The Herman Cain Victory Scenario (long but excellent)

I have been a supporter of Herman Cain since he spoke at Redstate Gathering 2009, and hinted at a Presidential run. I thought he is exactly what the country needs at this inflection point in our history: a non-politician with decades of management experience, decades of turn-around experience, and decades of working in consumer-oriented businesses where understanding customer demands is absolutely critical to survival.

Then… the primary season began in earnest, and Cain made a couple of major missteps. His comments about the right of communities to deny Muslims from building a mosque, betraying a woefully inadequate understanding of the First Amendment, was the proverbial nail in the coffin for me. (Note that the link above is not from some frothing-at-the-mouth Lefty site who’d claim the sky is red if a Republican said it was blue; it’s from Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment site – hardly a den of the Unreality Based Community that is the modern Left.)

Combined with all of the pundits — including our very own Erick Erickson — essentially writing Cain off as a “really great guy, but one who can’t win”, I was persuaded. Like many of you, I hoped for a Mitch Daniels candidacy, a Paul Ryan candidacy, a Chris Christie run, and when Rick Perry entered the race, I thought I had found my guy.

Cain somehow kept coming back into my consciousness. I blame the “debates” (which I put in quotes since the modern political debate is anything but an actual debate in the style of Lincoln and Douglas) for much of it. The guy just plain old made sense so much of the time. And unlike the unbelievably smooth Romney, the incredibly oleaginous Huntsman, even the seemingly-speaking-with-a-permanent-frown Santorum… Cain appeared to be saying what he meant, what he actually believed (damn the consequences), and in many cases, actually answering the question. Of course, it doesn’t hurt Cain that the other candidates — Ron Paul with his crazy-uncle antics, Michele Bachmann taking a starring turn as The Woman With Plastic Hair And Even Most Plastic Speaking Style, and Rick “I Crammed Really Hard Last Night” Perry — simply did not do themselves any favors in recent months.

Cain’s win in the Florida GOP Straw Poll last week was the last… ahem… straw. Byron York of the Washington Examiner had a great article on why Cain won. Money graf:

What had happened? In the days before the vote, nearly all the delegates who voted for Cain either said or heard someone else say this: “I love Herman Cain, but he can’t get elected.” The assumption that Cain can’t win the Republican nomination was a serious obstacle in their minds. But at some point late Friday and early Saturday, the delegates overcame that obstacle. Some concluded that since they had heard so many people speak well of Cain, he could indeed win, if everyone who liked him would actually vote for him. Others remained skeptical of Cain’s ultimate chances but decided to send the message that they would choose candidates based on conservative principles, and not on perceived electability.

Once the delegates got over the can’t-get-elected hurdle, a close contest became a landslide for Herman Cain. [Emphasis added]

It was Michele Bachmann who said on stage during the Orlando debate that this year, in this election cycle, with such a weak opponent in President Obama, we conservatives don’t have to settle. She urged us all to follow our hearts, follow our principles, and select the candidate we most want.

Well, the candidate I most want is Herman Cain. Sorry, Michele — I’m sure that’s not what you had in mind.

But if I’m not going to worry about “electability” in thinking of Bachmann, of Santorum, of anyone else… then why would I choose anyone but the guy I think is exactly who we need in 2012 to turn the country around?

And you know what? I’m not alone. I think Cain can win. And this is his victory scenario.

Now, I’m not suggesting that Redstate is anything even close to representative of the GOP primary voter. Redstate tends to draw the really engaged, fanatical activists of the GOP base. And of course, no one would consider an online poll to be anything other than a test for the Ron Paul people to swarm to victory. And yet…

I saw this call for a Redstate Primary Preference Poll. I took it. Then I saw the results. I’m positive these results will change dramatically, but as of the time of this writing, here’s the big takeaway for me.

Only three candidates won the “Top Three Choices” poll — meaning, since you have to choose your first choice, then your second, then your third, and so on down the line, I looked at the people who won at least one of those three rounds. The way I figure, if you’re not in the top three choices, you really don’t have much of a chance.

Those three are Ron Paul (first choice round winner), Herman Cain (second round), and Newt Gingrich (third round).

