Cain 2012 Looks a Lot Like Obama 2008, Except with a VERY Different Outcome - John Ziegler -

JohnZiegler.com ^ | 11/02/2011 | John Ziegler

[reformjoy]

Editorial by John Ziegler

Cain 2012 Looks a Lot Like Obama 2008, Except with a VERY Different Outcome

11/2/2011

Much has been written about the almost primal desire among conservatives to find the next Ronald Reagan, or at least someone they can get excited about, when it comes to choosing an opponent for President Obama in 2012. A huge number of Republican primary voters and Tea Party members now consider it almost a betrayal of their sacred honor to “give in” and vote for Mitt Romney, even if the evidence is overwhelming that he would have the best chance to beat the guy who provoked so much of their passion to begin with. 

 

What is particularly stunning about the way things are currently breaking is that it appears the “Not Romney” brigade is, in a stupefying bit of irony, now beginning to convalesce around the man who is most like the guy they claim to want to beat. Instead of a new Reagan, conservatives have instead found themselves their own Obama in Herman Cain.

 

The similarities between Cain in 2012 and Obama in 2008 are striking and go far beyond their shared (sort of) race. Both were basically political novices who just a few years before had been crushed in attempts to win seats in congress. Both are charismatic speakers. Both have massive holes in their foreign policy resume/knowledge. Both came out of crowded fields by appealing to the fringe of their parties and using the partisan media to gain enough traction to become the primary challenger of establishment candidates who no one really loved. Both seem to have a Teflon quality as their many mistakes never seem to stick to their personal appeal.

 

Now, based on the early returns, it appears as if Cain’s campaign is in the process of sharing an even more important historical commonality with Obama’s miracle run to the nomination. Just as Obama’s campaign was rocked with revelations that his long-time friend and pastor Jeremiah Wright was an anti-American racist loon, Cain’s is now in the process of dealing with allegations that in the 1990’s two women were paid to keep quiet about having been sexually harassed by the candidate.

 

While the charges were very different in both their nature and their seriousness (for my money Wright was much more of a presidential disqualifier than what we currently know about whatever Cain did), they are remarkably similar in how the media and political partisans are reacting to them as well as their apparent impact on each campaign.

 

In 2008, Obama told various conflicting stories in a desperate attempt to explain the inexplicable. The liberal elements of the media did everything they could to minimize the story, spinning it as being about race rather than an insight into his character and truthfulness. In the end, the base of his party was forced to rally around him and, in some bizarre way, you could argue the controversy clinched him the nomination.

 

Now, in the 2012 cycle, history seems to be repeating itself. The conservative media is rushing to Cain’s defense. Fox News has provided him with a platform where he can answer only softball questions, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, among others, have strongly condemned the allegations as racial motivated liberal hit jobs, and Matt Drudge is already asking if America is ready for an Obama/Cain general election matchup. The base seems to be instinctually rallying around him, inherently and understandably distrustful of any remotely suspicious charge against a “true” conservative by a liberal media outlet.

 

Meanwhile, the real issues of his truthfulness, ability to handle a crisis, and electability have been largely downplayed by the conservative media (the only media that really matters in a Republican primary) and the liberal media seems to be holding back the big guns, salivating over what a Cain nomination would mean for them economically and ideologically.

 

The most interesting/important figure in the Obama/Cain comparison is clearly Matt Drudge, whose legendary Drudge Report dictates so much of the content for Fox News, talk radio, conservative blogs and, to a lesser extent, CNN, MSNBC and major newspapers.

 

In 2008, the evidence I have seen (both public and currently private) that Matt Drudge was in the tank for Barack Obama, at least until his election was secure, is overwhelming. (As a point of full disclosure, I used to fill in for mat on his old national radio show and used to be close to his former right hand man Andrew Breitbart.)

 

All one needs do is go back in the Drudge archives from March 14, 2008, the day after the Wright story broke to see absolutely no mention of it on the site with the headline stating that super delegates were breaking towards Obama. This is just one of dozens of examples of where Drudge, apparently because he felt an Obama nomination/presidency would be good for his business (which it undoubtedly has been), downplayed or simply ignored stories which could have easily brought Obama down when he was still vulnerable. When compared to the extremely anti-Obama tone of the site today, it is downright comical to go back in time to see how Drudge portrayed events then.

