Herman Cain: Let’s face it, I’d probably have a substantial lead right now if I was the nominee

posted at 4:23 pm on September 21, 2012 by Allahpundit

A fun thought experiment, and a good way to refresh your appreciation for Romney after a tough couple of weeks. If you think Mitt’s been prone to getting thrown off-message, imagine what the media would do with a nominee on whom they’d already started muckraking and who was guilty of even worse verbal stumbles than Romney is.

Would have been a heck of a ride, though.

He focused on the tax code, energy and the national debt, while repeatedly bashing the mainstream media.

“Stupid people are ruining America, and we’ve got to take it back,” he said.

Cain told members of the media after the speech that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s recent “47 percent” comment was a “non-story” being blown out of proportion by the media. But Cain said he would have been doing better if he was the nominee, saying that he’d probably have a “substantial lead” on President Barack Obama at this point.

“The reason is quite simple: I have some depth to my ideas,” he said.

I don’t know whether he’s “deeper” than Romney but Cain’s 9-9-9 pitch was admirably concrete and clear vis-a-vis Mitt’s 59-point plans. My sense is that he would have connected better with the middle class too — although so would virtually anyone else in the field. And yet, for the reasons noted up top (as well as Romney’s organizational and fundraising advantages), it’s an awfully safe bet that Cain wouldn’t be as close as Mitt is now. That’s one of the big consolations whenever I feel frustrated about Romney’s campaign, in fact: For all his faults, my gut reaction is that none of his rivals from the primaries would have done any better and quite a few of them would have been doing a lot worse. (No doubt Ann Romney feels the same way, which helps explain some of her irritation at Mitt’s Beltway critics.) Santorum would have been better on the trail but his organization was much weaker and the media would have slashed him twice as deeply as Romney for his social conservatism. The “war on women” crap” would have been even shriller than it is now, as hard as that is to imagine. On paper, Pawlenty would have been more difficult to demonize than Romney because none of the left’s class-warfare ploys would work well against him, but how are we supposed to take him seriously as an alternative when he couldn’t get past the Ames straw poll? If the goal, purely and simply, is beating Obama, then yeah, I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field. Anyone feel otherwise? I’m interested in hearing readers’ counterarguments in the comments.


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 2

FACT CHECK: False.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:25 PM

He’d be polling 9, 9, 9! percent.

Too easy.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:26 PM

silly

rob verdi on September 21, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Which reminds me:

Whatever happened to the multitude of “serious” allegations of sexual misconduct? Are they still being pursued? I figured we’d still be hearing about them, y’know, if there were any merit to any of them in the first place.

mintycrys on September 21, 2012 at 4:26 PM

I’m interested in hearing readers’ counterarguments in the comments.

This campaign would be 1000x more fun if Newt had won.

Fact.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Can I get extra cheese on that?

Ellis on September 21, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Herman Cain: Let’s face it, I’d probably have a substantial lead right now if I was the nominee

Herman,I love ya baby, but seriously… Sit down and shut up. Doesn’t the lying disgusting Fifth Column Treasonous Media have enough fictional ammunition already?

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:28 PM

This campaign would be 1000x more fun if Newt had won.

Totally true, but that’s not what I asked. Would Newt be closer right now than Romney is? Not a chance.

Allahpundit on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Herman, at one point our home would have voted for you, but you didn’t make the cut! NOW Herman, please shut up with all this press as to what you could have or could not have done, please! WE need all the help we can get, not all the NEGATIVE vibs coming from our side?
L

letget on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

It seems like people have been forgetting that Romney was the last choice available during the primaries. Everyone else, from gardasil lady to even the pizza guy, led the GOP polls before flaming out one after the other. Our pool this year really was terrible.

mythicknight on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Plus Cain would have sold many copies of his album “Herman Cains Sings: Cover Songs” at all of his campaign stops.

