Quotes of the day
posted at 9:30 pm on November 6, 2011 by Allahpundit
“Allegations that Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain sexually harassed women in the 1990s have begun to damage his bid for the White House, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found.
“The poll showed the percentage of Republicans who view Cain favorably dropped 9 percentage points, to 57 percent from 66 percent a week ago…
“A majority of respondents, 53 percent, believe sexual harassment allegations against Cain are true despite his denials. Republicans were less likely to believe they are true, with 39 percent thinking they are accurate.”
“By any normal rules of politics, Cain should be toast. So what’s going on?
“Simply put, the media and Cain’s detractors have over-played their hand. By Friday night, Politico, which broke the original story, had published 94 articles on the allegations in under six days. Every other major publication had followed suit. Every time he stepped out of a room, Cain was mobbed by reporters…
“Cain’s very amateurishness became almost endearing. Rather than mouthing slick talking points, Cain got angry with the journalists (a profession loathed by most Republican activists) and claimed that he was the victim of a ‘high-tech lynching.’”
“[Ed Gillespie] also said he thought Republicans perceived liberals as having a ‘special disdain for black conservatives’ – and that, consequently, ‘they feel that there’s an unfairness that is at play here.’
“‘So I think that actually, you know, this is not as damaging to Herman Cain,’ he said, adding that because this was shaping up to be an ‘unconventional’ year in politics, ‘you’re not seeing yet as much damage as you would expect in other years or with other campaigns.’…
“‘Even though it’s an unconventional campaign with an unconventional candidate, Republicans want to win,’ Rollins said. ‘We want a candidate who can go up against Obama and beat him.’ Rollins said he did not believe Cain has answered the questions correctly, ‘or has seen the last of this.’”
“While describing Mr. Cain as ‘a decent, decent man,’ Mr. Huntsman went on to say, ‘It’s up to Herman Cain to get the information out and get it out in total.’ He said that the intense attention to the harassment allegations was ‘taking all the bandwidth out of the discussion,’ so that the Republican candidates were unable to discuss the economy, foreign policy and other pressing issues…
“[A]nother prominent Republican, Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi, made a similar point.
“‘Bad news is not like fine wine — it doesn’t improve with age,’ he said, paraphrasing a quote from Henry A. Kissinger. Mr. Barbour, who himself had considered a presidential run this year, said it was vital for Mr. Cain to ‘get all the facts on the table, get it behind him.’…
“‘There’s no way you could say it’s been good for him,’ said Mr. Barbour. He added that Mr. Cain ‘needs to get all the cards on the table, face-up.’”
“‘Everyone loves him. Who doesn’t? He has a great personality, but this is the leader of the free world we’re talking about,’ Bachmann said in an interview with conservative radio host Scott Hennan, set to air Monday…
“‘I think the real problem is how inconsistent he’s been on the issues… There’s been 10 instances in the last month where he’s changed his position on significant issues. On the issue of pro-life, he said the government shouldn’t intervene to protect life then he switched and said, ‘no they shouldn’t.”…
“Stingingly, she said when asked of Cain: ‘People are looking for an adult in the room.’”
“He’s not going to be the nominee, if I can just be honest here for a minute. He was never going to be the nominee. The support for him, I think, was a symbol of conservative and Republican distrust of some of the frontrunners, willingness to reward someone for being bold, for having comprehensive reform plans, for being an outsider, but I think the air is slowly going to go out of the Herman Cain bubble regardless of the sexual harassment charges.”
Click the image to watch.
“‘We are getting back on message, end of story. Back on message. Read all of the other accounts, read all the accounts, where everything has been answered in a story. We’re getting back on message,’ he said…
“The only hint of the recent controversy surrounding Cain’s candidacy came at the end of the debate, when Gingrich asked if anything surprised the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza about running for president.
“‘There are too many people in the media who are downright dishonest,’ he said to applause.”
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: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5
It’s not going to happen because there is a “there” there and they are holding it until the election. That is one scenario. Another scenario is that there is no “there” there and the accusers were shaking NRA down. Either way, we won’t know until we get all the facts and until then Herman will have this hanging over his head…
Thus.
Making him.
A political liability.
I never called Newt a liar; you called Newt a liar. If Newt wants to jump to conclusions like you and make assumptions — without all of the facts — then that is his prerogative, and I hope him and you turn out to be right.
In the meantime… I want the facts. I just the facts.
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 3:30 AM
Maybe Herman can take a lie detector test?
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 3:31 AM
Actually, I didn’t call Newt a liar. I said, you were calling him a liar. Either Newt’s telling the truth or he’s not. You just “corrected” him, so he must not be telling the truth.
P.S. See how nasty these little games get. And the point? Please don’t get too worked up about this, though.
