Can Cain win?

[wu_shizzle]

One of the things that favors Cain is he is easy to like (I think this interview reflects that). The other is that he actually (well, for the most part) tries to answer the question presented – which is a departure from what is “normal” in politics.

I have reservations about Cain and it has nothing to do with his sincerity – it is his naiveté.

I wonder if he would staff to that perceived weakness or even see it as a political weakness.

Ed Rollins or some other seasoned Republican campaigners might be good for him.

I don't know what you mean. As for Rollins, in my judgment, he should retire.

And it is a huge weakness. His faults, Cain's, shouldn't be a disqualification - no one, as a Presidential candidate, is an expert in foreign affairs. After all we wouldn't have Obama or the latest Bush for that matter. But most seem to know more than Cain does.

I guess I see 2 schools of thought with Cain. One would be to acknowledge that his naivete' is a weakness and try to balance his outsider image with traditional insider Republicans playing up his time at the Fed and getting him coherent and serious on foreign policy.

The second would be to go full throttle on the outsider, Tea Party image, being out front with the idea that he has little to no political experience. Making sure that he stays "pure" and away from Bush and McCain campaigners.

[Maggie]

One of the things that favors Cain is he is easy to like (I think this interview reflects that). The other is that he actually (well, for the most part) tries to answer the question presented – which is a departure from what is “normal” in politics.

I have reservations about Cain and it has nothing to do with his sincerity – it is his naiveté.

I wonder if he would staff to that perceived weakness or even see it as a political weakness.

Ed Rollins or some other seasoned Republican campaigners might be good for him.

I don't know what you mean. As for Rollins, in my judgment, he should retire.

And it is a huge weakness. His faults, Cain's, shouldn't be a disqualification - no one, as a Presidential candidate, is an expert in foreign affairs. After all we wouldn't have Obama or the latest Bush for that matter. But most seem to know more than Cain does.

I guess I see 2 schools of thought with Cain. One would be to acknowledge that his naivete' is a weakness and try to balance his outsider image with traditional insider Republicans playing up his time at the Fed and getting him coherent and serious on foreign policy.

The second would be to go full throttle on the outsider, Tea Party image, being out front with the idea that he has little to no political experience. Making sure that he stays "pure" and away from Bush and McCain campaigners.

Okay, I understand. I think to a certain extent Cain has been going with your first option. He repeatedly emphasizes that he believes his business experience is superior to political experience. That message will resonate with the public; however, I think it only gets Cain so far. Washington is not a corporation. It doesn’t run like one and never will. I think Cain would be well served to stress that his business experience enables him to better understand the impact this policy or that policy would have on the business sector. In other words, it won’t matter to him how well intended policy X is – what matters is what the policy will actual do.

As for foreign policy – he simply needs to get better (in all fairness he has been a little better of late but I still think the man is clueless). The execution of foreign policy is the primary duty of the executive branch and policy area in which a President has the most influence.

[Maggie]

Here you go wu_shizzle - he is following your track 1:

Cain's Post-Racial Promise

Listen to the video.

[ABC]

Cain won't be the nominee.

[shoxlax]

Cain acquits himself quite nicely in enemy territory:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/06/fireworks_msnbcs_lawrence_odonnell_hostile_interview_with_herman_cain.html

Not sure why he went on the show to promote his book since only about five people watch it.

[Maggie]

Cain won't be the nominee.

And I won't be the Queen of England. Going out on a limb ABC? I think Cain should be taken seriously now.

[shox1989]

One of the things that favors Cain is he is easy to like (I think this interview reflects that). The other is that he actually (well, for the most part) tries to answer the question presented – which is a departure from what is “normal” in politics.

I have reservations about Cain and it has nothing to do with his sincerity – it is his naiveté.

I wonder if he would staff to that perceived weakness or even see it as a political weakness.

Ed Rollins or some other seasoned Republican campaigners might be good for him.

I don't know what you mean. As for Rollins, in my judgment, he should retire.

And it is a huge weakness. His faults, Cain's, shouldn't be a disqualification - no one, as a Presidential candidate, is an expert in foreign affairs. After all we wouldn't have Obama or the latest Bush for that matter. But most seem to know more than Cain does.

I am a conservative Republican and I just can't see myself ever voting for Cain. He is way too naive.

Right now I can't figure out who I would like to see be the nominee. I think I could hold my nose and vote for Perry maybe even Romney (might have to use 2 fingers with Romney).

Not a one of them excite me, but neither did John McCain and I ended up holding my nose and voting for him.

[ABC]

Cain won't be the nominee.

And I won't be the Queen of England. Going out on a limb ABC? I think Cain should be taken seriously now.

He doesn't have any money and doesn't have much of a campaign staff. (By the way I know some of his campaign staff)

Taken seriously for what? He is running for the nomination and he won't win it, so I can't take him seriously.

He won't be the VP either. If a Republican wins, I think Cain could be a cabinet secretary.

[SB Shock]

Right now I can't figure out who I would like to see be the nominee. I think I could hold my nose and vote for Perry maybe even Romney (might have to use 2 fingers with Romney).

Not a one of them excite me, but neither did John McCain and I ended up holding my nose and voting for him.

That is why I think Obama reelection is a foregone conclusion unless he really screws up or the DOJ or Solyndia scandals blow up. Obama war chest is building and that is a big discriminator in elections and parties don't win election because people are holding their noses. Turnout is key and when your base is "Meh", then it doesn't bode well.

[Maggie]

Cain won't be the nominee.

And I won't be the Queen of England. Going out on a limb ABC? I think Cain should be taken seriously now.

He doesn't have any money and doesn't have much of a campaign staff. (By the way I know some of his campaign staff)

Taken seriously for what? He is running for the nomination and he won't win it, so I can't take him seriously.