I use editorial privilege (this being my diary) to throw out Ron Paul, attributing it to the unusually organized and charged Paulites in our midst. And I put in Rick Perry. What I get if I do that is this: •58.7% of the respondents (remember, not representative, not scientific) have Cain as their #1, #2, or #3 choice. •41.3% have Perry in the Top Three •26.7% have Gingrich in the Top Three.

Romney is way behind at 16%. Bachmann is at 19.4%. I conclude that they’re no longer in the running, at least for the hearts and minds of the engaged, activist base.

Think about that: two out of three respondents have Cain as the #1, #2, or #3 choice. That’s almost 20 points higher than the next highest guy, Perry.

Meanwhile, as the last few weeks and the last couple of debates have shown us, everybody and his cousin are taking aim at Perry and Romney, the perceived front runners. The division between those camps is fairly significant, IMHO. And of course, Bachmann, Santorum, Paul, and others are trying their very best to tear down the Rick Perry campaign. Hell, Rick Perry is trying his damnedest to tear down the Rick Perry campaign with his inadvisable slip-of-the-tongue about the “heartless” immigration activists. (And I happen to think Perry is exactly right; doesn’t make me blind to the political impact of that statement and that policy.)

If Perry’s campaign goes down in flames, a victim of a thousand cuts from all sides, then I’m sure the remaining attack candidates like Bachmann will turn their guns on Romney.

As I see it, what the Romney people love most about Romney is that he’s electable. He just looks so Presidential. He sounds so great. He is obviously so damn smart. He’s got great hair, and is a great looking guy. Hollywood would cast Romney as the President if they could (of course, Hollywood Romney would be a Democrat…). I figure most of his supporters are either (a) old-time Establishment people who figure it’s Romney’s turn, or (b) people who want to beat Obama at any cost, even if that means swallowing their discomfort with Romney on various areas. They say things like, “It’s great that you can get the base all fired up; but the general election is a different matter”. Sure sounds convincing.

What the Perry people love most about Perry is that he’s the most electable conservative in the race. He too looks the type: a flinty-eyed, tough guy from modest backgrounds, with great hair. On the stump, Perry is effective; and he enjoys the retail campaigning that it takes to win elections. He’s a winner — he hasn’t lost an election… like… in his whole life. He’s got a great organization, and mountains of cash. And he’s a conservative. I don’t think many people — even those who oppose Perry — would think of him as a moderate RINO (and yes, yes, I know you Gardasil and Illegal Immigration Should Be a Death Penalty Offense people think he’s to the left of Pelosi… but let’s be reasonable here).

The pro-Romney folks have to like Cain’s business experience and background; it is, after all, the most compelling thing about their guy. And let’s face it… Cain’s business experience kicks Romney’s experience up and down the street. Romney is a brilliant guy, but he worked mostly in investment banking, finance, private equity, and the like; Cain worked in consumer-oriented businesses like Godfather’s Pizza. The former requires real understanding of the elites, of global finance, of Wall Street; the latter requires real understanding of consumers, of retail management, and of Main Street.

The pro-Perry folks have to like Cain’s rock-solid conservative credentials and positions. This is a man who didn’t suddenly discover the Tea Party during the election season. He’s been saying these things, supporting the conservative movement, and even little-known bloggers like Erick Erickson for years.

Plus, in a hyper-competitive primary/general, the fact that Cain has held no elected office is a bonus, not a detriment (no matter how many times people want to bring up, “Yeah, but he has no government experience”). For one thing, Cain has no weird compromises in his history he has to explain, like Perry does, like Romney does. I believe Perry on the Gardasil issue; but man, it doesn’t look good. And it drags the campaign down to have to explain it over and over and over again, and apologize and apologize.

So the path to victory for Cain is that he’s the second choice of the two front runner camps. And if we take the Florida Straw Poll results seriously, then it means that he’s the secret love that dare not whisper its name in the hearts of the GOP base. The minute you throw out the “electability” question, a close contest becomes a landslide.

I find myself reminded of how Jon Snow became the Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch in George Martin’s awesome Song of Ice and Fire series. [If I just gave away a spoiler... I apologize. Read faster.] Just as Snow was not anyone’s first choice, Cain isn’t anyone’s first choice… initially. But as the various “electable” candidates and their camps beat the hell out of each other, raise the temperature in the primary, go negative, go hostile, make accusations fly (all routine primary stuff, before we unite to take down Obama and the Socialists)… I have a strong feeling that more and more voters might just say, “Y’know what? I’m tired of these guys; I’m going with my second choice.”

