Krauthammer: C’mon, Herman Cain’s candidacy is for entertainment purposes only

posted at 9:50 pm on May 20, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via the Right Scoop, I’m not nearly as sure as Kraut is that this is true. If Palin surprises everyone by staying out, Iowa will be wide open for a “true conservative” to emerge. And if Cain finishes well there, he’ll be well positioned to surprise people in his backyard of South Carolina. Doesn’t mean he’ll be the nominee, but it’s very easy to imagine him being a factor in the nomination given his grassroots support. If Palin does jump in, I don’t know how the base goes about trying to decide between them. Palin has held public office and Cain hasn’t, but Cain doesn’t have the sort of image problem out of the box that she has to overcome. How does the vote split between the two of them and Bachmann in Iowa? Somewhere Romney and Pawlenty consultants are reading that question and thinking: “Hopefully very evenly.”

I guess Kraut figures that since he’ll soon be alienating the base by criticizing Palin after she announces, he might as well go the whole nine yards and tweak Cain too. Speaking of which, the Herminator is now officially in. His formal announcement will come tomorrow.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7

I’m beginning to look like a prophetplant.

True_King on May 21, 2011 at 3:18 PM

Key West Reader on May 21, 2011 at 3:39 PM

I am backing Herman Cain. The Media and the GOP Leadership picked John McCain, I will not hold my nose to vote Republican again. Krauthammer is a great guy, fine reporter, but I do not agree with his assessment this time. Herman Cain will be the Republican Presidential Candidate and the President of These United States of America in 2012.

old war horse on May 21, 2011 at 3:51 PM

The upside of nominating Palin is that the press has shot their collective wad with regards to her supposed “unfitness” to be POTUS. I firmly believe that in a head-to-head race between Palin and Teleprompter Jesus — and especially in debates — Palin will crush him every time. Hard.

Those of you who think that Palin is considered a “joke” or “unserious” or “unelectable” have no idea what “serious” people said about Ronald Reagan from ’78 – ’80. He was universally rejected as the very pinnacle of un-seriousness. Ronald Reagan was pilloried by the press and the GOP establishment as a senile, old fool who was never anything more than a bad B actor in any event.

We often like to believe that everything we experience in our lives is the most extreme example of everything that came before, but those who think that Palin is “unelectable” because of a poll 18 months from election day clearly have no historical bearings.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Those of you who think that Palin is considered a “joke” or “unserious” or “unelectable” have no idea what “serious” people said about Ronald Reagan from ’78 – ’80. He was universally rejected as the very pinnacle of un-seriousness. Ronald Reagan was pilloried by the press and the GOP establishment as a senile, old fool who was never anything more than a bad B actor in any event.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 3:51 PM

I was there, and I can say this is 100% true.

More, a lot of people were convinced – convinced - that if he was elected he’d start a nuclear war with the Soviet Union that would make mankind extinct.

That makes “Trig Trutherism” small beer indeed.

Rebar on May 21, 2011 at 3:57 PM

And the puckering begins.

Key West Reader on May 21, 2011 at 3:38 PM

OK, I’ll play. What does that mean?

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 4:10 PM

And the puckering begins.

Key West Reader on May 21, 2011 at 3:38 PM
OK, I’ll play. What does that mean?

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Do I really have to tell you?

Key West Reader on May 21, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Key West Reader on May 21, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Yes, please.

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 4:39 PM

I’m just waiting for Mitch Daniels to jump into the race, since he is the one that Karl Rove and the others tell us is capable of winning the nomination.

.

If left to my own devices, I pick Cain.

kringeesmom on May 21, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Funny, but I think that electability is eminently “choate”.MJBrutus

Try not to use made up words. It is not the opposite of inchoate.

katy the mean old lady on May 21, 2011 at 4:51 PM

katy the mean old lady on May 21, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Thus the quotes. I was hoping that you would be plussed at the attempt to be droll :-)

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Kraut hit irrelevent years ago. He needs to just go quietly off into the sunset.

upinak on May 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Thus the quotes. I was hoping that you would be plussed at the attempt to be droll :-)

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Try again. I am not gruntled.

katy the mean old lady on May 21, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Try again. I am not gruntled.

katy the mean old lady on May 21, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Okay. This made me laugh! Good one, katy!

JannyMae on May 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

katy the mean old lady on May 21, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Fair enough, as long as we can agree that the remark was purely sidious.

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Fair enough, as long as we can agree that the remark was purely sidious.

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Giggle. Fair deal.

katy the mean old lady on May 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Those of you who think that Palin is considered a “joke” or “unserious” or “unelectable” have no idea what “serious” people said about Ronald Reagan from ’78 – ’80. He was universally rejected as the very pinnacle of un-seriousness. Ronald Reagan was pilloried by the press and the GOP establishment as a senile, old fool who was never anything more than a bad B actor in any event.

We often like to believe that everything we experience in our lives is the most extreme example of everything that came before, but those who think that Palin is “unelectable” because of a poll 18 months from election day clearly have no historical bearings.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Great comment. Some of us have made the same argument many times, but it usually falls on deaf ears. Your point about historical perspective is spot on. Most people are not students of history. Which is why the progressives and Marxists continue to attempt the same cynical power grabs over and over under the guise “solving society’s big problems”. There aren’t enough people with a historical perspective to point out that these things have been tried over and over, failed every time, and the only reason why they are attempted in the first place is to gain control over the populace.

Kataklysmic on May 21, 2011 at 6:14 PM

Are the six pages of comments are devoted mostly to Palin? I’m lazy…

equanimous on May 21, 2011 at 6:20 PM

are are

equanimous on May 21, 2011 at 6:30 PM

sidious.