 

Now, Drudge is playing the exact opposite role in the Cain “scandal,” heavily promoting conservative celebrity defenses of Cain and the narrative that this is just all part of a predicted “high tech lynching.” The Drudge Report was your only source of information; you would think that Cain was about to be named the nominee. 

 

While Drudge’s actions may appear to be very different in 2012 than they were in 2008, their effect is exactly the same. You see Drudge is extremely savvy and he understands that Cain is good for his business in the short run by making the primary season far more compelling. He is also a potential long-term asset as a general election between Cain and Obama (one Drudge promoted heavily on Tuesday) would be the most electrifying in history. He also knows that having Cain as the nominee would virtually assure that his cash cow (Obama) would be around for another four years. In short, Cain is a no lose proposition for the conservative media in general and Drudge in particular.

 

While this analysis may seem exceedingly cynical to those who have not devoted years of their lives to this issue of media corruption as I have, I can assure you it is not. If there was one piece of knowledge I learned during the making of my last documentary film “Media Malpractice,” that I wish everyone else knew, it would be that the news media, especially ideologically driven media, is a business and not a cause.

 

While there are obviously exceptions, the vast majority of people making content decisions in the media are far more concerned with their job security than they are about saving the country.

 

To media people a Cain/Obama matchup means short term job security for everyone and at least four more years of living off Obama for conservatives. After all, the dirty little secret of ideological media is that it is bad for business when your guys are in power (if you doubt that, just look at how Obama’s election impacted the ratings of Fox News and MSNBC). 

 

Now, it is possible that some reading this are now saying, “Okay John, if you are right and this is going to play out like 2008, doesn’t that mean Cain would be the next president?” The answer to that is decidedly no; because the fundamental reality of presidential elections, the one which has prevented conservatives from finding their next Reagan, is that the rules in a general election are totally different for Republicans than they are for Democrats. The incredibly unfair treatment of Sarah Palin in comparison to Obama in 2008 should have, if nothing else, at least ended any question about that obvious truth.

 

If a Republican had Obama’s ties to Rev. Wright he would have gotten slaughtered by the increasingly partisan mainstream media. Similarly, Cain has already given the media more than enough to “Palinize” him should he be the nominee. His 9-9-9 plan can be easily demonized, his statements about Muslims and Gays will be used to make him seem like an extremist nut, and his own admissions regarding his lack of interest in foreign policy will turn an Obama weakness from 2008 into a decided advantage. All this is already exists before the real pressure of a campaign even begins and Cain’s penchant for “straight talk’ surely comes back to haunt him on multiple occasions.

 

In short, a Cain/Obama campaign would be fun, but it would also result in a democratic landslide at the polls. The only “conservatives” who would gain from that scenario are those in the media. Unfortunately, they are also the ones controlling a narrative that most of their customers can’t currently see the danger of.

 

As inequitable as it is, conservatives are simply not allowed to nominate an Obama. We gave up that right when we allowed virtually all of the major communication/education outlets to be taken over by liberals. About the only thing worse than this unfair rule would be to not accept its inescapable reality.

[livius]

...the fundamental reality of presidential elections, the one which has prevented conservatives from finding their next Reagan, is that the rules in a general election are totally different for Republicans than they are for Democrats.

Interesting article. I don't think this is being stirred up by new media journalists (such as Drudge) just to give themselves something to write about, but I do think that the above point is an excellent one.

People here keep complaining that dirt came out on Obama, too, and it was never investigated and very often not even mentioned after the first report, if even then.

But that's just how it is, and any GOP candidate has to be ready for this. The fact that Cain wasn't ready for this, even though he knew he had this in his past, doesn't mean that he's guilty of anything, but simply that he is somewhat naive about politics. And it's not because he's black; any GOP candidate whose name was getting out there can expect this.

