That seems to be the pattern here. A few weeks back, Herman Cain was on the upswing until he said he wouldn’t appoint any Muslims to his administration. He had to walk that back. That comment plus Bachmann’s strong debate performance and Perry’s entry relegated Cain back to the second tier of candidates.
Now, he’s on a strong upswing again, but he’s saying that as things stand now he can’t support Rick Perry if he is the GOP nominee.
Herman Cain said Wednesday that he would be unable to support Rick Perry for president if the Texas governor were to eventually win the party’s nomination.
“Today, I could not support Rick Perry as the nominee for a host of reasons,” Cain said on CNN.
He cited specifically Perry’s support for in-state tuition breaks for the children of illegal immigrants.
That’s silly. As governor, Mitt Romney did nothing about sanctuary cities and signed RomneyCare into law. He governed from the center-left and left no conservative legacy to speak of in Massachusetts. In his Senate campaign, he claimed to have been an independent during the Reagan years, implying that he’s no Reaganite. Why does he get a pass from Cain but Perry doesn’t? All of the candidates have an issue or two in their backgrounds. All of them. Declaring one of the front-runners off-limits is unwise. The goal is unseating Obama. Right now, Rick Perry is probably a little above a 50% shot to be the nominee. I expect that Cain will be walking this back before too long.
But this pattern does point to the problem of political inexperience. Having outsiders run for office is good and healthy, but they tend to be unprepared for the intense scrutiny of a national campaign. Obama benefited from a love affair with the press that no one else, perhaps especially Herman Cain, can expect to benefit from. Cain is a massive threat to the entire Democrat mentality; the media will do everything it can to shred him if he is the nominee. Saying provocative things like Cain’s comment is great for talk radio, which is the world Cain has been in for several years now, but it’s treacherous when you’re running for the highest office in the land. It tends to blow up the candidate who says it, not the one who was targeted.
In the same interview, he said that he wouldn’t be able to support Romney either, due primarily to Romneycare. The Perry statement is simply getting more press. And in the interview itself, his tone and side statements were both far less harsh than they sound in print.
What’s alternative? Obama? Or a Trump independent run? Which is a vote for Obama.
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Herman Cain is a man of high principle. When he says something there is no doubt that he means it. He might not support a man publicly but still vote for him privately.
That said, he is finding out day by day how loudly his words reverberate in the echo chamber of the media. And if he is a quick learner he might get the feel for when NOT to say what he means and to realize that “no one ever blew his ‘cool’ by saying nothing”.
This seems to be a statement he can overcome. I cannot support Rich Perry either. Of course I am not running for anything. But I came out for Herman even before ANYONE had declared their candidacy. I had simply heard him on the radio.
Don’t know your specific reasons, but if you can’t support Perry because of the in-state tuition rates policy in Texas, then you ought not support Marco Rubio for anything either, because the two are in agreement.
Is Rubio sufficiently conservative? I would say so. And so is Perry.
Donuts, where did he mention Rubio? Is there another conversation in which Jim Kay supported Rubio or is this the non sequitur it seems?
It’s inevitable that he will receive more scrutiny and make more mistakes. He wouldn’t be human if he didn’t. The same thing explains some of Perry’s missteps. He looks like a stumblebum, but hey, running for president probably isn’t as relaxing as running for dogcatcher.
What interests me is that Cain has been given a pass on his 9 9 9 plan so far. I don’t expect that to last either. And if it DOES last during the primaries and he somehow gets into the general, it will be an even bigger problem, because he certainly won’t get a pass on it from the professional demagogues of the hard left (i.e., the media).
I realize that Bryan is a BIGGGG Perry man, fine. At least he admits it (not).
So, today’s crew toy is Herman Cain. The insinuation: look at Herman, he’s a repeated gaffe offender, looky at the pattern. I reality, the bigger story is how Perry is languishing since his announcement. Herman is climbing while Perry has long fallen from front-runner.