MJBrutus on May 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Is that even a word?

CWforFreedom on May 21, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Dems and Repubs nominate but Independents elect. Mr Cain has no chance, along with Palin and most of the current announced candidates. Can another step forward and get elected, absolutely. Who that person is, I personally don’t know at this point. Eighteen months is an eternity in politics. But Cain, Palin, Newt, Paul, etc not a chance.

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Patrick- Cain can.

CWforFreedom on May 21, 2011 at 6:51 PM

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 6:47 PM

How do you explain Reagan and GWB’s wins and Dole & McCain’s losses? Reagan and GWB were seen as polarizing figures despised by Independants and Dole and McCain were seen as sensible moderates. This seems to illustrate the opposite of the principle you are articulating.

Kataklysmic on May 21, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Patrick- Cain can.

Not only that but to slip in a little religious humor when no one is lookin; “Cain is Abel”

Don L on May 21, 2011 at 7:04 PM

Cain just tweeted thanks for the great turnout for his rally (more than 12k people) and that he has another announcement later tonite.

Must go cook supper. When I get back I’ll post my “electability” story once again.

While I cook I’ll hope that Daniels (our only real hope) chooses to enter the race.

kringeesmom on May 21, 2011 at 7:21 PM

My point about Cain, Palin and the others I listed is not about what DC and the pundits think but what the current polling reflects amongst Independents. Currently their unfavorables are too high. As I said 18 months is an eternity and Independents, and a sizable minority of Repubs, are hoping for some one else. Who? I don’t know.

My guess is Kraut is following the same polls.

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 7:26 PM

Interesting perspective linked below from American Thinker..

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/sarah_palin_leader_of_the_pack.html

SheetAnchor on May 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Daniels does have that Calvin Coolidge thing going for him….plus a good sense of humor while giving speeches..

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Yes because Daniels and even HUNTSMAN are such Heavy Hitters in the Republican Party. I mean, they’ve been around for years and years and years. You ALL have heard of them before THIS year. You know why? Because they are such Heavy Weight Hitters of CONSERVATIVE POLICY that they have been out on front of EVERY issue, guiding and directing us poor voting schmucks that need their wonderful leadership to get through the tough times. I mean, with a snap of your finger you can list 3 to 5 WONDERFULLY CONSERVATIVE accomplishments these fine fellows have done over the years, no decades. Didn’t you SEE them standing next to Herman Cain as he SCHOOLED PRESIDENT CLINTON on ObamaCare TYPE Health Care Reform? I mean, they were right there in the midst of all the Cainism, weren’t they?

/sarc

Moving right along… DONE WITH BEING TOLD WHO IS A LEADER AND WHO ISN’T. DANIELS AND HUNTSMAN WERE “SELECTED” TO FILL THE VOID LEFT BY McCAIN AND HUCKABEE. END OF STORY. PERIOD.

BTW– In case, you don’t get it… that’s not Conservative. That’s LIBERAL.

[Why are Republican voters so freaking stupid?]

Sultry Beauty on May 21, 2011 at 7:30 PM

unfavorables are too high.
patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 7:26 PM

What are Cain’s numbers?

CWforFreedom on May 21, 2011 at 7:37 PM

Daniels does have that Calvin Coolidge thing going for him….plus a good sense of humor while giving speeches..

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Good joke. He’s more Dukakis and Biden combined than Coolidge. By the way has he ever poled more than 5%?

promachus on May 21, 2011 at 8:05 PM

I’m for Cain. We don’t need another lawyer in the White House that’s oblivious to reality. We need a successful businessman that understands the hurting taxes and the beneficial taxes. Lawyers sure don’t know the difference. Cain is a sharp cookie that can speak on his feet and ask questions that profound the left. He’s tough and my money and vote is for this man.

mixplix on May 21, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Rather amusing, reading all these comments.

I just finished watching Krauthammer on Newsbusters.org (see here for that video and the comments from Noel Sheppard). Funny, Krauthammer said the left picks “squish” candidates for us…..then they vote against them. True. Quite true. Glad he noticed!

Hoist these guys on their own petards. Great job, sir!!

Noel Sheppard made a good comment at the end, too:

It’s high time conservatives understand this and in this campaign cycle do the reverse of whatever people like Shields and his ilk suggest for they don’t have conservatives’ best interests at heart.

Never did, never will.

I’d say Sarah Palin fits that description to a “T”.

DINORight on May 21, 2011 at 9:38 PM

If Sarah Palin doesn’t run, I am very much FOR Hermain Cain. I will even donate to his campaign, if I get the funds.

Palin/Cain or Palin/West are my dream tickets (probably in reverse order). But Cain/West – ah, that would be sweet, too!!!

DINORight on May 21, 2011 at 9:39 PM

The upside of nominating Palin is that the press has shot their collective wad with regards to her supposed “unfitness” to be POTUS. I firmly believe that in a head-to-head race between Palin and Teleprompter Jesus — and especially in debates — Palin will crush him every time. Hard.

Those of you who think that Palin is considered a “joke” or “unserious” or “unelectable” have no idea what “serious” people said about Ronald Reagan from ’78 – ’80. He was universally rejected as the very pinnacle of un-seriousness. Ronald Reagan was pilloried by the press and the GOP establishment as a senile, old fool who was never anything more than a bad B actor in any event.

We often like to believe that everything we experience in our lives is the most extreme example of everything that came before, but those who think that Palin is “unelectable” because of a poll 18 months from election day clearly have no historical bearings.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Reagan didn’t F up hostile press interviews regularly. He read the National Review cover-to-cover every month [among many other things] and had a broad base of knowledge. He didn’t have an accent that annoyed people. He was regal and could sell himself to the indies as well as Democrats [anybody remember the "Reagan Democrats"]. Oh yeah, Reagan was a great debater.