What could have been…..

portlandon on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

alol

rubberneck on September 21, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Herm, Herm, Herm.

crash72 on September 21, 2012 at 4:30 PM

I would have liked Newt or Perry… I really wish Perry hadn’t fluked it up, but he probably would have been easy to tie to W…

Newt…. if he had money and an organization I’d like to think he would be up (might be wishcasting). Newt is a great spokesperson, and I think he would have torn Obama apart.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Uh, no. Sorry, Herm. I love ya and you were terrific at that rally in the Clear Lake, TX area earlier this year, but you were a flash in the pan. 9-9-9 got pummeled in the GOP debates, so just imagine what the Democrat/media complex would’ve done to it. And if you think the War on Women crap is bad enough now, think of how much we’d be hearing with a new one of those lying skanks surfacing every 24 hours to accuse Cain of harassment.

I hate to say it, but Romney is the best from that field of candidates. Rick Perry is a likable guy and his record is solid, but he was a disaster at the debates. Rick Santorum was too easily goaded into talking about social issues which would’ve played right into the Dems’ hands in the general. Newt Gingrich is brilliant and handles the media as well as anyone not named John Sununu, but his personal baggage would’ve made him toxic to women voters. Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman never had a prayer. And Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann….do I even have to go there?

Doughboy on September 21, 2012 at 4:32 PM

I also wanted Mike Pence to run…

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:32 PM

If Rick Perry were our candidate, we would be way ahead. There are three reasons why, but I can’t remember any of them at the moment.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:32 PM

ROFL:ROFL:LOL:ROFL:ROFL
|
L /———\
LOL=\ [] \
L \__________\
| |
————-/

rollthedice on September 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Hey, Herman…. I called your show a few years ago, and we had a great chat. You’re a good guy – very smart, accomplished and a tremendous asset to conservatism.

However………constructive criticism is best. Let’s not go down the sad road of Bill Kristol and the Weakly Weenies. Is it pique or ego? Does it matter?

Check it at the door.

Cody1991 on September 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM

I object to Herman Cain just because his name “Herman” is politically incorrect. It should be “Person’sperson”.

The Rogue Tomato on September 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Totally true, but that’s not what I asked. Would Newt be closer right now than Romney is? Not a chance.

Allahpundit on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

I am willing to bet that Yes, Newt would be way better numbers wise. Media would be scared to tackle him, they would, of course, but would be way more cautious with their questions.

Not sure hwy Perry was not mentioned in your list, just Pawlenty and Santorum.

riddick on September 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM

I don’t disagree with the statement; I believe most of our primary candidates would have a substantial lead, right now.

I believe Mitt Romney has, in fact, a substantial lead. But no one that I know of is conducting a trustworthy poll.

listens2glenn on September 21, 2012 at 4:35 PM

That’s one of the big consolations whenever I feel frustrated about Romney’s campaign, in fact: For all his faults, my gut reaction is that none of his rivals from the primaries would have done any better and quite a few of them would have been doing a lot worse.

I agree. Everyone I think of that MIGHT be doing better didn’t decide to run at all. Rick Perry comes closest, but he was prone to gaffes himself and would’ve been too easily labeled a Bush clone.

changer1701 on September 21, 2012 at 4:35 PM

I liked you Cain, but you lost…so get behind Mittens and help us save our country by throwing Obama out.

search4truth on September 21, 2012 at 4:35 PM

If Rick Perry were our candidate, we would be way ahead. There are three reasons why, but I can’t remember any of them at the moment.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Now be fair. Only the third reason is elusive.

Which reminds me:

Whatever happened to the multitude of “serious” allegations of sexual misconduct? Are they still being pursued? I figured we’d still be hearing about them, y’know, if there were any merit to any of them in the first place.

mintycrys on September 21, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Oh they vanished from the face of the earth the moment Cain withdrew from the race. Which was the whole point of parading them out there. They were attention wh0res who were useful idiots for the Democrat/media complex which was terrified of the prospect of a black man leading in the polls for the Republican nomination when the race card was one of the few weapons they had to play in Obama’s defense in the general.

