Herman Cain’s Journal-Sentinel interview is much, much worse than Perry’s “Oops” moment. The clip, if you haven’t seen it, is a bunch of gobbledygook from Cain, who apparently has no opinion on Libya that extends beyond a knee-jerk response (in my opinion, he’s struggling to remember what that response was so as not to flip-flop). The campaign blasted the video as edited to make them look bad, but the Journal Sentinel claims the clips weren’t edited at all, and they certainly don't appear to be.
Here are three reasons why Cain's gaffe is worse than Perry's, followed by three reasons it won’t matter:
- Cain’s not forgetting a name, he’s forgetting what he thinks about an entire policy approach. (The Perry equivalent would’ve been flailing to remember the name of Gaddafi, not an incapability to remember the policy perspective you have—at least he remembered he wanted to close the department).
- There’s no easy way to hang a lantern on this one or poke fun at yourself.
- The excuse of the campaign is that Cain had four hours of sleep; I dunno about you, but I call that “Tuesday.” And it doesn’t get easier in the White House.
And flip side:
- No one supporting Cain at this point prioritizes foreign policy beyond “Obama is wrong.”
- This is a web video, not CNBC, and far fewer people will see it.
- The more surprising and negative story coming out of this interview which will actually be used against Cain is not the Libya answer, but Cain’s support for federal collective bargaining rights—a position far beyond even that of the Obama administration.
Why, this book tour suddenly became a campaign suddenly became a book tour. But hey, Scott Lincicome points out, this is just how President Kang won in 1996.
- Comment (36)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Mar '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Cain's answer regarding federal collective bargaining rights was perfectly correct. Many federal employees have unions and bargain collectively over personnel policies, practices and working conditions. It's true that most do not bargain over pay and some benefits, but that's not what the interviewer asked.
Jun '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Cain is little more than a carnival barker. His only virtue is that he recognizes a circus when he sees one.
Jan '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Cain has been a joke all along and has been saying things just as dumb or moreso for months. That he has any viability left at all can only be chalked up to the fact that it's not just liberals and independents that are willing to indulge fantasies and project an idealistic image onto candidates who don't deserve it and can't live up to it. I also think far too many people want to dive into identity politics to turn the tables on liberals and beat them at their own game by running a black man for president, even though he clearly isn't qualified. But that is a cynical and dangerous gambit.
Edited on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:20amFeb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Carnival barker? A Joke? Look, I realize people have valid reasons to not support Cain, even though I support him myself. Let's keep some perspective, though. This is an accomplished man and he deserves at least a little more respect than this.
Regarding the clip: it wasn't his finest, most articulate moment. I thought he recovered sufficiently and gave a passable answer: he would have wanted more assessment of the Libyan opposition.
I do accept the fours hours sleep explanation. If Mr. Domenech regularly gets by on 4 hours sleep, then good for him. But I don't think sleep deprivation is normal, even for the president.
Feb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
For the record, I didn't think Perry's "oops" moment was a big deal, either.
Oct '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
It appears that the fear of the outsider is running the show for conservatives as much as for the general population. Outsiders do not have the polish of the pro's. Herman Cain is taking his time to discuss the issue of Libya, rather than pop off with an authoritative sounding 30 second bite that will appear knowledgeable, but in fact will simply retain all of the substance of 30 seconds on any issue.
The Tea Party's success has been to look to outsiders, and the occasional pro, to come at the problem without the baggage of the insider club. No doubt the batting average will not be 1000, as the founders of our constitutional republic knew it would not. But the government of the people starts out with trust that "the people" can indeed govern themselves.
We decry the mess that the politicians have made, but then, when faced with a credible outsider, we retreat to the usual camp, where fear of the outsider rules.
There's an old saying in the corporate world: "Always choose IBM because no one can ever say you didn't choose wisely, regardless the outcome".
Oct '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
As one of the writers over at NRO said, I wouldn't hire Herman Cain to run a pizza company. Even if you dismiss the concerns about his character relative to the sexual harrassment accusations, he's shown himself to be entirely unsuited for the task of President of the United States based on his gross ignorance of foreign policy.
I'm really getting tired of his "well, gosh, I'll assemble some experts and do what they tell me to do" when it comes to foreign policy questions. He's memorized some answers as was apparent in the last debate, but it doesn't take much to exhaust what his advisers have programmed into him.
And Ben... I voted for Kodos.
Feb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
I have an opinion about Libya and what should have been done, and I'm not even running for president. I even expressed that opinion here, a while ago.
Why doesn't Herman Cain have such an opinion, and why can't he explain it?
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
I admire Herman Cain. I admire his courage, and I find his public speeches eloquent. I am skeptical as well concerning the sexual harassment allegations. But my sense from the start has been that he is ill-prepared and that he is not willing to do the studying required. I would be delighted were he to prove my opinion wrong. So far, however, he has acted to confirm it.
Mar '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Xennady: I have an opinion about Libya and what should have been done, and I'm not even running for president. I even expressed that opinion here, a while ago.
Why doesn't Herman Cain have such an opinion, and why can't he explain it? · Nov 15 at 7:40am
If a candidate can't articulate a philosophy by which he'd conduct US foreign policy, he shouldn't be running. We can't have another President who's content to do foreign policy on the fly. The Constitution tasks the President with the primary responsibility to conduct foreign affairs, and Cain's lack of knowledge is troubling. I like the guy, but the world is too dangerous and the stakes are too high.