Palin should not be in the same paragraph as Reagan. Perhaps one day, but not now.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 9:54 PM

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Palin will win more democrat, independent, Hispanic and gay voters than any Republican candidate since Reagan.

rrpjr on May 21, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Palin will win more democrat, independent, Hispanic and gay voters than any Republican candidate since Reagan.

rrpjr on May 21, 2011 at 10:02 PM

If indies don’t like her, how will Democrats vote for her? Your delusional.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Is it me or is Krauthammer wrong more often then right?

mechkiller_k on May 21, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Your delusional.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:05 PM

We’ll see.

rrpjr on May 21, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Is it me or is Krauthammer wrong more often then right?

mechkiller_k on May 21, 2011 at 10:11 PM

After seeing the Cain rally today, K is right. Dude made a political speech in shades. I like Cain and have listened to him on the Boortz show for years, but shades? Come on.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:16 PM

If indies don’t like her, how will Democrats vote for her? Your delusional.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Because Democrats, though wrong, at least have the courage to stand for something. The primary concern of Indies is jumping on the MSM bandwagon so that no one mocks them.

Kataklysmic on May 21, 2011 at 10:17 PM

Because Democrats, though wrong, at least have the courage to stand for something. The primary concern of Indies is jumping on the MSM bandwagon so that no one mocks them.

Kataklysmic on May 21, 2011 at 10:17 PM

I don’t know. Indies don’t pay much attention to politics, and when they do, they like to say sh-t like, “I don’t care about parties, I care about the candidate”, as if Democrats and Republicans don’t have differing political philosophies.

No labels.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Oy.

Anyone who thinks we Palin supporters are obsessed ought to take a look at toliver. This guy’s been going almost non-stop for the past twenty-four hours about how Palin is unelectable and about how independents hate her so much that, if asked to choose between an ex-governor who left her state with a $12 billion surplus and a president who has presided over a surge in government spending so massive that a nationwide financial collapse suddenly looks frighteningly plausible, they’ll gladly pick the latter.

I’m starting to wonder if toliver is one of those government bureaucrats who would find himself out of work should Palin come to DC, roll up her sleeves, and start changing how things are done around here.

Aitch748 on May 21, 2011 at 10:44 PM

Oy.

Anyone who thinks we Palin supporters are obsessed ought to take a look at toliver. This guy’s been going almost non-stop for the past twenty-four hours about how Palin is unelectable and about how independents hate her so much that, if asked to choose between an ex-governor who left her state with a $12 billion surplus and a president who has presided over a surge in government spending so massive that a nationwide financial collapse suddenly looks frighteningly plausible, they’ll gladly pick the latter.

I’m starting to wonder if toliver is one of those government bureaucrats who would find himself out of work should Palin come to DC, roll up her sleeves, and start changing how things are done around here.

Aitch748 on May 21, 2011 at 10:44 PM

Check your posting times. I took a long time off from this minutiae. I took months off the subject here as a matter of fact. For obsession, check out the same names in the Palin threads that rarely stop. “Unseen” would be a good example.

Yes, indies would likely vote for 0bama over Palin. She f-cks up too much in interviews and that awful VP debate. Not ready for prime-time…..yet. Have patience.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:53 PM

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Once you cut through all the Palin opposition that is due to 1) People who agree with her but don’t want to be mocked for supporting her 2) People who stand to benefit financially if another candidate wins 3) Women who don’t like her due to female jealously issues 4) Hoosiers who want their governor to win out of some sense of state pride or 5) Those who hate all those they perceive to be socons on general principle, there does exist a small group on our side with legitimate concerns. They assume her winning the nomination is going to be Goldwater redux while her supperters insist it is going to be Reagan redux. I think she has what it takes, but I also think if she doesn’t campaign well and perform well in the debates you are going to see most of her support vaporize.

Kataklysmic on May 21, 2011 at 10:54 PM

Yes, indies would likely vote for 0bama over Palin. She f-cks up too much in interviews and that awful VP debate. Not ready for prime-time…..yet. Have patience.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:53 PM

When, since the 2008 campaign, has Palin messed up in an interview?

steebo77 on May 21, 2011 at 11:02 PM

I think she has what it takes, but I also think if she doesn’t campaign well and perform well in the debates you are going to see most of her support vaporize.

Nope, her supporters think she won the VP debate when she was horrible. One can’t argue with love.

3) Women who don’t like her due to female jealously issues

That may be partially true, but abortion and hunting cute animals while being “stupid” should be factored in.

How about 6) Palin f-cks up interviews. 7) The media took a little ammo from said interviews and blew her up.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:07 PM

When, since the 2008 campaign, has Palin messed up in an interview?

steebo77 on May 21, 2011 at 11:02 PM

She hasn’t done hard interviews. Hannity? Oprah? Some BBC chick that ambushed her at a snow machine race?

She needs to face her adversaries on a regular basis. That might be a problem as tough questions that require specific information might be asked. Palin isn’t so good with that. She needs time to study up.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:11 PM

How about 6) Palin f-cks up interviews. 7) The media took a little ammo from said interviews and blew her up.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:07 PM

Well, as near as I can tell her last unforced error was the Couric interview. We’re coming up on three years. I agree with you that she can’t afford any more of those. I also agree that there are a snall number of people who support her for the wrong reasons and those will be the only remaining supporters if she implodes. I think there is a large number of perfectly rational supporters of hers who just think she would do the best job and can win. And if she screws up big time in her campaign, they will switch horses. No big deal.

