Herman Cain Strikes Right Chord With Right People in SC

Posted by on May 6, 2011 9:22 am
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories: Featured Entries

I almost never watch debates, especially this early. But the five-man line up in Greenville, SC, last night, at a Fox News-sponsored event interested me.

I like Herman Cain and Rick Santorum, and would like to like Tim Pawlenty, while having positives and negatives that almost cancel each other out about Ron Paul. Then Pilgrim encouraged me to find out who Gary Johnson is, which probably made me tune in more than anything else.

All three conservatives acquitted themselves well. And the Libertarians failed with me where L’s always fail with me.

So this morning I checked the news blogs to read the Friday morning quarterbacking. There were the usual comments about the sparseness of the debate, with no marque names just second stringers, and how could Fox not understand what a big waste of time this is? As I said, all three conservatives gave good answers. Then my son called this morning to say that Tim Pawlenty looked like Dana Carvey doing his impersonation of Captain Kirk. “What’s with the hand gestures?” Yep, Tim needs to work on that.

But the game changer for me was the after-action tale of the tapes by pollster Frank Luntz of a group of South Carolina Republicans (I assume).  Among them Herman Cain won in a landslide. No, by acclamation. If you didn’t see it, watch here, then lay aside your own personal observations and consider only those of the members of this group.

I won’t analyze what they said, or compare that to my own observations. I will only say the obvious: Herman Cain connected with this crowd, in part, because these are the people he came to this debate to connect with. He was uninterested, OK, less interested, in what the bloggers and talking heads might say, and much more interested in what the people of South Carolina have to say about him.

As it stands right now, the South Carolina GOP primary is Herman Cain’s to lose.

 

10 responses to Herman Cain Strikes Right Chord With Right People in SC

  1. lineholder May 6th, 2011 at 10:43 am

    vassar, I think our nation could benefit from having someone with successful private sector business experience in a high-level decision-making position. Someone with that kind of experience is far more likely to put an emphasis on cost-effectiveness of various programs, productivity and efficiency of work processes, re-establishment and implementation of quantitative standards, etc., etc. Those are typical benchmarks that are common in the business world today, and these could be very effective tools in finding ways to reduce expenditures, thereby generating options in reducing both the size of government and our national debt.

    And the truth being told, I’m really weary of the “same-old-same-old” that we get from the inside-the-Beltway-elite-club politicians, because they are far too prone to respond with what is politically expedient rather than what is genuinely practical and effective.

    So, I’ve been open-minded in considering Cain as a potential candidate. He may have unique things to offer that our nation needs right now, but it’s still early yet and there are questions about how well he would do in other areas of governance.

    It doesn’t surprise me in the least that he did well in SC. I grew up there and it isn’t the hard-core raaaacccissst state that the MSM often tries to portray it as being. It’s an RTW state, and anything that promotes freedom and liberty in generating jobs locally rather than being completely and dependent on the federal government for existence is going to appeal to them. They are just very practical-minded were this is concerned.

    • vassarbushmills May 6th, 2011 at 11:24 am

      I’ve always supported the Herman Cain “type” and will continue to do until that type, too, turns out to be a dismal failure in 30-40 years. The Left favors the Ivy league type and we see what that’s given us.

      I hope to see many more like him at all levels of our government. A nice man, too.

      • lineholder May 6th, 2011 at 12:25 pm

        I’ll add one other thing in here about Herman Cain as an individual.

        A significant portion of his past business experience has involved going into a business when it is failing and turning things around so that the business succeeds. What’s more, he’s the kind of person who has brought this about by applying team concepts rather than through micro-managing everything that goes on every step of the way.

        In other words, he knows how to inspire and motivate people on a very personal level to take more initiative, to become more proactively involved in the process, to accept greater responsibilities, and to ask more of themselves.

        That’s the kind of leadership abilities he has developed, and I find that very appealing. I still have plenty of questions about his stand on some of the issues, but I think this kind of leadership could do our nation a lot of good.

      • texasgalt May 7th, 2011 at 2:58 pm

        If the right things happen, Cain CAN win. I believe it.