Doughboy on September 21, 2012 at 4:35 PM

It seems like people have been forgetting that Romney was the last choice available during the primaries. Everyone else, from gardasil lady to even the pizza guy, led the GOP polls before flaming out one after the other. Our pool this year really was terrible.

mythicknight on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Plenty of people remember. It’s just that Romney didn’t get the hint.

Or maybe he did understand the implications of his eternal second-banana polling and stayed in because he had more funds, the establishment backing, and he wanted power.

mintycrys on September 21, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Say what you will about Cain but his foreign policy map is among the most epic things I’ve ever seen.

Kataklysmic on September 21, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Apparently he was counting on all of his mistresses to vote for him.

Hard Right on September 21, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Not a chance.

Allahpundit on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

How do you know?

I think T-Paw, Newt, and Santorum all “could” be doing better then Mitt. People don’t like Mitt, just like they don’t like Newt. However, Newt would be discussing the issues effectively, instead of playing hide and seek from the press. It would be more of an issues campaign. And not just on the economy. We win when its about the issues. The media can only talk about unfaithfullness so long before its a dead horse.

KMav on September 21, 2012 at 4:36 PM

This campaign would be 1000x more fun if Newt had won.

Fact.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:27 PM

And, about 500x more fun if Herb had won.

Speculation.

Fallon on September 21, 2012 at 4:37 PM

ROFL:ROFL:LOL:ROFL:ROFL
|
L /———\
LOL=\ [] \
L \__________\
| |
————-/

rollthedice on September 21, 2012 at 4:33 PM

.
Do we need to call an ambulance?

listens2glenn on September 21, 2012 at 4:37 PM

What I really hate about Mitt is that he’s giving Obama the kid gloves treatment… We are 46/45 days away from the election, a week away from early voting, and what is Mitt’s strategy?

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:37 PM

You sure about that Herm?

I mean, we did have a primary and all. And I don’t recall you ever having a “substantial” lead in that puppy.

Just go out and help get our guy elected. Right now, it’s not all about you.

BacaDog on September 21, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Totally true, but that’s not what I asked. Would Newt be closer right now than Romney is? Not a chance.

Allahpundit on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

I don’t think he’d be much further behind. Newt is great on the trail and he loves poking people in the eye – which, to my mind, is Romney’s main problem.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Nein-Nein-Nein!

pain train on September 21, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Poor Herm had to set his hair on fire this week.

faraway on September 21, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Plenty of people remember. It’s just that Romney didn’t get the hint.

Or maybe he did understand the implications of his eternal second-banana polling and stayed in because he had more funds, the establishment backing, and he wanted power.

mintycrys on September 21, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Oh Bless your heart, you must have been one of those kids who always got a trophy just for showing up…

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Not a chance.

Allahpundit on September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

ah sorry AP. your cant say that deifnitively. it depends is to correct answer. thats always the answer. of course on the poll. on the DRI. and whether its adults, registereds or likelies. AND what model you use, the 2008, the 2004, or the double sowkow 2010 modified twist!!

t8stlikchkn on September 21, 2012 at 4:39 PM

For all his faults, my gut reaction is that none of his rivals from the primaries would have done any better and quite a few of them would have been doing a lot worse.

posted at 4:23 pm on September 21, 2012 by Allahpundit

No person that the GOP nominated could have had the lead against Obama? Obama’s still objectively 2x as worse as Carter, right? Romney may be 1/2 Reagan, but if Obama’s 1/2 Carter he should be in the lead. Is it because of shifting demographics that we’ve passed the tipping point to moocherville? In 1980 Reagan had a much, much tougher media environment when he had nothing like Rush/Fox/Hotair.

sauldalinsky on September 21, 2012 at 4:39 PM

And that is why he had to be subjected to Jugears’ Chicago Campaign Rules.

platypus on September 21, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Mitt won the primary by denying people a choice, by disqualifying other candidates, but that strategy isn’t working in the general (duh) and that’s why he’s conceding 47% of the vote…

FREAK.