Kataklysmic on May 21, 2011 at 11:13 PM

Yes, indies would likely vote for 0bama over Palin. She f-cks up too much in interviews and that awful VP debate. Not ready for prime-time…..yet. Have patience.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:53 PM

When, since the 2008 campaign, has Palin messed up in an interview?

steebo77 on May 21, 2011 at 11:02 PM

Let me guess: Toliver’s answer will be that Palin refuses to submit to an interview with a proper MSM interviewer, so the logical conclusion is that she’s afraid of “f-cking up” if she were to do a proper interview instead of one of those phony non-combative interviews with somebody on Fox News, so it’s reasonable (to toliver) to conclude that she’s almost as big a “f-ckup” now as she was in 2008 when she came face to face with Katie Couric.

Aitch748 on May 21, 2011 at 11:14 PM

I think Toliver’s stuck in 2008.

Aitch748 on May 21, 2011 at 11:20 PM

My point about Cain, Palin and the others I listed is not about what DC and the pundits think but what the current polling reflects amongst Independents. Currently their unfavorables are too high. As I said 18 months is an eternity and Independents, and a sizable minority of Repubs, are hoping for some one else. Who? I don’t know.

My guess is Kraut is following the same polls.

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 7:26 PM

I refuse to believe that any media poll 18 months before election day have any bearing on what will be reality 18 months into the future. As such, I refuse to deem Cain or Palin “unelectable” at this juncture.

“Currently their unfavorables are too high” is meaningless, as there is currently no election being held.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 11:21 PM

Yes, indies would likely vote for 0bama over Palin. She f-cks up too much in interviews and that awful VP debate. Not ready for prime-time…..yet. Have patience.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Okay, I see where you’re at now. You’re either a concern troll or a Rockefeller Repub, and the though of an actual outsider type leading the GOP scares the sh*t out of you.

Palin was great in the Veep debate. Even the liberal network talking heads admitted as much, so for you to say she was “awful” explains a lot of your previous comments about her and Cain.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 11:27 PM

Okay, I see where you’re at now. You’re either a concern troll or a Rockefeller Repub, and the though of an actual outsider type leading the GOP scares the sh*t out of you.

Palin was great in the Veep debate. Even the liberal network talking heads admitted as much, so for you to say she was “awful” explains a lot of your previous comments about her and Cain.

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 11:27 PM

Go watch a Reagan debate and then watch that VP fiasco. The polling after that VP debate showed she clearly lost, although she did better than expectations.

Canned lines delivered poorly and out of place is not good debating.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:32 PM

The polling after that VP debate showed she clearly lost, although she did better than expectations.
toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:32 PM

Is that how you watch debates? Not by actually watching the debate itself, but by checking the scorecard delivered later by the pollsters?

Oh, and I’d like to repeat another poster’s question:

When, since the 2008 campaign, has Palin messed up in an interview?

steebo77 on May 21, 2011 at 11:02 PM

Aitch748 on May 21, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Go watch a Reagan debate and then watch that VP fiasco. The polling after that VP debate showed she clearly lost, although she did better than expectations.

Canned lines delivered poorly and out of place is not good debating.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:32 PM

I watched the Reagan debates in real time. Palin is no Regan, but nether is anyone else in the world at the moment. If you’re waiting for Reagan, you’re gonna be disappointed. Then again, Palin’s not the drooling, snow-billy you want all of us to believe she is, either, and she’s been a great spokesman for conservative, limited government for as long as she’s been on the national stage. furthermore, she was great in the Veep debate.

Yes or no, if Palin got the nomination, would you vote for her in the general election?

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Is that how you watch debates? Not by actually watching the debate itself, but by checking the scorecard delivered later by the pollsters?

Oh, and I’d like to repeat another poster’s question:

I was screaming at the TV the whole time. Plugs offered up chance after chance to spike the vollyball but Palin didn’t address him. She had her canned lines to recite, which often had little to do with the question or the BS spouted by plugs. She sucked.

When, since the 2008 campaign, has Palin messed up in an interview?

She only does softball interviews now, unless she gets ambushed at a snow mobile race. Then she brings up Trig to answer a question about doubts of her intellectual prowess.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Yes or no, if Palin got the nomination, would you vote for her in the general election?

holygoat on May 21, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Hell yeah. This country has been put on financial auto-destruct by the democrats.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:49 PM

Go watch a Reagan debate and then watch that VP fiasco. The polling after that VP debate showed she clearly lost, although she did better than expectations.

Canned lines delivered poorly and out of place is not good debating.

toliver on May 21, 2011 at 11:32 PM

-
Dude… You are comparing a noob to the big time DC debate scene with the Palin of 2011… She is no longer the neophyte that John McCain all but plucked up in Alaska one day, and then dropped into the meat grinder the next.
-
Obama was soft balled and coddled by the media ‘my muslim faith’… ‘you mean your Christen faith’… for example…
-
Palin was on the other hand pounded at every turn… Didn’t she at one point after it was over comment that her biggest mistake was expected the media to be fair?
-
She is a different level candidate now. You keep repeating (and repeating endlessly I might add) ‘someday, but not yet’… Admit it… you keep acting as if she has been static, or at least that she is a veeeeeery slow learner… Neither is true.
-
I won’t say it’s now or never for her… But she should put herself in the race if she wants to. At least if she wins she will take the fight to Obama and to the biased press… Many of the rest seem to be weak kneed and almost afraid to go after Barry.
-
So what? Sarah is not Reagan… She doesn’t need to be. She needs to be Sarah… and at the same time the anti-Obama. That’s good enough for me. If she runs… unless something or someone changes my mind… she’s got my vote.
-

