Iowa Poll: Herman Cain 24; Ron Paul 20

Washington Examiner ^ | 111711 | Charlie Spiering

[Fred]

According to a new Iowa State University Poll, Herman Cain is still in first place in Iowa, with Ron Paul coming in second.

Here is how it stacks up:

Cain: 24.5 Paul: 20.4

[ScottinVA]

How anyone could back that psychotic clown Ron Paul is beyond me.

[RitaOK]

Rasmussen is the only poll in town and the standard for nearest accuracy. Cain is in a full swan dive. Newt is in full soar. Yes, it can change next week, but Ras will be there to reflect it. The rest are just conversation.

[ScottinVA]

“No one expects Cain to be an expert in foreign policy.”

No, but he should fairly be expected to have a command of at least a few basic principles, around which to frame his responses to questions. A good media trainer, which I do NOT believe Cain currently has, would coach him to do just that. Here’s what I posted on another thread yesterday with a couple minor changes:

---

Cain’s main problem is messaging. He needs to make voters comfortable with the fact that, even though he’s not endowed with every detail of knowledge on international matters, he will ultimately make the right decisions. One tactic he could deploy right away is to make clear three main, broad, non-negotiable principles:

1. The U.S. shall — without exception — negotiate from a position of strength. We shall be respected by our friends and feared by our enemies.

2. America’s best interests around the globe will be at the forefront of ALL decision making.

3. The U.S. seeks peace in the Middle East, but we stand by our ally Israel.

Based on those three main principles, virtually any media lead question and follow-up can be answered clearly and succinctly. Reagan framed his responses in this manner. By doing the same, Cain could’ve avoided the trap he stepped in a few days ago during that interview in Milwaukee.

Here’s a scenario that could’ve transpired had he used the three-main-principle approach:

Q: “Mr. Cain, what is your position on our action in Libya?”

A: “Well, I believe BEFORE we and NATO entered that fray, we should’ve answered the all important question, ‘Is this good for us long-range?’ My point is that all military action, regardless of scope or size, must be measured against what the ramifications are to America’s national security. In this case, I don’t believe that was adequately done. In my administration, I can assure you that we will NOT risk the lives of America’s finest young men and women, nor will we expend our obviously limited resources, on foreign entanglements if the case can’t be made our national interests will otherwise suffer negative consequences.”

So..

Accomplished here are: 1) An answer to the question; 2) A restatement of the broad principle; and 3) An overview of what HIS approach would’ve been.

MOST important.. it eliminates having to “walk back” comments later to clarify his meaning.

It comes down to Media Training 101. We trained commanders at varied levels in the Air Force in this manner, and the resultant clarity of message paid dividends in credibility.

[Lady Lucky]

I do not respond to Cainiac attack dogs, particularly when they have obviously not bothered to read my previous posts about Mr. Cain.
They do their candidate no credit.

[ohioWfan]

And he's also the only candidate with an insane and dangerous foreign policy that will put America at further risk.

And for that reason, he doesn't have a shot at winning a sane election........

.......thankfully.

[MHGinTN]

Well done! The circular firing squad won’t lke it, but that is a great positive suggestion.

[ScottinVA]

Saw Ed Rollins interviewed on TV yesterday ...he picked Ron Paul as the eventual winner.

The eventual winner in Iowa (bad enough), or overall (disastrous)?

[ScottinVA]

Thanks!!!

I’d love to get the opportunity to sit him down for three days and work with him.

[Ozymandias Ghost]

Iowa ...sorry should have been more specific!

[ScottinVA]

Thanks.. I don’t know much about the voters in Iowa, but I’d be seriously stunned if Paul won the caucuses.

[justsaynomore]

He has a command of those principles, but you are right in that he would do better to just keep referring to them.