Latino’s really don’t like Obama, and I believe Perry or Newt could have taken swaths of them, denying Obama a chance.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:40 PM

If the goal, purely and simply, is beating Obama, then yeah, I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field. Anyone feel otherwise?

Me. Santorum had a better chance.

1.) He was competitive against Obama in head-to-head polling, at times doing better than Romney
2.) He was doing better in the “core four” than Romney. Romney’s losing VA and OH right now, is at best even in FL, and his lead in NC seems to be slipping a bit
3.) He greatly overperformed considering his financial resources and time allotted at the debates
4.) He pulled off the triple-upset night against Mitt of Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri after he was already supposed to be dead as a candidate (since he’d only won Iowa, and even then it was a very belated victory since Mitt was originally declared the winner)
5.) Social conservatism & economic populism plays well in the swing states (in IA, they kicked out their gay marriage supporting judges, in NC, banning gay marriage won by 22 — although the latest RCP average still has Mitt leading, it’s by low single digits and the latest polling’s going badly for him… FL’s panhandle is filled with evangelical christians, and there’s plenty of them in the Cincy area of Ohio too). He’s a much better fit for that than Romney (son of a blue collar worker vs son of privilege). He wouldn’t have been making 47 percent gaffes
6.) He has greater consistency than Romney in terms of ideology, and wouldn’t have a trust issue with the electorate
7.) He pulled all of this off despite next to no media attention, fawning articles, or establishment endorsements

Stoic Patriot on September 21, 2012 at 4:41 PM

How do you know?

I think

KMav on September 21, 2012 at 4:36 PM

You can think whatever you want, but the math says you are straight up wrong. The office of President of the United States is not a trophy given just for showing up. Please go collect your trophy, down the hall last door on the left.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Yup, I was for Gingrich before I was for Mitt.

I love Newt, but what happened to him and Calista at the convention?

The absolute worst presentation of all and I was truly disappointed.

Newt, you did not do any favors for Calista even if you really wanted to have her on stage to show her off.

It’s your job to protect your wife to make her look good in that venue, where you shine. You should have stood up and said no.

You had a great opportunity to fight the good fight and it was wasted with that amateurish delivery.

Typicalwhitewoman on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

If the goal, purely and simply, is beating Obama, then yeah, I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field. Anyone feel otherwise?

I don’t. Mitt was our best shot. The others were fatally flawed for the general election, in one way or another, and probably all less qualified in the financial arena. They each may have seemed more desirable in a different specific area that, imo, is less important than the financial one. They all had their chance and flamed out. I thought Cain was one of the worst.

a capella on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

I think a ham sandwich would be ahead of Obama in the polls right now, except the polls are deplorably, hopelessly biased.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Mitt won the primary by denying people a choice, by disqualifying other candidates

And just where, exactly, did Mitt disqualify a candidate?

BacaDog on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

If the goal, purely and simply, is beating Obama, then yeah, I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field.

Sadly, “weak” is the key word, and they’re all part of a gaggle, at such a momentous moment in history. The land needs a real man.

Anyone feel otherwise? I’m interested in hearing readers’ counterarguments in the comments.

Sadly, no.

Still, a cow pancake should beat Obama. Him bumbling on Univision was The Empty Man on the Chair.

How is it that Univision does a better job than all the other old media?

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

If the goal, purely and simply, is beating Obama, then yeah, I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field. Anyone feel otherwise? I’m interested in hearing readers’ counterarguments in the comments.

First, let me say…

RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL!!!!

Okay, now that that’s out of the way…

Yes, Mitt Romney was certainly the best bet to beat Obama. Other than Perry for the ability to raise money, and maybe Ron Paul for the ability to move people, none of them would even be close to Romney’s performance.

