In a case of an untimely death, the first thing the cops do when they arrive at the home of the deceased is to try to determine whether the death was the result of a self-inflicted wound and, if it wasn’t, whether a member of the family did it. Statistics show that these are good places to start looking. If the recent events surrounding sexual-harassment allegations against Herman Cain sink his campaign, the same postmortem may be appropriate.
First, Cain’s self-inflicted wounds. When the allegations became public, he started defending himself with an unloaded gun. Even an admirably unconventional campaign cannot defy certain principles. One would be never to eat at a place with an “Eats” sign in the window. Another is that when it hits the fan, you should get your recollection and your facts as straight as you can before you start talking. You can’t outwit the media at their own game if you don’t know the game they’re playing. Now it’s not just about whether he was overly friendly with Miss Molly at the Fourth of July picnic — it’s also about catching him in inconsistencies.
Advertisement
There’s a type of guy well known to every defense lawyer. He’s a very successful man, usually a businessman, politician, or other public figure, who owes his success in large part to being a forceful communicator as well as very smart. Often you cannot persuade him that he should not go before that grand jury to “just answer a few questions.” He cannot believe that he can’t persuade them of his innocence, because he believes he’s innocent. Just as he cannot believe the perjury indictment that is returned later.
I seriously doubt that Cain did anything that merits the “stop the presses” treatment this story is getting, but that won’t matter if he has to spend many more days talking about what he knew and when he knew it and the difference between an agreement and a settlement. As Herman himself might say, the situation is complex, but the solution is simple. He must get some advice from somebody who has been to a rodeo before, get it all straight, lay it out, and move on.
Actually, Cain has a good chance of weathering this storm for several reasons. People like him, and they want to believe him. More important, most primary voters intensely dislike the media, which they see as trying to bring him down. I’m not sure Herman will appreciate the reference, but that is one of the main reasons that Bill Clinton survived.
To many people, not just Republicans, this is just another instance of dirty Washington politics indulging itself, obsessing over trivia while Rome burns. Cain, a very intelligent conservative, upsets the liberal paradigm of what African Americans are supposed to believe. Many Cain supporters involved in the tea-party movement have themselves been called racists in the recent past. Now, with the economy in the tank, the nation broke, the European Union on the verge of throwing the entire Western world into recession if not worse, and former Democratic senator and governor Jon Corzine’s company having “misplaced” $200 million of investors’ money, our burning national issue is whether Herman Cain made some improper remarks over a decade ago.
Moreover, people are on to the sexual-harassment scam. In typical fashion, Congress took a situation where women had no protection for legitimate grievances and created a solution rife with unintended consequences. Now businesses are regularly making payouts for the flimsiest of reasons. It’s obvious that these alleged victims and their lawyers — no matter what they may say publicly — are champing at the bit to come forward for their day in the limelight and the inevitable book deal. Who can pass up being the new Anita Hill, who to this day periodically receives glowing newspaper profiles?
jasper99, if that is so, you will be kissing what is left of the republic goodbye, since four more years of Obama-style statism will be unrecoverable. We may already be too deep in the hole, but "laying back and enjoying it"* is capitulation however you cut it.
* search terms "Clayton Williams", "Ann Richards" for the reference
Who cares!! It needed to come out. Rest assured the Obama campaign probably knew and if Cain won the nomination they would have dropped this story in Oct 2012.
Since it wasn't the Obama campaign it must have been Perry's camp. But he denies it. Maybe it was Ron Paul trying to knock off Perry and Cain so he could finally get some media attention. Or maybe it was Romney's camp trying to knock off the two top contenders (except Perry wasn't really above Paul). No, Romney wouldn't do anything like that, or hire illegal aliens, after all he is running for President.
The Obama campaign (and MSM) is desperate not to run against Cain and wouldn't dare risk a flimsy story not gaining traction late in the game. If you doubt this, just imagine televised Obama v Cain (an annihilation).
Since it wasn't the Obama camp, because they would have waited until Cain was nominated as suggested by another poster, It may have been Rick Perry's campaign. Or maybe it was Ron Paul's campaign trying to get Perry and Cain to look bad and drop out so he could look good. Or, maybe it was a Romney campaign setup to make it look like Perry did it so he could take both of his top contenders out - except Perry has been polling below Paul. Hmm. No Romney wouldn't knowingly do something like that, or hire illegal aliens, after all he is running for President.
Had you actually acted like you were interested in campaigning for the POTUS job, Fred, you might have been taken more seriously. Ah, well, we may as let bygones by bygones... oh, wait.
If only Fred were President, we would be in good shape. There was nothing wrong with Fred's campaign. The problem was the voters. They went for show and glitter, for the one the media told them could beat Obama. In other words, they were suckers. If wisdom and charisma went together, we would be prospering under Obama.
They went for the show and glitter of John McCain? As a former Fredhead and still a fan I have to say I think Fred lost because he would not take on John McCain. Fred destroyed Mike Huckabee in the SC debate but he refused to lay a glove on McCain.
Fred, why are you so dismissive of the idea that Politico could find this on their own?
Who do you think found Perry's rock? Nobody ever claimed it was a rival political campaign. But someone had to interview dozens of Perry family friends to learn of this rock, and then track down the owners of the site, all the public records of the ownership, and then go find the rock and take pictures.
IN this case, there weren't that many employees at the NRA. How hard would it be to get a list of employees who left during Cain's reign, and call them to ask why they left -- not looking for harassement, just looking for someone to say he wasn;'t a good leader.
It would only take ONE of them to mention a rumor of harassment, and then the reporters would be all over it.
Of course, if your campaign got a phone call from someone who claimed they had been harassed, wouldn't you tell them to call the media instead?
Usually, the issue with campaign dirty tricks is if they dig up people to make new charges against the opposition. It's not about finding a facts about harassment claims and settlements. That's not "dirty", that is simply fact-finding.
Is it newsworthy that Cain was accused of harassment, denied the charges, was "exonerated" by an investigation, and the women received settlements?" Maybe not, but maybe so, and maybe voters deserve the right to decide for themselves.
Politico gave too much weight to the charges, but a one-page story about the bare facts of the case would hardly be a smear.
I've got a theory that Obama is behind the leak. He's done it more than once before. He leaked stories about Jack Ryan when running for the US Senate. I wouldn't be surprised if he was behind the NYT reporting that McCain had had an affair with a lobbyist. Its just a hunch, so i could be totally wrong. Obama is the king of sleazy, hard ball politics, so it wouldn't surprise me.
Romney will suffer when Cain drops in the polls because of this so-called scandal. Cain's supporters may go back to Perry or look for another non-Romney candidate.
It is to Romney's advantage to have Cain high enough in the polls to keep Perry, the real threat, down until Perry's money runs out. Romney believes he can more easily defeat Cain. Perry has a much better campaign organization and more money than Cain. I just can't see what Romney's motivation would be.
Cain is below average, when compared with the other candidates in his current ability to address issues and to deal with the media, Romney recognizes this and thinks Cain will eventually fade. Why accelerate this decline and give Perry another shot? It just doesn't make sense.
Follow