You may consider the rest of this diary a partisan deal — except I’m not associated with the Cain campaign in any way. Not yet anyhow.

The 999 Plan is obviously his central idea. It’s really, really interesting. And he doesn’t come out like a firebrand demanding immediate change on day one; he talks about phases of implementation, about making the migration to the 999 Plan. Any seasoned executive would do the same.

You can check out the rest of his ideas on his website, I’m sure. But I do like the fact that Cain has specific proposals that are simple to understand, and that make sense. Except on foreign policy, where he confesses that he’s a neophyte; didn’t seem to hurt the past three Presidents any (Obama, Bush, Clinton). And foreign policy credentials didn’t help Kerry, didn’t help McCain, didn’t help even George HW Bush (former Director of CIA) in his reelection bid.

The guy’s personal story should be some sort of a HBO miniseries. Born during the Bad Old Days of segregation, in the segregated South, to a janitor/barber/chauffeur and a maid… he achieved the heights of business success through education, hard work, perseverance, and execution. The man is the personal embodiment of the American Dream. Check out his biography; I know he’s publishing a book — I’ll be reading it.

Let’s not pretend this elephant in the room doesn’t exist. The greatest weapon the Democrats have is the race card. One could argue that the only reason why Obama is President at all is because a bunch of white Americans wanted to deal with collective race-guilt. (As an Asian immigrant, I have no such collective race-guilt, so I notice it when I see it.)

On a purely political point, for the GOP to nominate a black man as President — and not a child of African graduate student black man as Obama, but a born-and-raised-in-the-segregated-South black man — essentially wipes out the most potent weapon of the Democrats.

I mean… think about it… could you just imagine the Obama and Cain debate on the “black community”?

If you haven’t yet, go watch one of his YouTube videos. His debate performances are solid, but they’re nothing like what Cain is like on the stump. Town hall debate with Mr. Teleprompter? Cain would wipe the floor with Obama, casually, without breaking a sweat, as if he were Manny Pacquiao and Obama were… well… me.

He has a really great presence on TV; not something to be discounted in contemporary politics. Romney is excellent on TV as well, but there’s just something about him that suggests, “What do I have to do to get you into this brand new car here?” Perry plain old looks uncomfortable in front of a camera. Bachmann just looks so intense on TV, like she’s about to burst the bounds of gravity trying to convince us of something really really important. “Relax, lady,” is what I whisper to the TV when I see her.

Finally, as the Perry and Romney campaigns are showing, there is a real danger when you have a record as a public official. I’m very, very sympathetic to both men. They were governors of major states; they didn’t have the luxury of just sticking to their principles. Sometimes, they had to compromise to get things done. Sometimes, they did things they might not have wanted to do, because of political reality. (See, e.g., Perry and the Texas “Dream Act”.)

But hey, life is unfair. And politics is a blood sport. Cain has a number of opinions out there, and I’m sure opposition research could find something Cain said during his five years as a radio talk show host to try to hang on the man. But he has no votes to defend, no executive orders to explain, no inconsistency (that I know of) that makes him seem like a hypocrite.

AND… as far as I know, Cain has no pay-to-play type of drama in his background. All politicians do, to some extent or another. Donors get special treatment; they have to, since money is the lifeblood of politics.

Above all, this gives Cain the perfect platform to go after President Solyndra with fullblooded fury and passion. None of the others have perfectly clean hands to do the same, even Bachmann who wants to make a big deal of crony capitalism.

I apologize; I didn’t know I was writing 2500 words when I started the diary. So to summarize:

I’m back on the Cain Train. No disrespect or dislike for Perry, Romney, Bachmann, or frankly, any of the others… if any of them becomes the nominee, I’m sure I’d support him/her above Obama. But during the primary season… Cain Can.

I’m sure many of you would point out all of Cain’s faults and numerous reasons why I’m off my rocker. All good. Let’s just keep it civil, and keep in mind that we’re all on the same side come November of 2012.

Interesting history note.

Like then, there is no consensus first choice but there is a consensus second choice.

The nomination requires a consensus of delegates for somebody. If it can’t be their first choice, why not their second choice?

Why not Herman Cain?

“His comments about the right of communities to deny Muslims from building a mosque, betraying a woefully inadequate understanding of the First Amendment, was the proverbial nail in the coffin for me.”

