You’d have to understand the nature of the allegations, have some insight into their veracity, and judge the merits, before it would matter how many of these there were.
If Cain ran his association such that it simply paid off people who made false allegations, there could be dozens and it wouldn’t mean anything, other than if you were concerned that the leader of an organization would allow employees to take payoffs for false accusations, and wouldn’t know it was happening. But that’s a different charge than the allegations themselves.
You can take that point of view but I doubt the average voter would. Especially if we are talking about dozens.
Here’s Michael Harlin of the American Thinker’s take:
1) Herman Cain is accused of sexually harrassing two women, though no direct nor specific accusations are made, nor are facts presented to support it.
2) The nature of this harrassment ( if it did occur ) is unknown.
3) There apparently was a settlement in the “1990’s” under terms of non-disclosure when he was the CEO of the National Restaurant Association; meaning, no one gets to talk about the settlement, including Mr. Cain, nor the alleged victims, nor the attorneys.
4) So then, how does one “defend” himself after making a confidential settlement? Answer: you can’t under these circumstances. And that’s why this is a “when did you stop beating your wife?” scenario. There’s no way to win and the implication is inherently prejudicial to Cain.
Attorneys settle cases all the time under confidential terms. The point is of settlement, instead of taking the risks of litigation which is as certain as a crap game no matter how innocent you are, a reasonable party will pay to make it “go away.”
Does this mean culpability? Of course not! It means that instead of paying attorneys buckets of money to defend spurious claims, you pay to settle. It is the cost of living in this litigious world. And settlements of this type are routine in this country and are happening every day.