He won't be the VP either. If a Republican wins, I think Cain could be a cabinet secretary.

I was joking, in part.

I agree that Cain's path to the nomination is difficult; but I do think he needs to be taken seriously as candidate at this point. He has proven himself to be remarkably resilient. His economic message seems to be getting serious traction among delegates. He expresses a clear constitutional conservative argument better than anyone else in the field. His drawbacks are:

(1) Money (as you pointed out) – but a win in Iowa might change that;

(2) Lack of political experience by which I mean he could easily say something really stupid (he did early on) – which will kill his candidacy;

(3) He doesn’t talk about entitlement reform (but in all fairness – no one in this field is, which the exception of Huntsman);

(4) Foreign policy ignorance – he just doesn’t have the background.

And, lastly, as I wrote before somewhere – he might be better suited for Tim Terrific’s job.

[Kung Wu]

We like to focus on negatives, now let's compare some positives amongst the "big 3" (Cain, Romney, Perry).

Who is the most conservative? I think it's Cain, but let's debate.

Who is the most likely, based on background, to be able to fix our financial mess known as the economy? Hands down Cain. He is known for turning bad, financially stressed entities around.

Who can take Obama to the cleaners amongst the black voters? Cain. He was raised in black America and Obama was not. White people can't even discuss race anymore. If any GOP nominee is going to win over ANY of the black vote, only Cain can.

Who can win over the Hispanic vote? Probably Perry, but I doubt any of them. Maybe Cain just by being not white?

Off topic-- Check out this run off: Obama-Clinton vs Cain-Palin. --- holy shnikies what a battle royale. I know, I know -- "Palin?" you are saying. She would trounce Hillary in a woman only runoff though and that would be a huge factor.

But the better ticket by far would be: Cain-Ryan

[Maggie]

I agree that Cain is probably the most conservative; but he is not “perfect”. In terms of dealing with the economy, I personally think Cain and Romney are fairly similar. I do think if Cain is at the top of the ticket he could syphon off some of the black vote – maybe five or ten percent? As for the Hispanic vote – Perry’s stance on immigration would help him (frankly, I don’t have a huge problem with what he did in Texas – but I am probably in the minority as far as the rank and file GOP is concerned). But I also think anyone of the top three candidates could reach Hispanic voters – immigration is not their only concern and I think it is unwise (and also a little insulting) to think otherwise.

As for Palin – she won’t be asked to run again for the VP slot. And while I supported McCain picking her in 2008, I would advise against it in 2011-12. Ryan, at times, has appeared to the leave the door open regarding the Vice Presidency – but I don’t see him accepting. Besides, I would rather have him in the House now that he is not running for President. Rubio is the obvious VP choice; but he also says he is not interested. I hope he reconsiders.

Regarding Clinton replacing Biden….that would be interesting and a good political move by Obama.

[1979Shocker]

NBC/WSJ poll: Cain now leads GOP pack

Fueled by Tea Party supporters, conservatives and high-interest GOP primary voters, former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain now leads the race for the Republican presidential nomination, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

And in yet another sign of how volatile the Republican race has been with less than three months until the first nominating contests, the onetime frontrunner, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, has plummeted to third place, dropping more than 20 percentage points since late August.

“Cain is the leader ... That’s the story,” said Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff.

[Kung Wu]

Cain he do it? Yes he Cain!

[Kung Wu]

I agree that Cain is probably the most conservative; but he is not “perfect”.

I don't anticipate that Jesus will return in time to run this go around, but I have been wrong before.

In terms of dealing with the economy, I personally think Cain and Romney are fairly similar.

Based on? I don't know much about Romney, but I'd like to know more about his private successes. It will be _very_ difficult to convince me that someone with complete veto power to stop government mandated health insurance and failed to do so can make deeply important economic decisions though, so at least you know up front that I am skeptical. And that is a consistent theme amongst my friends so I am not the only one.

I do think if Cain is at the top of the ticket he could syphon off some of the black vote – maybe five or ten percent?

I'll go as high as 20, but could be as low as 5.

As for the Hispanic vote – Perry’s stance on immigration would help him (frankly, I don’t have a huge problem with what he did in Texas – but I am probably in the minority as far as the rank and file GOP is concerned). But I also think anyone of the top three candidates could reach Hispanic voters – immigration is not their only concern and I think it is unwise (and also a little insulting) to think otherwise.

Perry = Bush. Bush got 40% of the Hispanic vote. McCain got 35ish%. Yes Perry gets a slight bump over McCain, just by being Bush III as far as Hispanics are concerned. But a 3-5% bump ain't gonna do it.

Who said anything about immigration? Minorities have been told for generations that the GOP is racist. After a while they just give in and believe it. So 60+% is gonna vote Democrat regardless what the issues are. Bush wasnt racist and had strong positive relationships with Hispanics and the Mexican government ... Result? ... 40%. It's really the best the GOP can hope for.

As for Palin – she won’t be asked to run again for the VP slot. And while I supported McCain picking her in 2008, I would advise against it in 2011-12. Ryan, at times, has appeared to the leave the door open regarding the Vice Presidency – but I don’t see him accepting. Besides, I would rather have him in the House now that he is not running for President. Rubio is the obvious VP choice; but he also says he is not interested. I hope he reconsiders.

Agree with everything here except your belief that Ryan would turn down a Veep nomination. That would set him up perfectly for a 2016 run (or 2020 if he's an incumbent Veep in 2016).

Regarding Clinton replacing Biden….that would be interesting and a good political move by Obama.

Plan on it. If Obama wants to win he will make that adjustment. He may not want to be President anymore though. I don't think Michelle wants to give up her new lifestyle anytime soon though.