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 3:32 AM
For those of us that aren’t quick on the uptake – anyone with an R after their name would be a political liability by your standards.
You can’t honestly believe that anyone will emerge from the nomination without getting ripped at.
So what am I looking for? I’m looking for someone that knows how to take the media on – oh, and they are reasonably conservative.
Here! Here’s your chance to push Newt!
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 3:34 AM
Thanks! :-)
I think it was much worse, actually. Cain is 65 years old; lived through the Cold War; worked for the Navy as a civilian; was on talk radio; and yet never, ever heard of the neoconservative movement. It is absolutely shocking.
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 3:35 AM
Better idea. Just have everyone hooked up to monitors during the debates.
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 3:35 AM
But I never called Newt a liar.
No, the other candidates didn’t…
1.) Have two subordinates make a complaint for being sexually harassed.
2.) Get paid off by said accused’s association to stay quite for alleged sexual harassment.
If Newt had a similar situation, and was trapped in the same box as Cain, then yes I would pronounce him as a political liability since the public could not render a judgement on his guilt or innocence.
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 3:42 AM
Excellent idea!
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 3:44 AM
Herman Cain didn’t have more marriages than Bill Clinton. Herman Cain didn’t sit on a couch with Nancy Pelosi. Herman Cain didn’t claim Gardasil caused retardation. Herman Cain didn’t have a n*gger rock on his ranch. Herman Cain didn’t give instate tuition to illegals and then call his opponents heartless and un-Christian. Herman Cain didn’t pass a h/c mandate. Herman Cain never stated how important it was to have safe, legal abortions. Herman Cain never rubbed shoulders with KKK members. Herman Cain never said we should be friends with Iran. Herman Cain never served under Obama. Herman Cain was never the governor of New Mexico.
What’s your point? Because Newt Gingrich doesn’t have the EXACT same circumstances that Cain has, he’s not a political liability? Get out…
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 3:46 AM
You don’t believe he’s telling the truth…
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 3:47 AM
Yes, I should’ve added that it was worse, imo, because at least Palin didn’t outright admit to not knowing something that was common knowledge… but the MSM had a field day with her “answer”. If Cain ever became the nominee (lol), the MSM would bring it up and put it on a loop for the general. ITA with your points on it. I was shocked, too, which is almost hard to do with Cain since he is a veritable Cloard-Piven of gaffes (meaning he makes so many it’s hard to keep up with them all).
Aslans Girl on November 7, 2011 at 3:48 AM
So you claim you will know “what he did” if the women reveal their accusations.
You aren’t very bright are you?
nottakingsides on November 7, 2011 at 3:57 AM
I’m sorry we don’t see eye-to-eye on this issue, Meat. But this is indeed an issue that will not go away until we have all the facts and can prove Herman’s innocence. We need to know what exactly Herman did to these two young ladies working for him at the NRA.
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 3:58 AM
If the vote were today, Mine wouldnt go to Romney. Nore will it ever. Its simple, hes a snake oil salesman. You will always have the Paulbots. You will always have the Romnies. Those 2 guys alone screw this country off of ego. If Romney wins the election. Let him add Paul as the running mate. Snake and the flake.
Gedge on November 7, 2011 at 3:59 AM
I’m hoping that, once the women come forward with their story, Herman will then come forward and give us his side of the story. Then we will be able to weigh who is the most credible of the two. I just want to know what he did to warrant a payout. I just want the facts.
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 4:01 AM
You should read the Tobin article posted by, AG. :-)
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 4:05 AM
I’m not claiming this is going to go *poof* disappear. In fact, if you read what I was saying, you’d see I believe that any Repbulican, including Herman Cain, will be faced with nasty allegation, smear campaigns, and the media onslaught.
Now, what I do know is no solid evidence is coming forward to prove that Cain is lying about these women. In that case, I’d prefer to focus on what we can focus on – policy.
Your bias is showing when you stalk Herman Cain threads to talk about, in the words of Gingrich, gossip.
Now, if you acknowledge that any Republican (including Newt) is going to be faced with similar fights and smear campaigns; and that they are going to need to successfully take on the media, I can start respecting your opinion. If you said, “I don’t think Cain’s handling this right,” I’d actually (get ready) agree with you. But you’re being dishonest by putting Cain in this separate category because he’s the only candidate that worked for the NRA and got accused of sexual harassment (ftr, I believe he’s the only candidate that worked for the NRA). Probably half of the Republicans in the race have rumors about them linked to sexual improprieties. I’m not as concerned about these potential sexual acts as much as how well the candidate could handle them and how conservative the candidate is.
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 4:05 AM
And with that, the exhaustion has overcome the cough. Goodnight.
MeatHeadinCA on November 7, 2011 at 4:12 AM
But this isn’t a smear campaign. You want to call it a “smear campaign” to defend Cain from being properly vetted.