Herman is doing fine. It’s a marathon. Perry supporters like to point out that Perry will get his mojo back after fumbling but they won’t extend the same courtesy to Herman because he is climbing on them.
When Herman Met Bill Clinton:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WP5dYfBBzU
Note to Perry: offer top dollar to any mojado or hiring manager who worked for Godfathers Pizza to spill the beans. Comb Cain’s records while part of the Nat’l Restaurant Association to see if he parroted the US Chamber of Commerces’ usual song.
Herman Cain 2012: Nice Guy Not Ready For Prime Time
Cain/Perry 2012?
You must be joking. You would put Cain a pizza chain businessman above a man who has governed the near largest State in the Union for 10 years ? This would be hysterical if not so sad….
CAIN IS ABLE:
The question of ‘how can you put this guy above a Governor’ is answered readily: Cain has had as much leadership experience doing what he did than Romney got in 4 years in Massachusetts, and then spending the last year of it running for president instead of running for re-election, since he was unwinnable anyway.
Cain has a better agenda than Romney OR Perry, and will be a more sincere, honest, graft-free, leader.
I do not see it as much of a problem. I am still contemplating if I can support Perry if he is the winner of the primary. Perry is showing himself more and more to be more progressive at heart than he is conservative in mind. He is showing that his heart is what drives his executive decisions rather than his mind. This is giving me great pause these days as to whether I can support him, and I really wanted to be able to support him two months ago.
So, where is the gaffe? The fact that he does not support your heart throb of the month? I am personally getting tired of the flavor of the week candidates. It would be nice if a true conservative with a long track record of being conservative, and a long list of conservative victories would join the fight.
Instead we keep getting people like Pawlenty the social progressive, Romney the full bore socialist, Ron Paul the libertarian ‘tard, Michelle Bachmann the lightweight executive, then most recently we had Rick the you-heartless-conservatives-suck biggest-heart-of-them-all Perry.
I have to agree with you on this. What gaffe?
This opinion piece is written based on an assumption that what Cain said was a mistake and yet no where in the article does he try to explain why he thinks it was a mistake. We are all just expected to take his word for it.
You must be new to party politics. It is a sin to say that you will not support the eventual nominee of your own party. Cain is running as a Republican. Cain is suggesting that if the party choses someone else he will take his pizza and go home. Go ahead nubies. Start a third party. That always works.
So, if Paul wins, everyone in the race today must take an oath to support him? Or Romney? Or some dark horse reentering like Trump? What if Bloomberg puts his name in and half a billion dollars later is the nominee? Do we really consider it a gaffe to be honest with the voter?
I am not a Republican, I am a conservative. I am a social conservative, I am a fiscal conservative, I am regulation conservative and a defense and offense hawk, I am a total absolute non-political-correct person. I am not going to be swayed by inside baseball arguments from the establishment embarrassment Republican party.
My goals only tangentially touch upon what the nefarious goals of the Republican party are. It is just simply closer to my goals than the progressive Democratic party.
So far, Cain has never reached a position where I consider him someone I will vote for. I have seen him make gaffes, and they give me great pause on backing him. I think he has great things to say, but I do not trust him to not cause more harm than good in the long run. Which is where I am with Romney. I am certain that Romney will govern as the progressive he is at heart, and it will cause more harm than good. I will vote Obama if he is the candidate. Obama and the Democrats can take all the accolades for destroying the nation.
These happenings make the case for a two-stage election with an open primary and a run-off, even with cumulative voting (5-3-1 points system). If Obama is toast, why not finish him in June or September, rather than waiting until November? Cain would stand a even or better chance at making the next round, because blacks would probably either start switching over or putting him down as #2 choice.