So here's another crucial difference: Obama was a career politician. He knew how to play the game, and he played it with remarkable viciousness. He had never done anything significant in his life except being a "community organizer" (i.e., what they used to call a "ward heeler") and get elected to office, ranging from head of the Law Review to elected offices from Illinois. Granted, he did absolutely nothing once he got elected to these offices, but that was because he was simply looking on to the next one, and he did indeed manage to get himself promoted - with no achievements and no public history - all the way to the top. This is at least in part because he was chosen by the radical leftists who had taken over the Dems as being the candidate they were going to support come hell or high water, and they did. And they promoted him solely on personal grounds. I never found him "charismatic," but apparently a number of people did, and the Dems seemed to think it was really neat that people swooned when Obama appeared. I found it creepy, but maybe that's just me.

Still, no GOP candidate is going to get that kind of support from GOP Central, so we can rule that out to begin with. They might get fanatical, near-swooning support from a group of the "base," as we are seeing with Cain, but that's not enough to win a national election.

I don't think that it means we're finished and no GOPer except one who's not (Romney) will ever win. But I think it does mean that we've got to be much, much more prepared and that any GOP candidate has got to remember that simple axiom, which is that the rules are different for GOP candidates.

[AnnGora]

I used to actually like John Zieglar and bought his excellent film, Media Malpractice. John would go on MSNBC and CNN and stand up to all the Palin haters and bimbo pundits. He laughed in their faces and made them look like fools.

Then something happened to him and he turned on Palin like a pitbull. Seems like he wasn’t getting enough attention from the Palins and he threw a temper tantrum. That got him a good 15 seconds of notice from the MSM as a once-Sarah-supporter-turned-critic. Now he has faded into oblivion, but keeps trying to claw his way back to relevance.

Ye blew it, Johnny.

[kevao]

You state that Romney has the best chance of beating Obama and then offer absolutely no evidence for that assertion.

[samtheman]

Now, it is possible that some reading this are now saying, “Okay John, if you are right and this is going to play out like 2008, doesn’t that mean Cain would be the next president?” The answer to that is decidedly no; because the fundamental reality of presidential elections, the one which has prevented conservatives from finding their next Reagan, is that the rules in a general election are totally different for Republicans than they are for Democrats. The incredibly unfair treatment of Sarah Palin in comparison to Obama in 2008 should have, if nothing else, at least ended any question about that obvious truth.

There is truth in that paragraph.

It is a different media world for conservatives and "progressives".

[jospehm20]

I do not see any similiraties between the two.

[getitright]

henceforth and forevermore, the terms ‘mother’ and ‘pantload’ are forbidden to appear within 60 words of one another.

[Nervous Tick]

LOL

[WestSylvanian]

Excellent summary of what is behind this mania for Cain and why people had better soon get some common sense. Cain is an empty suit—like Obama he’s a guy with a bloated ego and inflated opinion of himself. Get him off the subject of 9-9-9 and he can only respond with bromides and superficial one liners that suggest he hasn’t even bothered to get informed on vital issues. A recent example is his answer to a question about China as a military threat to the U.S. Sure it is he said, “it’s trying to develop a nuclear capability.” That’s an exact quote. China, as anybody who’s interested in these things knows, has been a major nuclear power for years, since the 1960s. It’s not Iran. Apparently, Cain isn’t aware of that fact. And he doesn’t seem to think that his ignorance should be of concern. “I’ll just get the right experts,” was his answer to a question at the National Press Club about his knowledge of and experience in foreign affairs. Then he went on to compare dealing with foreign policy issues when he becomes president to deciding how to turn around Godfather’s Pizza when it was in financial trouble. God Almighty.

This guy is not ready for prime time and he’s certainly not ready for the White House. With the threats to its very survival that this country is facing, it is no time to nominate an amateur who doesn’t seem to have even an entry level knowledge of these issues. Just because he speaks with absolute self confidence and has an air of authority about everything under the sun doesn’t mean he knows what he’s talking about. He’s on an ego trip just like Obama was. I’m praying that Republican primary voters in 2012 will have more sense than Democratic voters had in 2008.