RalphyBoy on May 22, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Dude… You are comparing a noob to the big time DC debate scene with the Palin of 2011…

I don’t know what Palin2011 is because she won’t leave the castle walls! Let’s see her do battle.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 12:34 AM

I don’t know what Palin2011 is because she won’t leave the castle walls! Let’s see her do battle.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 12:34 AM

-
As in enter the race… with all it’s skirmishes… I like it.
-

RalphyBoy on May 22, 2011 at 12:37 AM

As in enter the race… with all it’s skirmishes… I like it.
-

RalphyBoy on May 22, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Let’s see her fight the media [face-to-face] first.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 12:56 AM

I don’t know what Palin2011 is because she won’t leave the castle walls! Let’s see her do battle.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 12:34 AM

Please ask for new talking points. You’ve been on the same ones for two days.

katy the mean old lady on May 22, 2011 at 1:02 AM

Please ask for new talking points. You’ve been on the same ones for two days.

katy the mean old lady on May 22, 2011 at 1:02 AM

Beliefs based on logic and reason are “talking points”?

Try to argue better.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 1:24 AM

toliver may be B O’R, still torqued that Palin told him to shut up and let her finish her answers…

Gohawgs on May 22, 2011 at 1:37 AM

toliver may be B O’R, still torqued that Palin told him to shut up and let her finish her answers…

Gohawgs on May 22, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Her canned and unresponsive answers.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 1:39 AM

Beliefs based on logic and reason are “talking points”?

Try to argue better.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 1:24 AM

Do you know the difference between an arguement and a statement? I’ve known 60 year old parrots with better skills.

katy the mean old lady on May 22, 2011 at 1:42 AM

katy the mean old lady on May 22, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Yeah, because the nondescript “talking points” argument really kicks parrot ass.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 1:52 AM

When, since the 2008 campaign, has Palin messed up in an interview?

steebo77 on May 21, 2011 at 11:02 PM

When, since 2008, has Palin granted an interview outside of friendly venues such as Fox News or paid speaking engagements?

Hollowpoint on May 22, 2011 at 4:03 AM

When, since 2008, has Palin granted an interview outside of friendly venues such as Fox News or paid speaking engagements?

Hollowpoint on May 22, 2011 at 4:03 AM

Long Island Association Feb 2011.

I think she may have been paid for a speech, but also did a lengthy Q & A afterwards.

Kataklysmic on May 22, 2011 at 4:48 AM

Her canned and unresponsive answers.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 1:39 AM

You misunderstood, I was referring to you and your one note johnny points. I was referring to Palin telling BO’R to stop talking over her and let her answer. If you’ve watched his shows, you might’ve noticed that he does that to most of his guests, habitually…

Gohawgs on May 22, 2011 at 5:45 AM

wasn’t, not was

Gohawgs on May 22, 2011 at 5:49 AM

When, since 2008, has Palin granted an interview outside of friendly venues such as Fox News or paid speaking engagements?

Hollowpoint on May 22, 2011 at 4:03 AM

Go here and scroll down to “Press Conferences”, on the left about midway down…Take your pick from India, Haiti, Palm Beach, Phoenix and, more…

Gohawgs on May 22, 2011 at 5:56 AM

All Palin fans. Did you not yet notice that it is impossible to convince a Palin hater that she’s high quality and what is needed for America? Waste of time -they’ll get you arguing about minutia – a leaf while they’re cutting down the tree.

They loathe -not her -but the fact that she’s a social conservative with the values of “old America” – one where God, family and morality determine one’s poltical decisions. The one where decency and right and wrong were clear and understood inarguable. The one where it was okay be successful, okay to be fathful, where s-e-x, not G-o-d was the 3 letter word not spoken in school-nevermind worshipped and encouraged. Sarah is the epitome of good fiscal responsibility -the poster girl for taking down her own party when they abuse such. I suspect the take-down attempts on Sarah are really because she’s a beliver -a supporter of life – and the traditional family. The dirty truth is that many in the GOP loathe such people.

Don L on May 22, 2011 at 8:59 AM

I love Herman Cain! terrific man, wish him the best. Palin will announce and then it will be curtains for the rest. She has been campaigning for two years or better. Like my neighbor the democrat said ” Man that woman gets on my last nerve, and I would vote for her in a minute, she will make an incredible president”.

shar61 on May 22, 2011 at 9:29 AM

This is not the right approach for a presidential candidate:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/22/cain-no-talk-about-security-until-elected/

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Cain’s problem may just be that he has not had to endure the kinds of specific questions about policy that become normal during a presidential race. He may not have a seasoned foreign policy advisor to brief him on these matters either. This is what can and does happen to people who have not been operating within the political realm as a candidate at this level before.

If Cain is smart he will immediately issue a correction on the Right of Return, and develop a policy on Afghanistan. He must understand that as a CEO in the private sector, one can focus on decision-making process, and this approach is expected and normal in the corporate environment. But in the political environment, the expectation is that you have concrete policy positions; decision-making process is a subordinate matter which is hardly addressed. This is the usual problem with a candidate who has a strong business background, and great success in the private sector, but little political experience.

In short, Cain’s lack of political seasoning was exposed in an important interview. He may be able to recover, but he needs to act quickly to do so. He needs to be all over the airwaves tomorrow issuing corrections; and he needs to obtain a top tier foreign policy advisor as soon as possible, if he does not have one on staff.

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 4:17 PM

I was thinking Cain might be the one. Then he said “Israel has no problem with the right of return” And now he is NOT. Are they all idiots or what?

marnes on May 22, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Mr. Cain is by no means an idiot. He is a successful business executive. He simply lacks political experience, something many try to discount, but it has significant value, as Mr. Cain and some of his prospective supporters have now discovered.