OK, sounds reasonable.
I think you’re upset. You’re negatively labeling me a “stalker”.:-(
Being called a “stalker” is a step up, I suppose, from the usual Cainian shaming tactic of calling the opposition “racist”.
Cain’s sexual harassment story isn’t a “smear campaign”. It happened, it is news, it sells papers/get hits.
He is the only candidate whose organization paid off his accusers for sexual harassment, yes. Why you are calling me dishonest for pointing this out is beyond me.
But do the other candidates have “rumors” that have payouts made by the organization they were running to accusers?
Punchenko on November 7, 2011 at 4:27 AM
yepper
they’re going to hate you no matter what with an R next to your name…don’t kowtow to them like the gop elite constantly…
cmsinaz on November 7, 2011 at 5:49 AM
So now you are saying that You will KNOW “what he did” by guessing “who is the most credible of the two”. You make no sense at all.
And you state that you “just want the facts”. What exactly would you consider “facts” in a he said/she said? Do you really think they have video/audio/hand-written love letters? Do you really think they would have settled with a pathetic 5 figure sum (pocket change) if they had any proof? Of course not.
She will make accusations. Cain will deny. Voters won’t give a $hit. That is the only outcome.
nottakingsides on November 7, 2011 at 6:10 AM
Still loathe Romney
Still p!$$ed at Perry
Still don’t trust Newt
Still gonna vote Cain
Laura in Maryland on November 7, 2011 at 6:36 AM
O/T – (kinda of)
This morning, my local NBC affiliate discussed a poll that showed slipping support for OWS. The teleprompter-reading bimbo concluded by proclaiming “They’re still have more support than the tea party!”
Yeah, the media is soooo not biased.
Laura in Maryland on November 7, 2011 at 6:44 AM
No one else has been accused so that means all accusations MUST be true?
THAT is your proof?!
csdeven on November 7, 2011 at 6:51 AM
BTW,
Do we get another “Walking Dead” thread today?
1) Somebody is having a baby!
2) Zombies get wrinkled when in the bath too long too.
3) Southern girls can be kinda slutty. HALLELUJAH for the beta Chinese guy!
4) The hillbilly is FINALLY running out of bolts for his crossbow.
5) We now know that some folks question the idea of a benevolent God after he releases a scourge of zombies on humanity. (Allah should like that part.)
6) When does Otis show up as a zombie and they figure out he’s been shot in the leg?
csdeven on November 7, 2011 at 6:58 AM
What’s fascinating is that if the woman who alleges the misconduct actually had a real case, that is an actionable one that wouldn’t cost the NRA more to defend against than she could expect in a legal victory, she would have taken it to court and pushed Cain and the NRA to the wall for every, single cent that could be had by her.
That didn’t happen.
Instead she goes for the private agreement and NDA.
That is not the action of someone who feels they have been injured in a civil way, or that their civil rights have been violated, or that a crime has taken place. That is someone who does not want to face the costs to her of going to court… and our quite litigious era had started way before then and she could have gotten decent legal council that would be in for a cut if they won. No lawyer had taken THAT option and so she goes for a private settlement… and if she didn’t go to a lawyer before that then she was not looking out for her best interests.
Put the absolute worst thing that could have happened, in your mind, in place and ask: why wasn’t the pants sued off Cain AND the NRA? Fear doesn’t cut it, I’m sorry, since the era of lawsuit lottery began with big payments a good decade and more before these alleged incidents.
Wanting the case to be put at its worst that you can imagine: why is Cain still around and the NRA still a going concern? If it falls far less than you imagine, then ask if that is any any way actionable beyond a civil agreement with NDA and would STILL make out any of the parties involved to be unworthy of your trust. They settled the problem and it was done with the NRA and the woman who was alleging problems. The NRA released her to speak after her lawyer had been rattling around the media to get attention… and then she says ‘Never mind’. That tells me a lot about the person making the allegations and none of it good.
Until the facts come out and someone is willing to stand up behind their allegations, say what they are, how they happened and when they happened, then the presumption of innocence still applies. Especially when there is a civil agreement involved as we must honor those agreements made between individuals for the legal process to have validity. Question that and you invite the destruction of it because you won’t uphold it and your fellow citizens to make such an agreements.
That is the OWS position with regards to mortgages and school loans.
That doesn’t get you to a nice and better place, but one with the restrictions of civility removed from your fellow man to treat each other as predator and prey. It doesn’t matter if it is a minor civil agreement with NDAs, loans that one agrees to pay back with interest, or purchase of that wonderful 12 gauge with parkerized finish that you put on the installment plan (although that is relatively cheap to find and you shouldn’t need that sort of plan). It is the legal process that must be upheld first and foremost and when there is an accusation you require that there be an ACCUSER so that those defending themselves can FACE THEM and not be attacked with rumors and innuendos.