Many of us believe that Islam is not a religion but a philosophical/legal system that is incompatible with democracy and our Constitution. The Constitution is not a suicide document - we are under no obligation to tolerate a belief system that has, as one of its tenets, the aim to destroy us and our way of life either by domination or violence.

Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin are both pro-gun.

Cain flunks the gun rights test.

Although Cain says he supports the Second Amendment, in the next breath he says he fully supports any and all state gun control/prohibitions.

That is like supporting federal rights for women and blacks, but allowing women and blacks to be slaves if the state laws permit them to be slaves.

I will not support any candidate who allows, and favors, individual states to outlaw guns, or to take away womens voting rights, or to allow slavery, or to prohibit free speech, etc. .

http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/Cain/Gun-Control.php

The central issue this campaign is JOBS.

Hermann Cain, as the only business leader running for POTUS, is a perfect fit for the number one issue.

= =

If Cain feels that he’s new to foreign policy, the may I suggest he choose John Bolton as his VP, whom I have an enormous amount of respect for.

Cain/Bolton

Well it really depends on what we are talking about, but for me I rather my state legislature decide things like:

Should a convicted felon be allowed to own a gun?
Should crimial possion of a gun on the grounds of a school or other public facility be an aggravated circumstance.
How close to a private dwelling should a person be allowed to dischange a firearm?
Should a person with a history of mental illness be allowed to own or buy guns?

And I can think of a plenty of others I bet even you can.

For me personally as I said I rather have the local legislature decide things like this. If they are wrong I have a far better and greater chance of getting it set right locally, than having to deal with Washington. And even if that doesn’t work one can always go to the Supreme Court as gun rights activist did in Chicago and Washington DC.

Interesting ticket. I would kind of think Bolton would fit better, and be more effective, as an SoS. Whoever Cain might surround himself with, I have the notion would get Cain’s 100% support. Unlike the current Madam Secretary way too often with the current POTUS.

The NappyOne

Well, the United States Supreme Court is just 1 judge away from determining that individual citizens are not allowed to own, possess, or carry guns.

Secondly, if Cain is ever President, then you can forget about Cain allowing national reciprocity for CCW.

Furthermore, allowing states to outlaw guns, means that California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Mass, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, and a dozen other states Cain thinks it is just fine that if their state legislatures outlaw guns, then Cain has no problem with it.

I ONLY!!! vote for pro-2A candidates.

Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin are both pro-gun.

Cain flunks the gun rights test.

Although Cain says he supports the Second Amendment, in the next breath he says he fully supports any and all state gun control/prohibitions.

That is like supporting federal rights for women and blacks, but allowing women and blacks to be slaves if the state laws permit them to be slaves.

I will not support any candidate who allows, and favors, individual states to outlaw guns, or to take away womens voting rights, or to allow slavery, or to prohibit free speech, etc. .

http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/Cain/Gun-Control.php

CGalen is going to every Cain thread and posting this misinformation.

Herman Cain is 200% pro 2nd Amendment. What he said in the Blitzer interview (mentioned on that link you posted) was taken to mean that he believed states could overrule the 2nd amendment. He does not believe that and he explains here:

(at the 10:17 mark) I strongly support the 2nd amendment. I said that some things should be left up to the states, for example, if the states want to require background checks, let the states decide that. But I did not in ANY WAY mean states had a right to restrict access to owning firearms. So that was the misunderstanding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOUF1Hug0JI

You wrote:

“You realize, of course, that if Cain is elected, then you can forget about National Reciprocity. You can also forget about owning a gun in any state in the future which has a large number of Democrat voters because Cain will not interfere.”

In contrast stand the facts of what he actually said, in context:

BLITZER: All right. Let’s talk about gun control. Do you support any gun control?

CAIN: I support the Second Amendment.

BLITZER: So you don’t — so what’s the answer on gun control?

CAIN: The answer on gun control is I support strong — strongly support the Second Amendment. I don’t support, you know, onerous legislation that’s going to restrict people’s rights in order to be able to protect themselves as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

BLITZER: Should states or local governments be allowed to control the gun situation? Or should...

CAIN: Yes.

BLITZER: The answer is yes?

CAIN: The answer is yes. That should be a state’s decision.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/07/interview_with_presidential_candidate_herman_cain_110131.html