Herman Cain Steps Up
Herman Cain is a breath of fresh air. Like Donald Trump, he is plainspoken and an outsider to politics who brings a new face to a Republican presidential line-up that desperately needs a shakeup. Unlike Donald Trump, he does not appear to be puffed up and infatuated with himself, but rather a man of substantial business background whose campaign deserves careful consideration. By winning the debate on Thursday, Herman Cain has taken an important step to being a player in this race, but it should be kept in mind that it is simply one step of many in a long journey.
Herman Cain has made a name for himself, but I do not attribute slam-dunk status to his debate performance. I believe he edged out Santorum and Pawlenty, but it was a narrow victory, and more about style than anything. He gave straightforward and solid answers, and this was a favorable contrast to Santorum and Pawlenty, who both beat around the bush in typical political fashion on several occasions. However, Santorum scored well on his passionate response to a question about whether social issues should be a part of this campaign, while Pawlenty showed overall polish and kept his balance in response to some difficult questions about his record. Ron Paul and Gary Johnson can both be commended for taking courageous positions instead of playing it safe. I especially respected Johnson’s position on the necessity of reforming entitlement programs in a serious manner, and Paul’s call to bring the military home cannot be so easily dismissed as some would like to believe.
One response from Herman Cain that stands out was his answer concerning Afghanistan. He understands our mission is unclear and that that is a big problem. But he also pointed out that he cannot give a definitive answer on what he would do since he does not have access to all the information that he would if he were President. It is a common sense, business approach to problem solving. Surround yourself with the best people, weigh their counsel, and get all the information before making decisions and proceeding. It is a reflection of Cain’s wisdom and experience that he did not feel the need to give a more specific answer when pressed.
The heavy weights took a pass on the first debate and it may come back to haunt them. Romney and Gingrich (and Palin and Huckabee if they get in) obviously calculated that it wouldn’t hurt them to skip forward, but some of the voters in South Carolina definitely feel slighted and won’t soon forget. In regard to those who are definitely running, there is a sense among voters that passing on this debate was disrespectful of the process, as if running for the Republican nomination is something that can be done according to one’s personal schedule. They have made an opening for an outsider, and although Donald Trump is way too much of a circus show to be taken seriously, Herman Cain capitalized on his opportunity. Nevertheless, allegiances are fragile at this point, and there is plenty of time and room for both candidates and voters to continue the courtship.
Besides these obvious no-shows, potential candidates such as Mitch Daniels, Michelle Bachmann, and Jon Huntsman missed an opportunity by not appearing. None of these are political outsiders, but they would be new faces to a Presidential campaign. Because they are much lower profile and not as far along in the decision making process as the first tier group, missing the debate will not be perceived as a sleight. What they have done, however, is miss an opportunity to make a nationwide splash in an official forum, while at the same time opening the door for an outsider.
Herman Cain is that outsider, and he has undeniable strengths and appeal. First, he is a successful businessman with plenty of executive experience, but no political baggage, hence, tea party appeal. Second, he is comfortable in his Christian beliefs and his position on social issues comes across as direct and without apology, hence, Christian appeal. Third, the underlying racial tension in our nation becomes a non-factor if he is the Republican challenger to President Obama, hence, racial appeal. Some people won’t like me making that third point, but the truth is, Herman Cain can challenge President Obama on wide-ranging issues, everything from big government dependency mentality to Planned Parenthood, without liberals playing the race card.
Pray for Herman Cain. If his campaign gains traction, I expect the liberals will develop some type of strategy to attack him as they have done with other conservatives they hate such as Clarence Thomas and Sarah Palin. Herman Cain says the Lord is his strength, so let us pray for the Lord to strengthen him.
RichardCash.net | Blog | About Richard | Intro to Clear Notes | Fast and Pray | Sign Up to Fast and Pray
Huckabee is my first choice, and Herman Cain my second. Huckabee made a mistake to skip this debate even if it is very early in the campaign. I would like a Huckabee-Cain ticket. Herman did very well in the debate. He has both intelligence and common sense.
Herman Cain is a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City 1995-1996 and deputy chair from 1992 to 1995. He is therefor anything but an outsider. In his defense, he has come out as a supporter of the gold standard for the US Dollar. This sound money measure would put an end to the hidden tax of government created inflation, the cruelest tax of them all. Unfortunately, he was also an outspoken supporter of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in 2008, the undoing of many RINO’s, and in Cain’s words “an investment opportunity for the taxpayers”. Taxpayers bailing out multi-millionaire banksters like Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman-Sachs CEO (2010 salary $13.2 Million), is the last investment our cash strapped middle class needs prior to their eviction from homes they can’t afford. There was only one candidate on the stage in Greenville who has the concerns for our country foremost in his heart, Congressman Ron Paul. Please take a long hard look at his record of true conservatism and faithfulness to the Constitution.
I failed to add, a lifelong defender of the unborn and of parents who want to home-school their children.
Peace and liberty,
Dr. Mike Vasovski
Aiken, SC
2010 Candidate, US Congress
Chairman, Aiken County Tea Party
Delegate, SC GOP Convention 2009, 2011
You beat me to it, Mike! Thanks for bringing to light those serious issues with Herman Cain – I believe he was critical of those of us who opposed the bailout, calling us “free market purists.” (a branding I for one will bear proudly..)
Also telling is his support for Romney in the last go round. (an endorsement he did not recant given the opportunity at the debate.)
He also has denied the need to audit the Federal Reserve, which is not surprising given his past position in it.
I attended the debate and was truly unimpressed with most of his answers. It seemed the only substantial answer regarded the fair tax – he was knowlegable and specific on that one. As for the rest – I just heard a series of platitudes that sound good, but are open for interpretation…kinda like “hope and change.” Who is going to oppose “common sense economics” “real leadership” “getting government out of the way?” or “consulting experts” in foreign policy? What I want to know is what principles are going to guide his decisions? I failed to hear him specify guiding principles and in fact may have detected some contradictions – saying “government doesn’t create jobs, the private sector does” and then turning around and saying he endorsed a Romney presidency so he could create jobs….(may have not been a contradiction but could have used clarification…)
When it comes to honest and clear expression of guiding principles – Ron Paul has been doing this consistently in congress for years. I really think he did well in the debate and (for those of you who weren’t there) he was the clear crowd favorite.