SheetAnchor on May 22, 2011 at 4:40 PM

Mr. Cain is by no means an idiot. He is a successful business executive. He simply lacks political experience,

Yes, I agree with that and idiot might have been an overstatement. But they need to learn the major issues of the day or not speak until they do. Dodge and deflect is better than that kind of mistake.

marnes on May 22, 2011 at 5:15 PM

This may explain Krauthammer’s analysis(not making excuses for Chuck).

Pressed by Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday” about why his Hermanator Political Action Committee (PAC) had only $13 in it at the end of March, Cain said he has a new PAC with more money in it.

It takes money to hire top notch advisers. If Mr. Cain was forced to jump in early in hopes of finding funding it may
explain some of his missed steps.

P. Monk on May 22, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Herman Cain has my support. He acquitted himself well on Fox News Sunday today.

Assegai on May 22, 2011 at 6:09 PM

I don’t know what Palin2011 is because she won’t leave the castle walls! Let’s see her do battle.
toliver on May 22, 2011 at 12:34 AM

you are kidding right?

Been to china and was impressive to those with a brain

been to India, the same

Israel, check

long island democrats

she’s been battling and speaking up gor our favored ideals more than any of the second placers and they are back as far a secretariats field at belmont

you say you’d vote for SP if she was the nominee yet I call that BS because your irate ranting is letting your lib show

go home dummy

Sonosam on May 22, 2011 at 7:39 PM

Sonosam on May 22, 2011 at 7:39 PM

Really? Palin debated the Chinese in front of cameras? You’re an idiot.

toliver on May 22, 2011 at 8:36 PM

No stupid

it’s just part of a long list of serious things you missed besides being the only thorn in obamas side

more and more it’s becoming obvious, judging by the lackluster preprimary stage so far, she’s far more serious than the rest of the clutter

her beliefs are solid and don’t change with a poll

fearless in her position I have no doubt she can meet the challenge of a winning campaign

she has ascended to the position of governor because of her ability to accomplish things not because she came from privilage

just because you choose to ignore her qualities doesn’t mean they don’t exist

Sonosam on May 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Sonosam on May 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM

You blindly follow. That’s unAmerican. Go back to Old Europe where you’d better fit in. We don’t mindlessly follow leaders here.

toliver on May 23, 2011 at 12:56 AM

I have to confess to you that I am very scared tonight.

I have no problem with Cain’s Afgan statement he put out recently. I actually liked it and no other candidate had a specific detailed plan (except Ron Paul) and I don’t want a President who will telegraph to our enemies all our plans and when we will pull out. But the way he explained it in the Wallace interview today was terrible. He has to give the people some BS and a little more meat.

If I think about the Palestinian answer too long, I may cry. That was the worst part. (and I think Chris Wallace was being very fair and nice to Cain.)

What Cain said about the lack of leadership in Washington painting us into a corner where Cain’s plan to not raise the debt ceiling and cut spending drastically MAY not work now, is not a problem for me. It is the truth. And having Cain in office would ensure a reversal in the way Washington is mismanaging our money and sending us into bankruptcy. But the Palestinians . . . . . . Oh my gosh.

I’m not throwing him away yet. God bless him, he has too many rare and essential qualities we need. He could recover from this. But will he do and say what he has to do recover? That’s the scary question.

Because quite frankly, if Rick Perry does not step into this race, I fear Obama may win.

Gingrich will definitely lose. Even before he became unlikeable and unreliable to Conservative, he was unliked by the general public.

I don’t think Rick Santorum has a chance of getting the nomination and he will be painted as scary by the media in a general.

I think Romney would lose, as well. He is not the fighter we need against Obama, he can be boring, he has nothing to say about Obamacare – because he stands by his own fiasco and we should not discount that there is a small percentage of Christian voters who will not vote for a Mormon. Not saying it’s right, but it is a fact of life. And those are Republican voters. In a close election in some states, it could matter.

Tim Pawlenty? Maybe. Too soon to say. But I have serious doubts against the Obama machine.

The only way Romney or Pawlenty win is if enough Independents will take any boring or inconstant candidate who is not Obama.

And it breaks my heart to say it, but I don’t see my beloved Sarah (if she does run) winning in the general. She has had 3 years to rewrite the incorrect narrative the liberals set for her (and McCain and Republican elites allowed them to set). If she hasn’t changed minds since then, I don’t see it happening in the next year. Especially when the big guns will be out for here all the more. They never stopped in 3 years.

It doesn’t matter that they are wrong about her. She and we cannot talk these people out of what they think of her if they are not listening. The just don’t want to hear it. Done. Over for them. Some (like my mother and daughter) will be a lock vote for Sarah, even though they don’t like her. But they are conservative and hate Obama. The moderates and Independents who dislike her and actually fear her, will sit out the election or vote for Obama (better the devil they know kind of thing.)

And there are many people out there who simply will not vote for a woman for President when it comes time to doing it. Bachman will have the same problem and the media will make her into a Palin clone.

And they will trash Cain too if he keeps this up.

It’s not fair. It’s a crime actually. But these are hard facts we have to get a grip with.

I don’t say the 2 women or Romney and Pawlenty are unelectable. I’m saying it will be tougher than usual and than it should be, and it will be worse for the 2 women.

And we can’t take any chances this year.

We better start praying for Perry. I’m not looking for perfection. And Perry (who has made mistakes in office or not been a perfect Conservative, like everyone else, including Sarah) seems like a true Conservative.

