Cain 1, Establishment 0
By Ken Falkenstein | Sunday, November 6th, 2011 | Politics
The establishment political “experts” all told us that Herman Cain had mishandled the situation and lost his big chance to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.
They were resoundingly wrong.
When the “news” media confronted Cain last weekend with unsubstantiated allegations of having been accused at some unspecified time by unspecified people of unspecified actions, Cain was understandably unwilling or unable to give a specific response.
When he failed to immediately give a specific response, the “news” media feeding frenzy began, and this non-story became the lead story for every major news organ in the country.
Cain spent the entire next day going on the air giving off-the-cuff responses to questions, and over the course of that day, clarified, and indeed corrected, his account. I praised Cain’s response at the time as “dignified and candid” and was castigated by the “experts” for not recognizing how badly he had flubbed that response.
Indeed, political “experts” across the board, but particularly on the right, said he had badly mishandled the situation. After all, when confronted with a scandal, the establishment political handbook says that the candidate should go into seclusion until his operatives and lawyers tell him what to say, and Cain had dissed both the handbook and the establishment experts who wrote that handbook by addressing the allegations head-on in person immediately.
But something happened that the “news” media and the political “experts” never anticipated: The people formed their own conclusions, and Cain’s support increased.
What both the “news” media and the “experts” failed to understand is that the people, and particularly the conservative people, are absolutely sick and tired of having canned candidates give us canned speeches and canned responses to canned issues formulated by canned “news” media and “experts.” That’s why Mitt Romney, the poster child for textbook campaigning, cannot muster support from more than 1/4 of Republicans despite his impressive resume, debating skills, good looks, and campaign talent.
Herman Cain is the anti-Romney. He has never been elected to public office (despite several unsuccessful campaigns). He does not give canned speeches, and he is not running a textbook campaign. He is not even campaigning in Iowa, a strategic blunder of such immense proportions that the “experts” have noted that fact as evidence that he is unserious about his candidacy.
But Cain is tied with Romney in Iowa anyway.
And he is also tied with Romney in nationwide polling.
And he is leading Romney throughout the South.
One might think that the “news” media and the “experts” would have taken note that Cain’s candidacy was taking off despite his unconventional strategy and campaign and tried to understand why, but to do so, the “news” media and the “experts” would have to abandon the handbook and the textbook and engage in some actual objective analysis and reporting. Most of them don’t know how to do that.
So, they engage in the old tactics of sandbagging the conservative frontrunner (using ridiculously unspecific and unverified allegations of sexual harassment as a way of exploiting racial stereotypes against the black conservative), and then attack that conservative frontrunner for not following their prescribed handbook for responding to their hit job.
Well, as I noted above, the American people, and especially the American conservatives, have seen what happens when we nominate and elect textbook establishment candidates. We end up with pathetically inept candidates like John McCain who hold the door open for the election of leftist radicals like Barack Obama.
And now, after Obama has done trillions of dollars of damage to the country, we are determined not to repeat that mistake. We are determined to select a nominee who is genuine and not a creation and lapdog of the political establishment, a candidate who has demonstrated that he is committed to the core conservative principles that must be applied to restore the country.
Herman Cain had already demonstrated throughout his campaign and life before that campaign that he is a principled conservative and that he is not a creation or lapdog of the political establishment. Last week he had his trial by fire. And far from being destroyed by the establishment “news” media and establishment political “experts,” Cain endured the trial by being the same unconventional and genuine guy that he has always been.
And so, the effort by the “news” media to destroy him, and the consensus by the “experts” that they had succeeded, all backfired. The people saw a man who remained genuine and committed to his ideological principles, and they became more comfortable supporting him.
The “news” media do not tolerate defeat lightly, and we can be sure that they will dig even deeper to find or contrive a way to tear Herman Cain down. And the establishment “experts” who so readily and quickly sang Cain’s swan song also don’t like to be proven wrong, so we can count on them to sing the second verse of Cain’s swan song the second the “news” media invent the next scandal.
What the “news” media and the “experts” will continue not to understand is that in doing so, they will just enhance Cain’s stature as exactly the kind of candidate the American people are seeking in this election.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Ken Falkenstein has been a staffer in the United States Senate and the Virginia House of Delegates. He has managed political campaigns. He was a military intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army in West Germany during the Cold War. He is currently a civil litigation attorney with Poole Mahoney, P.C. in Virginia Beach. But his concern for his kids' future is what most informs his writing.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
10 Responses to "Cain 1, Establishment 0"
Cain is not anti-establishment. He has always been mainstream in his aspirations and career. This was a hit piece by the Dems probably. If Romney or Perry were behind it, which I doubt, they will be in deep doo doo. Look at what WaPo did with McDonnell. It didn’t work either. Cain is simply an unconventional but respectable and appealing candidate who has never won an election. It is not irrational for party professionals to be leery of that unless he had been a victorious General.