Which do you want?
A nation of laws or a nation of men?
If you want the former, then uphold the process.
Perhaps conservatives can learn that lesson before it is too late.
ajacksonian on November 7, 2011 at 7:35 AM
First!
Bishop on November 7, 2011 at 7:38 AM
So, where is Vera Baker?
ExpressoBold on November 7, 2011 at 7:48 AM
You must have meant “what exactly Herman is alleged to have done.”
Right?
Missy on November 7, 2011 at 7:56 AM
Anybody else hear the second woman is going public today?
gophergirl on November 7, 2011 at 8:13 AM
Did you mean to say….
I just want the facts…or anything, an accusation, etc. that can get Herman out of there. Oh, please let me have something!
balkanmom on November 7, 2011 at 8:29 AM
I don’t think we’re concerned about how candidates “handle” potential sex acts. That’s TMI, good buddy.
It would be nice if the first woman went public. Actually, she doesn’t want to go public and probably never did. The shyster lawyer decided to get away with playing the media fiddle for his 15 minutes and she finally backed him up when the media came to her door.
The second one is a real frameup (based on the success of the first one) and the third one is non-existent.
This whole series of events is manufactured. The reason you can safely say that is because there is no similar set of tales from his other high management positions. Only at NRA – must be something in the water that makes its powerful black execs get all feeley with the wenches.
I am going to so much love voting for this man.
platypus on November 7, 2011 at 8:40 AM
You think it is too much to ask Cain as a potential GOP nominee to help settle the allegations once and for all?
It is Day 9 of the Cain “scandal” and we still remain in the dark with the issue hanging like a sword of Damocles on Cain’s head.
You want to know how Cain can settle this once and for all?
1. Challenge the women to come forward.
2. Waive every NDA and request that the NRA release every detail of the allegations.
3. Give us his side of the story and kill it once and for all.
Is that too much to ask?
TheRightMan on November 7, 2011 at 8:41 AM
Sure, but at this rate, you will soon be one of a minority as Cain refuses to put the allegations to bed. I don’t think the majority of GOP primary voters are going to follow Cain like lemmings over a cliff.
And don’t be too thrilled with Cain’s current standing in the polls. He has reached a ceiling in his support and is starting to trend down. But Cain knows that, right? Because I am more and more convinced that he is not in to win but to milk suckers like yourself for all you’ve got.
’999′ does sound like the Nigerian ’419′ scam.
TheRightMan on November 7, 2011 at 8:46 AM
He has already done each of those things, and it doesn’t matter. But you already knew that. At this point, it’s better for him that they continue so that the LSM look more stupid by the day.
Pass the popcorn.
platypus on November 7, 2011 at 8:48 AM
Nice ganja you got dere, brah. Got some links to go with your ceiling comment? I didn’t think so. Go pour yourself some more coffee.
platypus on November 7, 2011 at 8:50 AM
Okay, way OT for this late in the thread, but – fIREHOSE and Trip Shakespeare? Did we go to college together? fIREHOSE played our spring concert and came to our backyard barbecue afterwards. Great day. Trip Shakespeare also played at our school at some point, I think…that memory’s a little foggier though.
Missy on November 7, 2011 at 8:59 AM
*Yawn*
This kerfuffle will be a distant memory in a couple of months if not sooner.
the_souse on November 7, 2011 at 10:27 AM
Ewww…double ewww becasue I have actually seen this happen (shuddder).
I don’t believe it was PJ media rather Politico that did the initla hit piece and subsequent marshalling of non-facts and innuendo.
RedLizard64 on November 7, 2011 at 12:45 PM
Thank you
RedLizard64 on November 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM
Very valid points but I point out that he is setting the example of staying within a budget..something some might say Romney should have learned in 2008. I tend to lean toward a guy with a lean organization but staying on target $$$$ and on message…that’s just me though.
RedLizard64 on November 7, 2011 at 1:12 PM
Isn’t it special how the MSM gets to push the “all Conservative blacks are sex fiends” meme without any challenges…and without even a perfectly logical charge that they are blatantly racist???
Cute tactic: lie about someone and then demand that they prove your lie to be false!!!
landlines on November 7, 2011 at 4:14 PM
You have just bought into a stupid and illogical argument advanced by the left, which basically amounts to:
1. There is a totally unsupported allegation (lie) about _____(fill conservative name in here).
2. _____________ has not explained his side of the unsupported allegation (lie).
3. Therefore, there is no acceptable Republican candidate.
Of course there is no logical way to prove a negative, especially if the subject is a lie. But the whole tactic is as ridiculous as if someone on the right said “Obama is not qualified to run because he is a space alien who eats human flesh…and he has not proved that he didn’t”!!!
landlines on November 7, 2011 at 4:33 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5