I’m 51 and have followed politics since high school. I know a true conservative when I see one. Cain, Palin, Bachman and Perry. I know someone who would make a great leader. Those same 4. But only Perry seems to be a good candidate out of the 4, unless Cain straightens up. And I fear he may not.

And one has to be a GOOD CANDIDATE BEFORE THEY CAN BE A GOOD PRESIDENT.

I’m sad and scared. Thanks for letting me vent.

Elisa on May 23, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Well he was a speaker and lobbyist for the food industry after leaving the CEO duties. when he become CEO godfathers had sales of $365 million in 1984. by 1997 sales had fallen to $265million. Cain also used a leveraged buyout to buy the company in 1984 from pilsbury. terms of the sale was not released. but as late as 1995 Cain confirmed tha tthe company still faced debt issues.

He stated in a 1995 interview with Teresa Howard of Nation’s Restaurant News, “My next goal is for Godfather’s to reach its goal of financial independence.” He further stated, in reference to the company’s heavily leveraged debt, “I want to retire debt in order to allow us to grow the way we want to.”

unseen on May 21, 2011 at 10:51 PM

From your link, you will see that the first point you made was mistaken. Cain was not put in charge of Godfather Pizza in 1984. He was still working for Burger King then and didn’t go to Godfather until 1986, after sales and profits already tanked. In fact, the reason he was transferred to Godfather was because he did such a good job turning around Burger King and making many of their losing stores profitable. He did the same with Godfather. From your link: “Under his management the company showed profits for the first time in three years.”

Higher sales are desirable because it’s assumed they lead to higher profits. But is possible to have high sales and still lose money. What is most desirable are profits.
And your link shows how Cain doesn’t look for the short term quick fix that ends up being a disaster. He looks long term. Which is what we want.

Thanks for this link.

Also, Cain and the other investors did not buy the company in 1984. It was 1988. The part about the debt to finance the buyout not being paid off 9 years later (1995) is not a problem. This is typical of business investments. And you see from your quote, that paying it off as soon as possible was a priority to Cain. He doesn’t like debt.

And here is Cain successfully “lobbying” for the food industry back in 1994:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WP5dYfBBzU

I just wanted to straighten that out, so that misinformation doesn’t spread. What if he got the nomination or was our VP? We wouldn’t want the Dems quoting this, right?

There is no need to deny that Herman Cain was a successful executive and would make an excellent President (which is an executive position).

There is no doubt he has the knowledge and guts and experience to turn around our economy. If the foreign policy things don’t trip him up during the election. There too, I would sleep well at night with him as President. He has good instincts and problem solving skills and sees our friends and enemies in the proper light and would deal with them accordingly.

But he better improve his message or he will be toast before the Summer is over.

Just a little tweaking would do it. Because foreign policy will take a back seat in this election. This election is about JOBS, JOBS, JOBS and the economy. And a successful businessman will look good to independents.

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Godfathers-Pizza-Incorporated-Company-History.html

Excerpts:

The 1970s: Godfather’s Heritage

From 1977 to 1979 Godfather’s was the fastest growing food chain in the United States in terms of sales growth. Development of the chain continued until its peak in 1984, when the company amounted to 911 Godfather’s restaurants, generating annual sales of $365 million.

Following that growth period, intense competition within the pizza business and the failure of many of its stores to open in prime locations resulted in declining sales and profits. In 1986 Pillsbury appointed Herman Cain, an employee of Pillsbury Company since 1977, as the new Godfather’s president. Cain had earned an impressive reputation previously with the Burger King restaurant chain division in the Philadelphia region, where he had rescued several of their operations. At the outset of his efforts to enhance stability for Godfather’s, Cain worked to settle several lawsuits filed by franchise owners, disposed of money-losing units, arranged for many of its units to provide home-delivery service, and introduced new products such as bacon-cheese-burger pizzas. Under his management the company showed profits for the first time in three years, according to Stephen Madden of Fortune. . . . . . .

As part of the restructuring–and prompted by takeover rumors–Pillsbury encouraged a leveraged buyout of Godfather’s by a group of senior managers, led by President and CEO Herman Cain and Executive Vice-President and COO Ronald B. Gartlan. The purchase price was not disclosed, but was estimated by some analysts at $100 million. At that point, Godfather’s ranked fifth in the pizza segment lineup, having slipped from its third place ranking in 1985. The chain continued to face considerable competitive challenges and reported that although most of the company-owned businesses were profitable, many of its 420 franchisees, which paid royalties to the parent company, were not. Cain told James Scarpa of Restaurant Business Magazine that Godfather’s aim over the next several years was to move from fifth to fourth place in the ranking. Staffing levels were expected to remain the same, but to help finance the purchase, which was provided by Citibank, certain assets were sold. Cain stressed, “The easiest way for a big public company like Pillsbury to meet its goals to compound earnings per-share-growth is by opening more units and making investments that are bigger, bigger, bigger. … Opening units is a nice short-term way to help increase earnings.” Cain continued, “But long-term, if you don’t have people and resources to do that as effectively as you run your existing units, you can get into trouble.” He emphasized that their goal was not to surpass the competition in the number of units (Pizza Hut, for example, had 5,800 units at that time). Rather, he explained, “… our goal instead is to surpass them in average unit sales, which relates back to quality.” Cain reasoned that the ranking was misleading because Godfather’s average per unit volume of $429,000 almost matched the $466,000 per unit volume of Domino’s Pizza, and in their strongest regions Godfather’s outperformed the competition in unit volumes.

The company decided to concentrate on saturating several strong regional pockets, like the Seattle, Washington area, rather than trying to establish a larger national presence. Other strongholds included market areas such as Omaha, Nebraska; Kansas City, Missouri; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Salt Lake City, Utah. Before looking to new markets, the company initiated a company store remodeling program and then planned for future expansion outside of existing markets. . . . .