Of course, Rand Paul thinks it is already in the bag for Mitt. Prescience, or eternal optimist? Only time will tell…

JohnGalt23 on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

I miss the primary days… they were fun.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:43 PM

I don’t think he’d be much further behind. Newt is great on the trail and he loves poking people in the eye – which, to my mind, is Romney’s main problem.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Newt has too much personal baggage. He would be polling horribly with women. Romney does trail with them, but to an extent that it would put him too deep in the hole. Plus let’s not sit here and act like Newt ran a flawless campaign. He was prone to serious gaffes like the Paul Ryan smear on Meet the Depressed. And he underperformed at a few of those debates when key primaries were on the line.

Doughboy on September 21, 2012 at 4:43 PM

I’m going to make the case that Jon Huntsman would have been doing better at this point because…

Nah.

change is for suckers on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Herm doesn’t have the keys to the Death Star.

It’s warming up now… Beware.

faraway on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I think a ham sandwich would be ahead of Obama in the polls right now, except the polls are deplorably, hopelessly biased.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

I hope Obama stays ahead by 3-5 until Nov. 6. I like arrogant and delusional leftists.

Don’t trust the polls this year. Look around. There are very few bumper sticker on cars, for either side. It’s an unusually unusual year.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I miss the primary days… they were fun.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Back then they didn’t feel like fun. Today I’m with you.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

This campaign would be 1000x more fun if Newt had won.

Fact.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:27 PM

mankai on September 21, 2012 at 4:45 PM

And just where, exactly, did Mitt disqualify a candidate?

BacaDog on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

I didn’t mean that literally, but changing primary dates, rules, and lying about others to disqualify them in voters eyes.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Gingrich would’ve definitely been 1000x fun. Palin even more so. Either one would be bashing the anti-colonial Marxist daily and would’ve caused the Old Media to explode into a million pieces.

sauldalinsky on September 21, 2012 at 4:46 PM

If Rick Perry were our candidate, we would be way ahead. There are three reasons why, but I can’t remember any of them at the moment.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Now be fair. Only the third reason is elusive.

Doughboy on September 21, 2012 at 4:35 PM

I like Perry. I just gotta tease.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:47 PM

another barometer. go to “neutral” sites. no lib places or conserv places. read the comments. note which way they tip.

t8stlikchkn on September 21, 2012 at 4:47 PM

First, let me say…

RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL!!!!

Okay, now that that’s out of the way…

Yes, Mitt Romney was certainly the best bet to beat Obama. Other than Perry for the ability to raise money, and maybe Ron Paul for the ability to move people, none of them would even be close to Romney’s performance.

Of course, Rand Paul thinks it is already in the bag for Mitt. Prescience, or eternal optimist? Only time will tell…

JohnGalt23 on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Romney was not my first choice, or even my second one, but any one here claiming any other candidate would be doing better than Romney is living in denial land. Romney didn’t steal the nomination, he didn’t deprive anyone else of anything. He actually won the nomination the old fashioned way, by working his ass off and getting more votes than any of the other candidates.

I know on the right we like to clown the left about math being hard, but for crying out loud people, it all about the damned math.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Dear Mr. Allah,

You got through an entire post without once using (that’d be “deploying” on your planet) the word “here .” Congtarulations for that.

We haven’t seen “palate cleanser” for weeks now, er “here,” Did your prose style grow up?

PS. That “War on Bacon” riff is the most hysterically funny thing that Hot Air has ever conceived. It is a wonder to behold in its idiocy.

Keep up the good work.

JackieB on September 21, 2012 at 4:48 PM

but the math says you are straight up wrong. The office of President of the United States is not a trophy given just for showing up. Please go collect your trophy, down the hall last door on the left.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Show me the math and I will give you the trophy.

KMav on September 21, 2012 at 4:48 PM

I supported Herman Cain. But he’s not the nominee. Mitt Romney is.

So, if Cain thinks he would be leading more than Mitt now, then I suggest he shut his mouth and get out there campaigning for Romney to draw those extra people he thinks he would be carrying right now.

Stop talking and start doing.