If Romney is the nominee the leftist media will be trashing him everyday with Mormonism and Wall St. aspersions. Romney does have an advantage over the Dole and McCain campaign model in that he is running a scripted campaign not an aimless fumbling campaign. He unlike them has been an executive. The puzzlement for me is why he is cold shouldering the conservatives to this extent in the primaries, particularly since he would have no problem “moving to the center” for the election. We will see if that is a major tactical mistake. It certainly is giving life to the other non Romney candidates.
How dare the base form a positive opinion on Cain in spite of the king makers of the party. (eyes roll)
We could be witnessing the rebirth of conservatism in the GOP forced by a long SCORNED republican base. Romney resembles what has gone wrong with the status quo GOP.. The party is old, worn out, in the gutter and out of touch with people who love the USA and despise what unchecked political power is doing to them. Opposition from within the party has failed to materialize.. Call Limbaugh what you will but he is more in tune with the frustrated gop voter than the party seems to be and his arguments in defense of the non insider non establishment candidacy of Cain is well grounded.
What a change it would be to see rinos sent packing back to their roots.. Their dem pals need them back.
Damned right, Ken. And just look at how the liberal media is manipulating public opinion against Jerry Sandusky with unsubstantiated allegations of having been accused at some unspecified time by unspecified people of unspecified actions. All just to bring down the most successful college football coach in the country. Shame on them!
BTW, victim number 4 was just live on the cable news channels. We now have a specified time, three specified people (her, a doctor she was dating, and a business acquaintance), and specified actions (sexual assault). Does Herman Cain still have a right to direct what questions reporters can ask him and declare this subject over?
Just for the Hell of it, what would your position be if these women were making the same accusations against Barack Obama?
How many times can you mention “new” and “experts” in one post? I would be Curious to know your feelings now that there is a face behind an allegation of sexual assault (not sexual harassment)?
@ Val,
Is there any evidence that this was the work of Dems? I don’t think so. Secondly, Romney, arguably, is the strongest candidate for the general election. The Democrats wouldn’t want to give him the upper hand.
A couple of things.
Val- Actually, Cain’s campaign is saying that Perry did it. I think they are probably right, the Perry campaign has the best motive. The governor can’t regain momentum as long as Cain remains the flavor of the month.
As far as the experts go, latest polling shows Cain off by about 8 points.
I think it’s real interesting that a lot of people on the right just want to disregard this before any of us know the entire story. We now know that there at least $80k was paid out in settlements, that seems like a lot to pay if there wasn’t some meat to the claims.
Also, there’s some GOP pollster with ties to the Perry campaign saying he witnessed Cain sexually harassing an employee at Chrystal City restaurant…maybe it’s bogus, maybe it’s partisan…seems like there’s more than a little smoke here.
Howard Stern’s producer/joke writer took over the microphone prior to the news conference and talked about Cobra Starship, “Leave it to Beaver”, chanted Hebrew prayers, and tried to “introduce” Allred. This “news conference” circus parade was almost complete with clowns, a cartoon victim from Chicago, donkeys and Gloria Allred following behind as a comedian cracking jokes about a “stimulus package” and pushing a broom to sweep up a story for whatever tabloid is paying the highest. It will be interesting to see if any of the press will peel this woman’s skin off to confirm her allegations.
Thanks for the highly predictable input, Timmy. For the past week you and others on this blog have been discounting the veracity of the allegations on the basis that the accusers wished to remain anonymous and refused to come forward and publicly repeat their accusations. “If they are telling the truth, then why won’t they come forward and stop hiding behind their lawyers?” Well, you just answered your own question. They knew that they would be ridiculed and have their character attacked, just as you just commented about Sharon Bialek. However, for whatever reason, Ms. Bialek is willing to put herself out there as a target. Maybe it is because she never got a payday like the other women did and therefore has a bigger axe to grind.
Before you get too far down the road accusing the accuser, consider this. In my experience, when there is a scandal the accuser more often than not isn’t a person of stellar reputation. We had a Colonel in the Army who was selected for Brigadier General. As soon as the list was announced, a whistle blowing contacted the Inspector General and accused the Colonel of sexual and alcohol offenses that had been covered up. The IG investigated and substantiated the charges. The Colonel was removed from the promotion list and forced to retire. The Major General who had concealed the charges received a reprimand and was also forced to retire. And who was the whistle blower? A dirt bag former First Lieutenant who had been relieved of his duties for incompetency and forced out of the Army by the Colonel. But, that didn’t make the charges any less true. There is an object lesson that applies here.
Rocky, irrespective of whether Cain stays or goes, this is about bandits chasing after and trying to hold up the pay car on “Cain Train”. As far as whistle blowers sacking O-6s with accusations, take a look at the recent history of the Norfolk Naval Shipyard where they seem to just finish a Change of Command ceremony, and within months the Commander is being relieved.
Timmy,
The Navy relieved several CO’s in the past few months and, from what I have read, the reliefs were abundantly justified. That makes me wonder what is wrong with their selection and promotion system. Or, are they finally shaking off the “boys will be boys” attitude that the Navy has always been so infamous for? (Yes, I know that one of the relieved CO’s is a woman. By all reports, she was a bigger abusive bully than any man.)
Why am I hearing John Lithgow’s voice when i read this post?
Leave your response