The day Herman Cain’s campaign died
The sexual harassment non-scandal is not what brought down Herman Cain’s campaign. Cain’s campaign died in a quiet, unassuming way. It was not even friendly fire that brought Cain down.
What was it that has brought about the end of the Cain campaign?
It was the Cain-Gingrich debate.
That was certainly not the intention. By all accounts, Cain and Gingrich are friends. They certainly were friendly at the debate.
Cain’s demise was self-inflicted.
In what should have been a debate between equals, Cain constantly deferred to Gingrich. The game ending moment came for Cain on a simple point. Steve King asked a question about defined benefits. Cain stammered, started to say, “A defined…” then he said the words that would kill his campaign. “You go first Newt.”
Either Cain did not know what it was or could not explain it in front of a national audience.
His demur left the impression that Gingrich was far smarter than Cain and could answer the questions Cain could not.
This event, a friendly event as both candidates noted, lacked a gotcha question, revealed Cain’s fundamental weakness. Cain is very engaging and he is an incredible orator. He is a terrible debater.
Unfortunately in this modern era, that is a skill that every candidate must have. Gingrich wanted a friendly debate and he got one. But he also showed something he has demonstrated in every debate. Gingrich is an incredible debater. This is his greatest talent. Gingrich has been described as the smartest man on the stage at the debates he has participated in and that has been obvious.
Herman Cain’s limitations have become obvious in a debate. He is not comfortable in that format. Unfortunately for Cain, if he were to be the nominee, he would be expected to do at least three debates with Obama. With history as a guide, not only would Cain not have the friendly environment he had last night, the stage would be stacked with pro-Obama media types.
Anytime a sitting President runs for reelection, the vote is a referendum on the President. This should be an easy vote. If Obama did not have the mainstream media in his corner, he could expect to retire in fourteen months.
This election will be closer than any of us want to admit. In some ways, this could be a replay of 1980. Americans knew they did not like Jimmy Carter but were not sure about Ronald Reagan.
After three debates and the famous line, “Are you better now than you were four years ago,” Reagan pulled ahead and we had a great eight years.
If Herman Cain has a series of bad debates, we could see four more years of Barack Obama. Obama is a far better debater than Cain is. Gingrich will destroy Obama in a debate.
Unfortunately for Herman Cain, in a debate against Barack Obama, if he does not get the question, he cannot simply turn around and say, “you first Barry.”
Cain is a great guy with a bad plan. Unfortunately he is a bad debater and Gingrich is an all-pro. As much as I like Cain, he is not quite ready for the starting line up just yet.
Our primary goal has got to be the defeat of Barack Obama. That means we need our first string out there on their A-game. Cain showed us in the debate last night that he is not the first string.
Gingrich is.
Tags: 2012, barack, cain, campaign, debate, gingrich, herman, newt, obama
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by gm.shoemaker on -
Establishmentarian Newt wasn't "for real" when he had the power as the speaker of the House, why do you think he will change? Newt is not right on every issue, that is a problem for me. Newt is not right on a lot of issues that are ailing our nation. He will be a toady for the Council on Foreign Relations, the American Enterprise Institute and the United Nations. Newt will be the great compromiser. He and Romney are Rockefeller Republicans, not conservatives. We have had enough of that. See the real Newt here. and here.
What do these people have in common? Paul Wolfowitz, Gen. Richard B. Myers, Henry Hyde, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George Bush Sr., Sandra Day O'Connor, George Soros, Christopher Dodd, Diane Feinstein, Gerald Ford, Bill Frist, Newt Gingrich, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Katherine Harris, Teresa Heinz, Antonia Hernandez, Gen. John P. Jumper, Joseph Lieberman, John McCain, Rupert Murdock, David Rockefeller, Diane Sawyer and Tony Snow.
Hints: Other than being buddies, they all support one world governance. Their association's initials are C.F.R.
You say that you like Ron Paul, why would you vote for his opposite?
Gary
-
Permalink Reply by Gary S. Cox on -
I could be comfortable with Newt as the candidate if he didn't have a D- rating on illegal immigration. Check out the candidate scores on NumbersUSA under Elections: 2012 Presidential Hopefuls.
-
Permalink Reply by Gene Daughtry on -
I felt that Cain did himself in at that debate also. I like Newt he is articulate and there will be very little "O" could call Newt on in a debate. I would love to see one between them.
One thing about Perry. "open borders" is not really accurate in his description. Texas has been dealing with a 1200 mile long border since the beginning of statehood. Actually Texas was a part of Mexico before the US took control. Spanish is spoken in south Texas as much or more than english is. Mexicans, El Salvadorians, Hondurans, Guatamalans and many others from South America have been a fact of life in Texas. Perry has studied that border. He has attempted to guard it with the resources of Texas with little or no support from the federal government. Texas has no choice but to educate and medicate the illegals because of federal mandates that cost billions. At least in Texas all state taxes come from fees, sales tax and real estate property tax. If you live in Texas consume products and have a dwelling on any property you pay taxes. When the Texas legislature passed a law (181 to 4) that allowed illegals coming out of high school, working on citizenship the opportunity to PAY the state tuition rate Perry signed it. Is Perry the man? Maybe not but he does have the experience to do the job. Newt is the only one that can actually "mop the stage" with "O" in a debate.
-
Permalink Reply by Caleb White on -
Without a doubt! Great point!!
-
Permalink Reply by E. SCOTT PICKENS on
-
Gee, more carreer politicians being pushed on us, Newt as an advisor at best, Newt is out for newt, none other.
CAIN 2012
Were Newt so wise, he would have come up with 9-9-9 plan that takes away the politician/lobbyist from the economic paradigm.
CAIN 2012
-
Permalink Reply by John Hayes on -
Do we want RINO Romney?
-
Permalink Reply by Constitutional Reset on
-
Do we want RINO Perry?
I literally don't know anyone who would not defer to Gingrich on smarts.
I hope not to know many that would defer to Gingrich on character.
Use Gingrich absolutely -every chance I got. Trust Gingrich? BIG deference.
My heart wants to trust Cain even though he is just a man too.
-
Permalink Reply by CoChair on
-
Just for your knowlege, there were 2.75 million RINOs who voted for Perry last Nov.
-
Permalink Reply by Jeff Waller on -
As opposed to whom? Was his opponent a conservative or a liberal?
That's an empty argument CoChair.
-
Permalink Reply by Vern Shotwell on -
"RINO Perry"? Exactly what is a RINO? How many votes, which way?
For a governor, what defines a RINO? I so tire of the terminology.
If you don't like somebody, they are a RINO. Is that the going definition?
-
Permalink Reply by Janice Albrecht on
-
What I saw in the debate was an excellent ticket....Gingrinch/Cain or Cain/Gingrinch. Actually it wasn't a debate...it was an information discussion and very educational.
-
Permalink Reply by Jim from Texas on
-
Great -- I'm not the only one who sees a Cain/Gingrich or Gingrich/Cain ticket! Herman Cain is far from done IMHO! Never forget -- we have a great campaigner-in-chief orator in the White House who has almost destroyed America in 3 years, and he hasn't even run a lemonade stand! Anybody but Obama is better than that!
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
