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
Permalink Reply by DocHollywoodMD on we better get it right in 2012 everyone or there will be hell to pay from obama.
don't give that....BASTARD another Four Years Sorry! BUT HE IS ONE! AMERICA CAN DO BETTER WITHOUT OBAMA
HERMAN CAIN I BELIEVE HAS THE SPIRIT OF AMERICA AND HE HAS THE ABILITY TO BEAT OBAMA ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITEHOUSE
Permalink Reply by Commie Hunter D on Gingrich has his own baggage, but he is a much better debater than most candidates. Cain is getting baggage thrown on top of him, but seems adamant to plow ahead. I admire his tenacity and his willingness to lash back at the supposedly angelic media, which is using textbook Alinsky tactics against him.
Permalink Reply by Charles H. Sims on Permalink Reply by gm.shoemaker on Who thinks that this is going away? Herman Cain can't get away from female allegations and he doesn't know that China has had nuclear weapons for almost 50 years. (400+ of them, in fact)
Here is the next bombshell:
Chicago Sun-Times
By MICHAEL SNEED msneed@suntimes.com November 8, 2011 12:30AM
Updated: November 8, 2011 12:14PM
The Cain Encounter ...
They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends.
She grabbed his arm and whispered in his left ear.
She kept talking as he bent to listen, and he kept saying “Uh, huh. Uh, huh.”
Huh?
“I don’t know if what she was giving him was a sucker punch, but he didn’t put his arm down while she was talking to him,” said the Sneed source.
◆The “he”... is GOP presidential contender Herman Cain, who has been accused of sexual harassment by several women.
◆The “she”... is Chicagoan Sharon Bialek, who held a news conference Tuesday as the only woman to PUBLICLY accuse Cain of sexual harassment.
◆The Sneed source ... is WIND radio co-host Amy Jacobson, who tells Sneed she witnessed the Cain/Bialek encounter a month ago while backstage at the AM 560 WIND sponsored TeaCon meeting in Schaumburg Sept. 30-Oct. 1 at the Renaissance Hotel and Convention Center.
◆Quoth Jacobson: “I had turned on TV to find out who was Cain’s accuser, and I almost fell over when I saw it was Sharon Bialek accusing Cain of groping her genitals.”
“I was waiting for Herman Cain’s ‘Accuser No. 4’ to surface — and up pops Sharon!”
“I couldn’t believe it. I was shocked.”
“I recall Sharon was hell bent on going backstage at the TeaCon convention — where she cornered him,” said Jacobson.
“I was surprised to hear she claims she did not know Cain was going to be there. Cain was expected and was late.”
Bialek told the media on Monday: “I went up to him and asked him if he remembered me. I wanted to see if he would be man enough to own up to what he had done 14 years ago.”
◆The encounter: “It looked sort of flirtatious,” said Jacobson. “I mean they were hugging. But she could have been giving him the kiss of death for all I know. I had no idea what they were talking about, but she was inches from his ear.”
◆The introduction: “It all began when I took a convention break and joined my pals at the hotel bar. Sharon was drinking Mimosas with them. She said she was a Republican, a Tea Party member, had once dated [White Sox sports announcer’ Steve Stone] and had worked at WGN radio.”
◆The rendezvous: Sharon also said she was anxious to meet Cain again and had once gone to an afterparty with him and her boyfriend years ago. But she never mentioned he had sexually harassed her.”
◆The upshot: Bialek has since applied for employment in sales at WIND radio and is scheduled for a second interview Thursday.
So it goes.
Gary
Permalink Reply by Virginia Ritter on The more I see Newt, the more I like Newt. I hope more people start looking at him as a serious candidate.
Permalink Reply by PUMABydesign001 on I commend Herman Cain for standing strong against the Democratic Party who has yet again proven that they are the real racists in the room.
Progressives have, for decades, successfully implemented abhorrent schemes such as the nasty allegations leveled against Herman Cain to ensure that Americans remain separate and divided while further solidifying their power structure.
As Americans, we must deliver a message to Progressives that the American people will no longer cower in fear of being targeted, victimized and forced to defend their reprehensible assertions.
Be assured that it is the goal of Progressives to destroy Herman Cain even if it
means taking him down by destroying his family.
It is the Progressive agenda, as well as that of many on the right who want to continue business as usual in Washington D.C., to obliterate this American to the point of no return.
The high-tech lynching of Herman Cain must end NOW along with the urge to manipulate and guide Americans to a candidate chosen by forces behind the scene.
This American will not be manipulated and guided where she chooses not to go.
Take a stand America and never forget that the truth has no agenda.
Permalink Reply by Glenn Byron Jones Sr. on I don't know who wants to get rid of Herman Cain more. The Denocratic Media Machine or short sighted not in the know Tea Party members! All this flack about sexural impropriety is rediculis. Wall Mart has thousands of impropriatal accusations a year and thow a large ammount is handeled by fireing the person still a large group is handeled by pay offs becouse it is more expensive to fight the claim than to just say hear is some money ,,,go get lost. In none of the settalments did Herman Cain ever say that he was guilty of improprieties. If these wemon have witness or colaborator then take it to court. It never happened and for wemon to keep saying "O yes ,blame the victom" needs to back off and look at just who is the VICTOM "HERMAN CAIN". Keep Running herman and may GOD bless you.
Permalink Reply by John R. Lancellotti on I AGREE ... Cain just ain't ready... Too bad. He might have been good. John
Permalink Reply by Gilberto Matias Jr. on One thing that I think we need to keep in mind is that the system as it stands has been tailored to favor career politicians who have no connect with the real world. "Executive experience" is a detriment to the people represented, as being in office longer leaves one with with a better sense of how to manipulate the public, and less ties to what works for the people as a whole.
That said, debate skills fall into a legitimate attribute to look for in a representative, as being a solid debater requires understanding. An unexpected question can best be dealt with with someone who understands the fundamentals of the subject.
Permalink Reply by Royce Latham on from: http://newhampshireherald.com/sinclairinterview.html
This story is very important and timely because a few weeks ago, a number of women made
unsubstantiated harassment allegations against Herman Cain. The media ran with the stories even
when it was increasingly becoming very evident that the allegations had no legs. The uproar caused
some character assassination for Cain and ultimately halted his campaign for president.
Right now, the same media wants the public to believe that Newt Gingrich is not good material for the
Presidency because of his past infidelities. If this argument is good for Cain and Newt, why isn’t the
media holding President Obama to the same standard by demanding that he defends the allegations
of drug deals and infidelity being levied against him by Larry Sinclair?
When Obama ran for president, Sinclair says the candidate’s surrogates successfully stifled
discussion on the subject. It is our hope in printing this interview that it will spur on that discussion, if
not at the national level, at least here in the Granite State. After all, the Granite State makes up an
integral part of the electorate.
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