Oct '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Agreed. This feels like a variation of Sarah Palin where we have someone who has the raw political talent and potentially the intellectual ability, but for some reason isn't willing to do the proper preparation to run a serious campaign from a policy standpoint.
I do not know what these people are thinking when they do this. I really don't. Maybe this is the most they are capable of which means they are inherently suited for the role or there is some other reason that escapes me. Vanity? Arrogance? Ignorance?
Sep '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
I guess I just don't get the joke. Too snarky by half, I think.
I won't vote for Cain in the primary, but I get why he has so much support. He is genuinely likeable. People want him to succeed, because they like him on a personal level. None of the other candidates are even close in this realm.
Dec '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
And think, people flocked to Cain because Perry was inarticulate.
Feb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Illiniguy
Xennady: I have an opinion about Libya and what should have been done, and I'm not even running for president. I even expressed that opinion here, a while ago.
Why doesn't Herman Cain have such an opinion, and why can't he explain it?
If a candidate can't articulate a philosophy by which he'd conduct US foreign policy, he shouldn't be running. We can't have another President who's content to do foreign policy on the fly. The Constitution tasks the President with the primary responsibility to conduct foreign affairs, and Cain's lack of knowledge is troubling. I like the guy, but the world is too dangerous and the stakes are too high.
He wasn't asked to articulate a philosophy in this clip. He was asked some fairly specific questions. No, it wasn't a slam dunk answer, but do they all have to be to remain in consideration? I don't mind that people withhold support due to concerns about his foreign policy chops, but I do mind when people use bogus evidence to support the case. There's no need to trump up charges or inflate the case.
Aug '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Rick Perry's gaffe reminded my husband that a public speaking coach once told him to avoid numbering out loud when speaking without notes in front of an audience. If you say, for instance, "I have 3 objections to this plan...", and then- out of nervousness or exhaustion- you are suddenly forgetful , (the coach said this is common) you look awkward. If you say "some" instead of 3, and forget to mention one of your objections, your audience often doesn't even notice. I don't think Perry's mistake was any big deal.
Edited on Nov 15, 2011 at 9:52amMar '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Ed G.
Illiniguy
If a candidate can't articulate a philosophy by which he'd conduct US foreign policy, he shouldn't be running...The Constitution tasks the President with the primary responsibility to conduct foreign affairs.
He wasn't asked to articulate a philosophy in this clip. He was asked some fairly specific questions. No, it wasn't a slam dunk answer, but do they all have to be to remain in consideration? I don't mind that people withhold support due to concerns about his foreign policy chops, but I do mind when people use bogus evidence to support the case. There's no need to trump up charges or inflate the case. · Nov 15 at 9:12am
He's running for President, so he needs to display an understanding of what's going on in the world, how America is affected by world events and his answers need to be as slam dunk as possible. If you're certain of your principles and your understanding of America's role in the world, then your answers will reflect those principles, will be philosophically consistent and predictable. I don't see this as a trumped up criticism.
Feb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Illiniguy
He's running for President, so he needs to display an understanding of what's going on in the world, how America is affected by world events and his answers need to be as slam dunk as possible. If you're certain of your principles and your understanding of America's role in the world, then your answers will reflect those principles, will be philosophically consistent and predictable. I don't see this as a trumped up criticism. · Nov 15 at 10:25am
Wait, are you criticizing the entire foreign policy aspect of his candidacy or just this clip? I don't see how this clip is more evidence to support the view that he doesn't understand what's going on in the world, America's role in the world, that his answer's don't reflect his vision, or that he's inconsistent. What did you find to be wrong with what he said here, i.e. that he would have wanted a better assessment of the opposition?
Feb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
For me, it's not quite that he is inarticulate; it's more that he never earned the hype. It's more that there are lurking suspicions that he's another compassionate conservative from Texas with some of the same drawbacks of the original; that he's not clearly articulating small government conservative principles because he's not exactly a small government conservative. It's more that he's a big government federalist and that it's unclear which aspect would dominate if he were to become president.
Oct '10
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Mark Belling Fan
I won't vote for Cain in the primary, but I get why he has so much support. He is genuinely likeable. People want him to succeed, because they like him on a personal level. None of the other candidates are even close in this realm.
I think this is one of the many reasons why we lost our republican form of government. If the rank and file members of a political party that is supposed to be the most serious about protecting and defending the Constitution provides candidate with substantial political support because he's a nice guy, we're never getting it back.
This is what perplexes me about the modern Republican party. How can a party with this much of an electoral advantage when it comes to a weak incumbent and a vast number of potential Senate seats to pick up do such a poor job picking primary candidates?
Why on earth would such an unserious candidate like Herman Cain get so many people to think he'd be a good choice for President even though he's clearly not up to the job?
Edited on Nov 15, 2011 at 10:49amFeb '11
Re: Herman Cain's Latest Gaffe is Much Worse Than Perry's, But It Won't Matter
Publius
.....
This is what perplexes me about the modern Republican party. How can a party with this much of an electoral advantage when it comes to a weak incumbent and a vast number of potential Senate seats to pick up do such a poor job picking primary candidates?
Why on earth would such an unserious candidate like Herman Cain get so many people to think he'd be a good choice for President even though he's clearly not up to the job? · Nov 15 at 10:48am
Edited on Nov 15 at 10:49 am
This is what perplexes me: how someone can blithely dismiss as "unserious" anyone who doesn't fit one's own set of preferences. Aren't you aware that people have different criteria than you? Aren't you open to the possibility that your assessment could be off in some way?