  2. pilgrim May 6th, 2011 at 11:30 am

    Vassar, I am glad I helped pique your interest enough to watch this debate. I agree with your analysis of Herman Cain. The panel and format was a pain for every candidate, and the observations I have are how well did the candidates do in this atmosphere. Herman Cain did an excellent job of refuting Chris Wallace on the Fair Tax. Tim Pawlenty was able to include his answers an attack on Obama and the NLRB vs Boeing, and a challenge to Obama over how he now regards the enahnced interrogation techniques that made an attitude adjustment to KSM so he was more amenable to divulging information. Gary Johnson refuted the suggestion from Chris Wallace that he supported an open set time table for getting our troops out of Afghanistan, and expressed disappointment that he was not asked questions like the other four about US energy policy. Santorum was well spoken and on the right side on all of the issues, but he did not show me any signs of executive leadership. He just adopted a continuation of policies that Pres. George W. Bush had developed. Ron Paul was a doddering old fool who sounded especially nutty to me when said shooting up heroin is equal to having no laws against practicing your religious faith. That is the way I saw things, and I am not upset with the announced candidates. I remember 1992 when the supposed giant killer, Mario Cuomo, decided not to run. The not so well known Bill Clinton won with the help of a bad economy. Obama has an even worse economy than George H W Bush had.

    • Mike gamecock DeVine May 6th, 2011 at 4:56 pm

      If Herman can connect with Iowans, then we might just be able to do something historic and nominate a man that we could truly trust to be a strong conservative ala Reagan.

  3. Queen Hotchibobo May 6th, 2011 at 12:13 pm

    I’ll tell you why I didn’t watch the “debate”. I am utterly sick and tired of this stupid media freak show debate format. This is not a debate, this is a panel question and answer session with time limits imposed on the interviewees.

    The questioners, obviously, have no time limits. They have no restrictions on their questions. I didn’t watch it, like I said, but I’ll bet a million dollars they asked something about evolution/God. Like that’s something that is really a big, hot button with us. At every Tea Party Riot I’ve been to, there have been dozens of signs waved around protesting the gov’ts intervention in our evolution debate. /snark

    This is what happens when you let liberal journalists ask conservatives questions.

    1. We don’t find out about what we really want to know, we hear pat answers to questions we don’t care about.

    2. Their assumption is that, as in a real debate where debaters ask each other questions and challenge each other, our candidates won’t be able to ask the hard-hitting, pertinent questions, so our liberal elitists have to step in and cover for us.

    Well, you know what? Up yours. It’s a dancing chicken show and I’m sick and tired of it. I’ll watch the first time there is a real debate, but if I want to watch Chris Wallace ask slanted, liberal, gotcha questions, I’d watch him on Sunday. I don’t.

  4. SEC May 6th, 2011 at 12:47 pm

    I suspect, after last night’s debate, that Herman Cain will gain quite a bit in the polls, and with his fundraising. Good for Herman. I loved when he told Chris Wallace, as to never having won elective office, “How’s that working out for ya.” He kept his answers short and to the point. I also liked that he came across as a problem solver that wouldn’t run away from the big problems/issues. For me, that’s leadership. He does need to brush up on foreign policy, which I’m sure he will. I remember reading that when he took over Godfather’s that he fired the dead wood, and hired the best to help him turn the company around, with the main requirement being good work ethics. I believe he would do the same with a Presidential cabinet.

    I also like Rick Santorum. From what I’ve been reading about him, he has spent the 4 years since leaving office not only working on social issues, but that he has spent as much time on foreign policy. He recently gave a great, on target foreign policy speech that was well received by many.

    Before the debate, I read several comments that Pawlenty would be the only top tier candidate on a stage filled with the bottom of the barrel candidates. Some actually suggested that he should back out of the debate, and not embarrass himself to stoop so low. Today, I think the description has gone back to “vanilla.”

    Talk about hand gestures. I read one blogger saying about Johnson that he looked like he was conducting an orchestra. I guess he was conducting the tiny violins that played when he complained about not being asked questions. Not a good move. Another blogger remarked that after the debate he had a clear understanding why Johnson wants to legalize pot.

    I want to say that I was surprised that Paul said he would legalize Prostitution and Heroine, but I’m beyond being surprised by anything he says. One thing his comment did prove was that legalizing pot would not be a slippery slope to legalizing hard drugs, there would be no slope with Paul, it would be done. With Ron Paul as President, the cure would in fact be worse than the disease.

    Cain and Santorum are both gaining ground in the early states. We shall see.

    • texasgalt May 7th, 2011 at 2:19 pm

      Santorum is problematic for me because he was part of Mitch’s Senate leadership team. In KY, he stayed true to Mitch, backing Trey Grayson against Rand Paul who Santorum said was a poor candidate.

      I’ve had quite enough of that sort of Royalist thinking.

Leave a Reply