______________

Cain has said in many interviews his policy is “Peace through strength and clarity” - clarify who our friends are, clarify who our enemies are and stop giving money to our enemies.
______________

Further info from his website:

The primary duty of the President of the United States is to protect our people. In fact, it is the principal duty of a limited federal government. They must ensure that our military and all of our security agencies are strong and capable.

Unfortunately, national security has become far too politicized with our elected officials using the issue as a means to polarize our country as the “war hawks” and the “peace doves.” In response, the safety and morale of our brave men and women in uniform are often at risk for political gain. The judgment of our military experts on the ground is often underutilized in exchange for political purposes. National security isn’t about politics. It’s about defending America.

While diplomacy is a critical tool in solving the complex security issues we face, it must never compromise military might. Because we are such a free and prosperous people, we are the envy of the world. Many regimes seek to destroy us because they are threatened by our ideals, and they resent our prosperity. We must acknowledge the real and present danger that terrorist nations and organizations pose to our country’s future.

Further, we must stand by our friends and we must not be fooled by our enemies. We should never be deceived by terrorists. They only have one objective, namely, to kill all of us. We must always remain vigilant in dealing with adversaries.

We must support our military with the best training, equipment, technology and infrastructure necessary to keep them in a position to win. We must also provide our men and women in uniform, our veterans and their families with the benefits they deserve for their tremendous sacrifice. These heroes have served us. We must never forget to serve them.

Cain discusses foreign policy in interviews:

with Dick Morris - http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/herman-cain-interview-on-new-ideas-to-tame-iran-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/

Henry Kissinger who said he had talked to all the Candidates and only Cain was asking the right questions?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282241/kissinger-digs-cain-s-brilliant-video-robert-costa

with Bill O’Reilly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJjAJeyYhAg

Cain’s Position on Israel: http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/28/the-u-s-must-stand-with-israel/

Summary of Foreign Policy Stance:
http://www.hermancain.com/the-issues

Values Voters Speech:
http://www.therightscoop.com/herman-cain-brings-the-house-down-at-values-voter-summit/

Seeing Green in Red China
December 3, 2005
By Herman Cain
http://www.economicfreedomcoalition.com/news/press-opinion-120305.asp

Back to Terrorism Reality: Islamic Fascists are the Enemy
July 9, 2007
By Herman Cain
http://www.economicfreedomcoalition.com/news/press-opinion-070907.asp

Anatomy of World War III
July 26, 2006
By Herman Cain

http://www.economicfreedomcoalition.com/news/press-opinion-072606.asp

[Ozymandias Ghost]

Well thought out and very well written. I have to agree w/you that Herman needs some professional media advisers/strategists to develop some structured “boilerplate” to deal w/various common foreign policy questions. I can't understand, w/the money that has been coming in to his campaign of late, why he hasn't done that. Based on Herman's press releases his top foreign policy adviser is a retired Navy Captain. An retired O-6 seems pretty "lightweight" for this level of competition.

Part of Cain's appeal; but also part of his problems, has been his accessibility. I think he has been making himself TOO available; and, as a consequence, he has been falling victim to the jackals in the media and making rookie mistakes. It appears that he is pulling back some from that approach for now; which is probably warranted, as long as he is using this time to retreat and regroup so that he can get his message “on target” for the next phase of his campaign.

[ScottinVA]

Thanks.. I have no doubt his foreign policy stances are good. But, as has been the case several times, he has to hone his themes and messages on specific subjects. He already has the principles in place... he just needs to draw from them during interviews.

[ScottinVA]

Spot on, FRiend.

[Paul Ross]

Newt is not as competent as you seem to think. And he never once saved an American business with sound financial understanding. He is a politician. And a progressive one at that. Attacking Paul Ryan like he did. It is time to nuke him once and for all.

[Impy]

Oh? Which RINO do you want to win, Perry or Newt?

[jessduntno]

“Oh? Which RINO do you want to win, Perry or Newt?”

I don’t want any RINO to win. I want the son of a bitch who is running against Obama to win.

You?