Tucker Carlson: ‘Herman Cain Is Not Qualified To Be President And We Are All Pretending He Is’

On Fox News’s Red Eye, Wednesday morning, The Daily Caller‘s Tucker Carlson made a blunt analysis on Herman Cain‘s abilities to govern as president.

“Come on, can we just stop pretending?” Carlson remarked. “I don’t know what happened with these women, the ‘he said, she said, she said, she said’ thing. He is not qualified to be president, and we are all pretending he is. He’s a nice guy. I know him, I like him. I think he’s a great guy. He would be a better president than the current president, but he can’t explain his own economic plan.”

“Isn’t that all we need — is somebody better than Obama?” asked host Greg Gutfeld.

Did you ever think we have thought it through? That we’ve considered the other candidates and think Cain is the best choice? You’re basically accusing Cain supporters of the same mistake voters made in the last election. We’re more intelligent and thoughtful than that. Maybe you’ve thought it through and come to a different conclusion think another candidate would be better. Good for you. But don’t disparage others because they’ve also evaluated the present pool of candidates and have decided differently than you. He meets the constitutional qualifications and he has quite a resume of turning around failing companies. Being president is very much like running a corporation, albeit a much bigger one. One of the qualities of a good executive is their ability to choose experts for departments he doesn’t have as much knowledge about. It’s highly doubtful Cain could have been as successful as he was if he had constantly chosen the wrong people. Other people may have different qualifications but my evaluation is no less legitimate than yours.

Cindie

Yeah because it’s not enough to follow the criteria set forth in the Constitution, the document all conservatives are supposed to want to follow to the letter. So we can follow the Constitution to the letter EXCEPT when it comes to presidential elections. Sorry, but it’s about time we lived the values we supposedly profess. Every single candidate, including Cain, is qualified according to the Constitution. Had the founders thought there was other criteria just as important don’t you think they would’ve added “who has also served as governor of a state or served in the military. I’m sick to death of choosing someone just because they’ve been on the “established” career path.

Cindie

I mean no insult ... it's just that so many here keep referring to Herman Cain as a "Conservative". And I see nothing in his 999 proposal to support that. It truly is an additive tax plan --- that's why he had to come up with his "9-Zero-9" plan and opt-outs based on income and empowerment zone exemptions for poor areas. There's no magic in this plan---there's no solution in this plan--which is why he cannot explain it. Really explain it.

I find no cogent blueprint in his foreign policy statements (in fact his lack of depth makes me cringe).

I keep saying "stop and think" because I am so afraid that in our near frenzied hope to find a replacement for Obama we are falling for platitudes and terrific soundbites.

There's so much anger and raw emotion surrounding his candidacy that I will say it again--please, pull back and hear what he says about policy and process, not what you want to believe he means.

Thanks.

Again, I HAVE thought it through. NO ONE is an expert in every area a president has to deal with, period. But his success in the corporate world is proof he knows how to be a leader. And considering his constantly evolving success it’s obvious to me he is a very quick study. You aren’t more qualified than I am analyzing the current field. Our criteria is different. That doesn’t mean I haven’t “stepped back” and analyzed the current field.

Either the intent of the founders means something or it doesn’t. Did the founders add qualifiers? NO! And that’s for a reason, don’t you think? In my opinion, through generations of losing sight of original intent, we’ve lost sight of WHY the founders didn’t add other qualifiers. My first consideration is whether the constitutional requirement has been met. Look where the “right” education (elite Ivy League) and career path has gotten us. We’ve gone from very capable private citizens taking the helm to 0bama who was “on the right career path” but no resume that anyone can find and whose Constitutional requirements are unknown at this point.

However, even though Cain IS more qualified than 0bama (and there’s nothing wrong with stating that), I simply look for qualifications beyond a government or military career. Once the Constitutional requirements have been met the next thing I do is evaluate qualifications based on criteria I deem important. The most important of those is leadership ability. Cain has proved he has that. I also look for someone who can learn very quickly on the job. Considering how quickly he’s turned around failing companies, it’s obvious he quite capable in that area too.

So please don’t tell me (or anyone else here) they haven’t taken a step back and considered things thoughtfully and logically according to our criteria. You’ve come to different conclusions based on what you deem important in a president. I would never presume to tell you to “take a step back” because you have different considerations than I do. Now, tell me where I am wrong and you are right? Is your way the ONLY way of assessing the field? Does stepping back mean ONLY your conclusions are valid?

Cindie

Oh, please I have no freaking intention of convincing you to vote for anyone. Unless you’re reading comprehension is lacking you should understand that. I don’t even care who you’re supporting. What I DO resent is your presuming to tell me I haven’t analyzed my choice thoroughly, logically or according to whatever standards YOU think I should have. And yeah, that pisses me off. After you told me (and everyone else who’s chosen Cain) that we hadn’t stepped back to analyze things (twice) and I called you on it (twice) you now come back with this? Come on, you can do that. If you can’t follow the conversation then don’t bother responding.

Cindie

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.