[kevao]

They might get fanatical, near-swooning support from a group of the "base," as we are seeing with Cain

I personlly know very many Cain supporters; not a single one of them is a "fanatic" or a "swooner."

[Kartographer]

One of my favorite lines form one of my favorite westerns 'Open Range' goes like this:

"You may not know this, but somethings gnaw on a man worse than dying."

Voting for Mitt Romney is one of those things!

[ken5050]

The nominee will be either Cain, Perry, or Mitt. Mitt can’t WIN the OP nomnation....his support has topped out at about 25%..bu he could manage to back into the nomination, if Perry is unable to restart his campagn, and if Cain somehow self-destructs. ( Note: I support Cain, but it could happen) TheGOP base will NOt support Mitt..minimal volunteers, minimal cash..I couldn’t work in te field for him, nor send him a dime, but te question is would a substantial portion of the GOP base go to the polls and NOT pull the lever forMitt. That’s still to be determined.

[dead]

He also knows that having Cain as the nominee would virtually assure that his cash cow (Obama) would be around for another four years.

He goes on to explain that the leftwing media will prevent Cain from winning.

It's kinda cute, but a little sad, how much power Ziegler imagines the traditional media outlets still have.

In his mind, they decide who will be president, and then they make it so.

If that were so, what ever happened to President Mondale, President Dukakis, President Gore, and President Kerry? Or maybe Ziegler imagines that the incredibly shrinking mainstream media somehow has more power now than they did during those elections, when the internet and alternative media was smaller and less influential.

Ziegler is living in a past that never even really existed. His industry is not the king makers he wishes they were. They pissed away any mojo they once possessed.

Obama is clearly the worst performing President in generations. The unwatched broadcast networks and the barely relevant New York Times cannot save his skinny ass from defeat.

[livius]

I’m just talking about some of the reactions I have seen here. They’re way over the top.

That said, my point is that the article was absolutely right and that ANY Republican candidate has got to be prepared to be attacked in a way that would never happen, even for identical real or alleged infractions, if they were Dems. If you want to support your guy, you’ve got to encourage him to be prepared for this and to have a plan for responding to it.

[sauropod]

My question for John Ziegler is “Why did you turn on Sarah Palin and stab her in the back?”

[sauropod]

It’s worse than that, Johnnie.

John Ziegler originally positioned himself as a defender of Sarah Palin when she was being eaten alive by the American media. He did one of the first interviews post 2008 election with Sarah.

Then, he did a 180 degree turn around and stabbed her in the back.

I want to know why, and my opinion of this guy is he is lower than whaleslime.

[Lazlo in PA]

LOL. Nicely played. That ad campaign was totally hilarious. That pretty much sums up the Cain Obummer comparison this constant whiner Ziegler is trying to manufacture.

Let's remember Ziegler is the one turned on Palin like a rattle snake after pimping her non stop just because she wasn't giving him enough attention. He is a genuine POS and is going to be the next David Brock.

1979 Ford Granada VS. Mercedes Corny Ad

[1malumprohibitum]

Lost me at “Evidence is overwhelming that Romney would have the best chance of defeating O.” Saying it over and over doesn’t make it so. Nobody wants Romney. Not in 08 and not now. If he is so fantastic why don’t his poll numbers reflect it?

[dead]

the “Not Romney” brigade is, in a stupefying bit of irony, now beginning to convalesce around the man who is most like the guy they claim to want to beat...

[I Shall Endure]

If Mitt’s the nominee a third-party conservative challenger is pretty much guaranteed. A choice between Obama and Obama-Lite isn’t a choice.

The question is, will that inspire a fourth-party Ultra-Left candidate?

[ken5050]

Disagree. The base will just focus down-ballot..winning the Senate, increasing the House margin, and pickign up several governors slots..If Mitt gets the nomination, and we run a conservative as a 3rd party candidate, we give Obama the win. Just as easy to not vote for him, and a lot cheaper..devote our resources to the key senate/House races, andd we have the same result, we final bury the GOP country club establishment//