Herman Cain: Viable Candidate?

Now that Herman is thinking about suing politico, adding to campaign conflicts, what are his chances of surviving the primaries? These allegations are not what the Republican party prefers to have on their dinner plates going into the general election cycle.

Cain mulls lawsuit against Politico: aide | Reuters

 

Cain would have a case against politico... and honestly I'd vote for the man over Romney or Perry. I've heard that the Perry campaign may even be involved in all this Cain sexual harassment stuff and being in and from Texas let me tell you, Perry is dirty. The man just ran for governor without a single debate and won. We're stuck with him down here but hopefully the rest of the country has figured him out. Romney is just too liberal and then he's not, and then he is, then he's not again. I'll pass...

 

Aww; can't Jon Huntsman come out of this race with anything? Smart, took an unschooling nontraditional path so he's one of our people - he left high school to play keyboard in a band, then earned a GED and went to state university before transferring to Penn - has a quirky sense of humour, would be an entirely interesting guy to share, er, maybe a grape juice with.

 

Mitt Romney will be the nominee and next president!

GO MITT GO!

 

Huntsman appears to be a candidate that I would support, even though he may not draw much media attention or have the excitement that Obama would draw. He has a wealth of executive experience serving as a governor, assistant deputy secretary of commerce, deputy trade representative, and US Ambassador. Huntsman also has business experience. At the very least, he should be picked for VP, secretary of state, or commerce if a Republican were to win the general election. Any thoughts?

Jon Huntsman, Jr. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

 

Mr. Cain might appear to be a viable candidate in a republican primary election but he could never win a general election.

 

But the Republican Party would never completely screw up their nomination process, select an aggressive African American radio host appealing to their base but disastrously unsaleable in a general election, and put him up against Barack Obama in a race in which the Republicans could have had considerable structural advantages and a really good shot at winning. Oh, wait.

 

My thinking is this: In a primary election a candidate has to play to the extremes of their party. In this case Mr. Cain has to play to the right. But in a general election one has to play to the middle and that is his weakness. He will never appeal to the moderates of either party because of the positions he has adopted. He will lose some moderate righties and he will never pull any moderate lefties over the line. Because of that he will lose. Obviously I'm speculating (as are we all) but I"ll bet you a dollar that he doesn't even come close to winning the Republican nomination.

 

If there ever is a an Obama Cain matchup, Obama would knock the Godfather's Pizza right out of Cain's beer belly! Chingos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Abner :smile:

 

All Presidential candidates are poorly informed about anything the President needs to be concerned about, because they are not yet the President. This is why the campaign is irrelevant and why candidates who campaign on one platform often end up on the same course as the previous President. Security Clearance is a wonderful thing.

Now if we presume that a general knowledge of history and economics is a good thing to have prior to becoming President, sure. But I'd say that the level of things the President is often counseled on lay beyond the majority of people with solid general knowledge to effectively use without counsel. Ergo.. no one is qualified to be President until they are one; hence incumbancy being a very important thing regardless of anyone's political leanings.

ITJD.

 

This is clearly untrue because some presidential candidates are presently the president.

BTW, no one will accept my small $1 bet. Not much conviction there.

 

Maniac while Kizmet had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the (long-suffering) online adjunct.

 

I’ll bite … you’re on! :smokin:

 

The allegations against Cain are serious. Sharon Bialek's very specific account describes sexual assault.

 

In the 2004 primary cycle, and the early runnings of the 2008, I supported, ahem, John Edwards.

That didn't go so well.

In the John Edwards case, of course, there were never allegations of anything nonconsensual, so the floor to which he would fall with the repercussions even in the worst case scenario if the allegations were proven, admitted or widely determined likely to be true would not be remotely as far down as the floor to which Herman Cain would fall if even some of the allegations were proven, admitted or widely determined likely to be true.

Even still. Have you seen how low the floor was for John Edwards in the end?

Republican and conservative friends: you don't want this to happen to you!

*shivers*