Cain ?—yes he thinks its alright for your State to deprive you of your Constitutional Right to bear arms,said Gun rights issues should be “left to the States ” ! ..does he also think they can deprive you of free speech as well ? I think he is a more then a bit uneducated on Constitutional law and issues…
As for foreign policy—The man did not even know what the issue of Palestinian “right to return” was. As important as the Israel/Palestinian issue is this is foreign policy 101 (not to mention general knowledge). He also apologized to CAIR, an unnecessary apology.
Do we really think a man (however nice and well spoken he is) that ran a restaurant chain and was a successful businessman has the ability to run world affairs-like being Commander in Chief of the military and making grave decisions that may require dropping nukes on our enemies etc. ? Sitting in at Board meeting of Godfather’s pizza does not equate sitting face to face-eye to eye with Vlad Putin !
He is NOT the one for the job. Do we want another ‘learn as he goes’ President….
And his Stage 4 colon cancer which spread to his liver ? Although he has been cancer “free” for nearly 5 years that stuff tends to come back with a vengeance…and the percentages are against him-at his age..especially if he were in a high stress job like the presidency !
http://youtu.be/Wmhu1QkRbqY
Hey, he’s our black guy. Stop asking questions.
We have every right to be as brainless as 53% of the ountry was in 2008.
And Cain talks good too. Says all the right things, usually, except when he doesn’t. He really does great telling Mark Levin what he wants to hear and Mark has certified him as a true conservative. Sometimes Mark even says mmmm in that nice way that shows he approves. Nuff said.
I know enough about him already to trust him with my life.
Soon as we elect him we’ll learn what he’ll do, besides lower everybody’s taxes to 9% of course and that other 9 stuff and create a bunch of jobs.
I’m not a bit worried that of the hundreds of posts on PJM about Mr. Cain that not a single post from a true believer says even a single word about the 9 9 9 plan or his thoughts on Israel or China.
Conservatives have this unerring ability to tell what’s in a guys heart just from speeches and a couple of interviews and punch lines. We’re smart.
Actually if you read the 1st Amendment, it prohibits the congress from making laws the abridge the freedom of speech, not the states. Since the 10th amendment specifically gives the States those powers not delegated to the Federal government they do have the constitutional right to abridge your free speech. One can now argue that the 14th amendment prohibits states from doing this, but that is the same argument that the Federal government uses for not allowing states to rule themselves all the time.
As for the 2nd, it does not specify that the congress can not make a law, but instead guarantees a right to the people which is different, and states do not have the ability to infringe on the rights of citizens to keep and bear arms under the 10th, because the 2nd prohibits it in general, not specifically prohibiting just the congress. The constitutional question is does requiring a background check and a waiting period, or even banning certain weapons count as infringing on this right, and the Supreme Court has continually ruled that no it is not. They have stopped outright bans of all handguns, but not assault weapon bans, or the legal requirements to purchase a gun. This may be unfortunate, but I would rather the states be in charge of making these laws if we are going to have them and not the federal government, since the state is going to be more responsive to the desires of those that they govern.
But, then the 14th Amendment did state “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”
So, what to do, what to do? Is freedom of speech one of those privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States?
“astonerii” is correct. Section 1 of the 14th applies the Bill of Rights to the States. In fact, a study of the history of section 1 reveals that it was proposed by Representative John Bingham of Ohio in order to allow Congress to pass civil rights legislation. The primary impetus behind this was that officials in Southern States were using their authority to disarm freed blacks as well as Republicans, allowing them to be attacked with impunity by mobs. In addition, Republican newspapers were subject to attacks facilitated by state and local officials.
There are two reasonable interpretations of the meaning of Section 1 of the 14th. Both Bingham and Senator Jacob Howard, who worked on Section 1 in the Senate, stated that it applied amendments 1 through 8 to the states. However, there is an elegant piece of historical analysis by Michael Kent Curtis that presents a strong case that Section 1 operates rather more like the 9th Amendment applied to the states.
I can cut Cain a little slack because most people don’t really know anything about the 14th. Arguably, that great constitutional scholar, President Obama, didn’t seem to think the 2nd Amendment was incorporated even though it was explicitly a primary reason for Section 1 to be proposed to the states by Congress.