ButterflyDragon on September 21, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Don’t trust the polls this year. Look around. There are very few bumper sticker on cars, for either side. It’s an unusually unusual year.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

2008 and 1980 were unusual years for bumper stickers and excitement. This year is more like 2004 or most other years in between.

sauldalinsky on September 21, 2012 at 4:49 PM

He’s right.

Romney is the worst candidate of the field we could have chosen, which is why the State Media cleared the field for Romney in the primaries, taking on each alternative as they popped into consideration.

The Democrats have been preparing to run against Romney since 2010, and Romney has to ignore his own record to present himself as anything but Obama-lite.

Romney might still win because Obama and friends have done so much damage to the country, but if Romney wins any of the other major Republican candidates could have won.

18-1 on September 21, 2012 at 4:49 PM

This campaign would be 1000x more fun if Newt had won.

Fact.

lorien1973 on September 21, 2012 at 4:27 PM

He was on Greta last night and he can speak.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM

So we’re stuck with Romney, but Romney/Rubio would be leading.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM

I hope Obama stays ahead by 3-5 until Nov. 6. I like arrogant and delusional leftists.

Don’t trust the polls this year. Look around. There are very few bumper sticker on cars, for either side. It’s an unusually unusual year.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I’ve noticed that! And I live in Austin! Man, if Obama has lost Austin…

And about the guy supposedly ‘lynching his chair’ in Austin … I am pretty sure the dude is just trying to stop liberals from stealing his chair. Someone actually took the time to scrape a Romney sticker off my truck last week.. Our liberals are nuts around here. Seriously nuts.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM

I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field. Anyone feel otherwise? I’m interested in hearing readers’ counterarguments in the comments.

Trump for the win!

Ian on September 21, 2012 at 4:51 PM

How is it that Univision does a better job than all the other old media?

Apparently they aren’t journolisters.

18-1 on September 21, 2012 at 4:51 PM

but the math says you are straight up wrong. The office of President of the United States is not a trophy given just for showing up. Please go collect your trophy, down the hall last door on the left.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Show me the math and I will give you the trophy.

KMav on September 21, 2012 at 4:48 PM

The math was presented to the entire damned world in Tampa… I’m guessing you missed that. You can go ahead and keep your trophy, apparently you did earn it.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Oh Bless your heart, you must have been one of those kids who always got a trophy just for showing up…

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:39 PM

The office of President of the United States is not a trophy given just for showing up. Please go collect your trophy, down the hall last door on the left.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Was that joke really good enough to warrant seconds?

mintycrys on September 21, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Well we’ll never know because Herman Cain quit the race. It seems rediculous to me that he thinks he would be leading when he couldn’t even manage to stay in the race.

I didn’t want Romney originally but by the end of the primary I was rooting for him to win. I thought he was best suited to survive the media’s attempt to win this thing for Obama and I still do.

I wish Cain well but I think if he was running he wouldn’t want Mitt saying stuff like this. What does it accomplish? It seems selfish to me and frankly makes me think less of him.

magicbeans on September 21, 2012 at 4:52 PM

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Was that joke really good enough to warrant seconds?

mintycrys on September 21, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Ummmm, yes, why yes it was…

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:54 PM

I have been a supporter of Cain, but 40 days before an election these types of comments are not helpful at all. If Romney and Cain were swapped places, would he appreciate Romney saying the exact same things? Does the GOP have any team players?

mpthompson on September 21, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Newt…. if he had money and an organization I’d like to think he would be up

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 4:31 PM

He would be. Problem is he didn’t have any organization, and I don’t know if he would have even had he won the nom. Lack of organization is what killed his campaign, not lack of substance or likeability. “Three wivez!!1!!1 Tiffany!!1!!!!1″ was a total red herring.

alwaysfiredup on September 21, 2012 at 4:54 PM

And it’s nice that Herman Cain has self-esteem. The greatest love of all, y’know.

alwaysfiredup on September 21, 2012 at 4:56 PM

I’d probably have a substantial lead right now if I was the nominee

Were, were, were, Mr. Pundit. “If I were the nominee.”