An Offer He Couldn’t Refuse: 1994

Herman Cain, whose academic background included a B.S. in mathematics from Morehouse College and an M.S. from Purdue University in computer science, became the 73rd president of the National Restaurant Association (NRA) and began his active political career as a speaker and lobbyist for the food industry, while maintaining his title as chairman of Godfather’s. His CEO duties were handed over to President Ron Gartlan. . . .

Elisa on May 23, 2011 at 1:56 AM

Sonosam on May 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM
You blindly follow. That’s unAmerican. Go back to Old Europe where you’d better fit in. We don’t mindlessly follow leaders here.
toliver on May 23, 2011 at 12:56 AM

whatever comrade

hey, remember “quantitive easing 2″?

Who was it who pretty much singularly spoke out against it, and was right?

Oh yeah

I’m not blind, in fact I have been paying close attention and SP has been on the right side way more than wrong, but better yet she’s been on the front lines

how much does axlerod pay for you?

Sonosam on May 23, 2011 at 6:53 AM

Genuine, policy or character flaws?

Or baggage that is primarily media generated that can be deflected with a good, solid campaign that proves the lies for what they are?

powerpro on May 20, 2011 at 11:09 PM

I can guarantee you that abdicating ones governorship and then expecting Americans to elect you to a tougher job IS A CHARACTER FLAW. Fortunately, Sarah doesn’t suffer from that. She would NEVER expect Americans to vote for her for POTUS. She resigned for personal and professional reasons and is too classy and smart to think those reasons will not crop up again, putting her in a position to resign again.

csdeven on May 23, 2011 at 9:54 AM

Bbbbbbut, Mitch is so electable. Just ask toliver, csdevon, Benaiah or the other members of the HA RINO Brigade.

Mitch is exactly what the American people are looking for: a 5′ 3″ weak looking geek who constantly sticks his size 3 feet in his mouth and is scared sh!tless of his nutty wife.

bw222 on May 20, 2011 at 11:57 PM

Yes. Ask me who I support. I do not subscribe to the theory that just because someone does not support my candidate doesn’t mean they do support the person I hate. They could very well be a supporter my second choice or of no candidate at all yet.

csdeven on May 23, 2011 at 10:00 AM

My guess is Kraut is following the same polls.

patrick neid on May 21, 2011 at 7:26 PM

Polls at this point are irrelevant. If anything, state-run media polls are being used to shape, not reflect public opinion. To some extent, they are having some effect.

But does anyone think the Commie News Network, al-New York Times, the Washington Compost, See BS News, et al., want an electable GOP candidate to run against the Chocolate Jesus? Of course not.

When the state-run media tells you a GOP candidate is “electable,” chances are it’s a sure-fire loser. Likewise, the ones they deem unelectable — those polarizing conservatives — are the ones they fear. When Our Lord and Savior tells us He fears Daniels and Huntsman, that’s likely who He wants (or wanted in Daniels’ case) to run against. Same with Romney. The commercials just write themselves with him.

pdigaudio on May 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Anyone catch Cain on Fox News Sunday? He was doing great, and then Wallace asked him about the Palestinian right of return.

Cain: Blink, blink.

Silence

Cain: “The right of return?”

Wallace” “The Palestinian Right of return.”

Silence

Finally, Cain rolls with something about how the Palestinians do have the right to return, as long as Israel is ok with it. Which of course they’re not.

To me, this was a pretty big problem. This wasn’t some gotcha trivia moment. Cain denounced Obama’s position on Israel without knowing about a basic underlying argument in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

hawksruleva on May 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM

whatever comrade

hey, remember “quantitive easing 2″?

Who was it who pretty much singularly spoke out against it, and was right?

Oh yeah

I’m not blind, in fact I have been paying close attention and SP has been on the right side way more than wrong, but better yet she’s been on the front lines

how much does axlerod pay for you?

Sonosam on May 23, 2011 at 6:53 AM

Anyone that isn’t a Palinista is a “comrade”. That’s absurd. Hiding from the mainstream media is not engaging the “front lines”. She’s a REMF these days.

toliver on May 23, 2011 at 11:04 AM

Anyone catch Cain on Fox News Sunday? He was doing great, and then Wallace asked him about the Palestinian right of return.

Cain: Blink, blink.

Silence

Cain: “The right of return?”

Wallace” “The Palestinian Right of return.”

Silence

Finally, Cain rolls with something about how the Palestinians do have the right to return, as long as Israel is ok with it. Which of course they’re not.

To me, this was a pretty big problem. This wasn’t some gotcha trivia moment. Cain denounced Obama’s position on Israel without knowing about a basic underlying argument in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

hawksruleva on May 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM

I’m going to have to watch the interview on YouTube. Are you saying that Cain is unfamiliar with the Palestinian “right to return” issue?

toliver on May 23, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Hiding from the mainstream media is not engaging the “front lines”

You recommending Republican candidates sit down with the likes of Mr. Tingly Leg, Crazy Larry and Rachel Madcow, who’ll just call them racists and play “Gotcha”? Same with David Gregory and the rest of the state-run Obama lapdog media.

It’s a pity there aren’t any tough but fair-minded interviewers out there. Just leftwing hacks. Tim Russert is taking the Eternal Dirt Nap, and ABC took Jake Tapper off This Week. Anyone else is just a pro-Obama partisan hack who would be hellbent on making any Republican look as bad as humanly possible.

I don’t blame the smart Republicans/conservatives for avoiding them like the plague.

pdigaudio on May 23, 2011 at 11:29 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7