The problem as I see it is that Cain needs to get some experts to advise him post haste. The establishment media will tear him apart.
I really don’t want to have to vote for Romney.
Refusing to appoint a Muslim is not a gaffe. The Constitutionally-mandated oath of office is completely incompatible with adherence to Islam, and that’s that. He could have been more artful about it, by saying that he would not appoint anyone who subscribes to a belief system or ideology that is incompatible with the oath of office.
You want to see a REAL gaffe? Ten days on, and no apology.
The problem is that Perry is more a moderate than a conservative. So is Romney. The RNC has repeatedly gone “moderate” instead of sticking to their conservative values. Ala Tea Party. Conservatives are fed up with the Republicans pushing “moderates” on us and expecting that people will vote for them regardless of what they actually are. I am hoping those days are over. We will see.
This turned me off of Cain. Why would you support someone who implemented socialized medicine?
I smell sour grapes from the Perry camp.
First, it seems to me that there is former President Ronald Reagan’s “eleventh commandment,” that is: Do not attack your fellow Republicans. While in the course of a debate or campaign speech, it is valuable to state one’s positions and if appropriate, accurately describe how they differ in significant ways from other candidates … it seems to me Mr. Cain’s assertion fails on both scores.
Second, in reading the comment … I would suggest we all need to assure we are fully aware of the candidate’s backgrounds and current positions. Governor Perry has a long record of governance of one of the most successful State’s in the Union, despite all the help he has been getting from the Administration’s federal government. The environment he has fostered for jobs and business is clearly worthy of consideration. He has written a book about substantial issues, with approaches for consideration (among others) in addressing them. Mr Romney has a history of Governance and with Bain Capital as the leader and venture capitalist. He has also written a book and put out extensive information on his current positions. There is information available as to his changes in positions. Mr. Cain has written a book and has a site with his purported views and positions. INFORMED – positions, discussion and voting seem to me to be far safer than “shoot from the hip” opinions based on glimpses, liberal headlines and “gotcha” interviews.
Okay, I don’t know whether it’s a gaffe, but I consider it a misstep. Running for the nomination, you’ve gotta decide whether you’re going negative after the other candidates or you’re gonna limit yourself to promoting yourself without tearing others down. (This choice is more a matter of emphasis than a clear either/ or split.) Unlike Bachmann, Santorum, Romney and (by default) Perry, Cain had taken the high road. That, not coincidentally, was part of his personal appeal. These comments re both Perry and Romney works against that appeal.
In addition, Herman (or Herb or Herm, or whatever the heck Palin’s calling him today) must realize that he’s risen in the polls because he’s viewed as the clearest, most forceful expression of grassroots conservative sentiment right now. Tilting toward Romney and away from Perry muddies that expression.
Finally, if Herman had more experience, he’d realize that his remarks would place him in an untenable position if Perry were to win the nomination. He and all other rivals would be called upon to unite behind the nominee. He’s now set himself up for unnecessary embarrassment.
I would suggest that Rick Perry make a comment to the following effect in the next interview opportunity: “Ever since becoming a Republican, I’ve tried my best to loyally support the party’s nominee for every office. And I’ve campaigned for numerous Republican candidates over those years. And I will support the party’s nominee for President no matter which of us it may be, and that specifically includes Herman Cain, for whom I have the highest respect and personal regard.” That would put Cain neatly in his place for his untoward and unfortunate remarks.
Hey at least he didn’t insult me by calling me heartless or imply that I was a bigot and might not like a policy because of the sound of someone’s last name. You can tell a lot about a candidate by the nature of their gaffes.
I’m not sold on Cain but this constant pushing of Perry by PJM, especially by Mr. Preston, is tedious and removes even the pretense of objectivity. Then again, I guess that’s what you get when you ask a politician to become a “co-blogger” – the proverbial deal with the devil.
