Like Huckabee, Cain is an insurgent campaign, trying to appeal to the base. Huckabee also was a Fair Tax guy. And they both are skillful pitchmen.
The big difference between the two is that Cain has no record, because he's never held elective office. So his talk has never been tested. Had Huckabee run with no record, just based on his talk, he might have won it.
That's not to say Cain would govern the way Huckabee governed, it just means it's easy to say the right things when you've never had to prove it.
If Cain draws significant base support, but not enough to win, then he ends up like Huckabee did--in second place. Cain has to clear the conservative field to compete. That means Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann, and Santorum all have to go away by the time votes are being counted. If not, Romney still has a chance.
I see. Thanks for your insight.:-)
I think the 1976 primary is a better analogy than 2008.
Ford was the establishment candidate, but most of the base didn’t want him.
Reagan was the outsider with radical ideas that scared the heck out of the establishment, but he was supported by huge numbers of the base that was dissatified with the status quo (called the silent majority then) who craved a real change in the direction of the country.
Romney is clearly playing the Ford part.
Several candidates keep stepping up for the Reagan/outsider part. Right now it’s Cain, but it could be someone else.
The tea party is playing the part of the “silent majorty”.
Reagan took it all the way into the convention, but it laid the groundwork for Reagan to get the nomination in 1980. If Romney does pull it out, I think it will lay the groundwork for an outsider candidate to be the nominee in 2016 (even if Romney is elected prez).