I’m sorry, I didn’t copy the article I’m reporting on. However, in the past Mr. Preston has noted, in passing two of the candidates he felt were particularly interesting and worth following. Governor Perry was not one of the two he mentioned.
Perry certainly screwed the pooch with his “you don’t have a heart” statement. However, on Hannity he did explain his position, which was perfectly satisfying to me. The essence was that (1) the in-state tuition was very popular in Texas (passed the Texas legislature 181-4), (2) non-citizens had to satisfy the same requirements as citizens with the added proviso that they must pledge to try to become a US citizen, (3) it’s a 10th Amendment issue. I think that’s a good answer – his position is OK with me. However, as nearly everyone agrees, belittling people who disagree with him by making an emotional argument is just dumb.
On the other side we have Romney, whose attacks on Perry for accepting stimulous money are beyond the pale. They are especially egregious because what Romney never says – and for some reason, no one ever points out – is that MOST of the government money funding Romneycare comes from the Federal Government, NOT Massachusetts. That certainly knocks Romney’s 10th Amendment argument into a cocked hat. Sorry ex-Governor, but I’m paying for your “experiment” and I don’t like it one bit. I’m tired of living in a “donor” state being parasitized by big blue states.
You know what Obama is digging right now? All of the infighting within the Republican ranks. The more we do it the better the chances of his reelection. Cain said something he shouldn’t have and probably doesn’t believe, and he’ll gracefully back away from that comment.
All of the candidates have strengths and weaknesses because they’re human. I like and don’t like Perry for some reasons. I like and don’t like Romney for more reasons. I like and don’t like Cain for some reasons…..
Same goes for all the rest of them. Listen to them. Evaluate them. Discuss them.
It’s called the vetting process.
But public scab picking only plays into Obama’s hands.
Politics is the art of the possible and I’ll take anybody who I agree with on 90% of the issues, hell 85% of the issues versus someone who I agree with on ZERO percent of the issues which is what we have right now.
Honestly, there’s only one person who would be the perfect President.
But I’m not running.
I thought that I put in a wink, wink, nod, nod in this post at the end, but encasing it in carets must have removed it. It’s an HTML thing or something.
My point was that each and every one of us conservatives would be a better President than this president. Every single man and woman would be better because we actually love the concept of individual liberty.
Marxist socialist Alinskyites are anathema to this idea. They’re all about statism and group think.
Cain is into individual liberty. Some in the field are not. Sort it out yourselves.
For once we have a candidate that is genuinely a real person, has actually DONE some great things in the business world, actually inspired people, does NOT walk around with a chip on his shoulder and can actually laugh at himself. This man has actually solved a lot of problems and has been recognized for it.
He understands he is not an expert in many areas and has said he will surround himself with talented people who know what they are doing.
Gaffes are a fact of life in the real world. Even the Obummer has them even with the help of a teleprompter.
Obummer thinks he is “the chosen one” and does not know how to do anything that is not in his agenda.
The fact of the matter is I trust this man and would be proud to shake his hand and to vote for him.
No one is perfect. Obummer proves it every day. He has been wrong so many times it has to be a plan to hurt America. It is no accident he has used Alinsky, Cloward and Piven tactics in the past and is using the same strategy today on America.
Cain, Romney, and Perry are a Trillion times better than Oman any day.
If we’re going to have an African-American President again, then Cain has two advantages over Obama: (1) he has actually run a business; Obama never did that. (2) as a computer scientist, he understands and trusts data – as opposed to handwaving and hot air.
Vote Cain. Cain Can.
Scrutiny? Obama got srutiny? When? Where?
Its We The Elite People controlling Washington DC, folks. That’s where scrutiny has to be focused. Stop shredding candidates and shred vested interests in Washington DC. Focus, Focus. Focus.
Any candidate will be “made” or “Slayed” by We The Elite People in control of Washington DC, wake up.
Vote 2012. God Bless America.