Granted, the subjunctive mood is hard to grasp among members of the not-too-bright community.

But still …

Er … Palate cleanser, “here,” heartache, dude?

JackieB on September 21, 2012 at 4:56 PM

herm leadsby 2 in ubekibekistanstan

t8stlikchkn on September 21, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Why was it a weak field ? Was a field of Forbes, McCain, Hatch, E. Dole, Keyes and Kasich any stronger ?

runner on September 21, 2012 at 4:57 PM

If the goal, purely and simply, is beating Obama, then yeah, I think Mitt had the best chance in a weak primary field. Anyone feel otherwise?

excerpt: Allahpundit

.
Me. Santorum had a better chance.

Stoic Patriot on September 21, 2012 at 4:41 PM

.
I’m with you Stoic’, but we’re beyond that now.

listens2glenn on September 21, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Hermain Cain, put over the top by the votes of all his on the side lovely ladies!

astonerii on September 21, 2012 at 4:57 PM

And if I had wings I could fly.

kim roy on September 21, 2012 at 4:58 PM

The math was presented to the entire damned world in Tampa…

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:51 PM

The entire Republcan establishment, nominating rules, main stream media, Fox News, and money bags of the Republican party is what gave Mitt the nomination. If all 5 were for any other candidate, we would have another nominee.

What precisely did Mitt do to win otherwise? What speech? What policy issue? What interview? What spectacular debate? Name me the 3 things that Mitt DID to win?

He hid and let the process win for him. Rope a doped to victory.

KMav on September 21, 2012 at 5:00 PM

And if I had wings I could fly.

kim roy on September 21, 2012 at 4:58 PM

If I was rich… I would have more money…

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Dear Mr. Allah,

You got through an entire post without once using (that’d be “deploying” on your planet) the word “here .” Congtarulations for that.

We haven’t seen “palate cleanser” for weeks now, er “here,” Did your prose style grow up?

PS. That “War on Bacon” riff is the most hysterically funny thing that Hot Air has ever conceived. It is a wonder to behold in its idiocy.

Keep up the good work.

JackieB on September 21, 2012 at 4:48 PM

.
No use trying to get on your good side, is there?

listens2glenn on September 21, 2012 at 5:01 PM

I’ve noticed that! And I live in Austin! Man, if Obama has lost Austin…

And about the guy supposedly ‘lynching his chair’ in Austin … I am pretty sure the dude is just trying to stop liberals from stealing his chair. Someone actually took the time to scrape a Romney sticker off my truck last week.. Our liberals are nuts around here. Seriously nuts.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM

bitsy, I wrote on that newspaper’s site and told them what fools they were and that that reporter was a bully. I would have liked to have taken a shovel to her head if she trespassed on my property and lied like she did:”Sir, we have cameras rolling and you are talking to me.”…….what’s that’s got to do with his telling her she was tresspassing and asking her to leave (nicely at first)……
I’m glad I don’t live in Austin. I’m afraid there would be a few altercations.

avagreen on September 21, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Don’t trust the polls this year. Look around. There are very few bumper sticker on cars, for either side. It’s an unusually unusual year.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Agreed. I live in a deep, deep blue SF Bay Area suburb. Occasional Obama bumper stickers, but that’s all. I have only seen a “single” lawn sign for Obama, which matches the single lawn sign I’ve seen for Romney. Four years ago Obama signs were plastered in front of every other house. The Libs I know would still vote for Obama, but I wonder if they’ll bother to vote at all this year. The few conservatives I know are chomping at the bit to vote against Obama, even though it’s a futile gesture here in California.

Do my observations match others in blue areas?

mpthompson on September 21, 2012 at 5:02 PM

I’m the King of Siam.

Bishop on September 21, 2012 at 5:02 PM

JackieB on September 21, 2012 at 4:48 PM

JackieB on September 21, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Pedantic.

sharrukin on September 21, 2012 at 5:02 PM

He’s right.

Romney is the worst candidate of the field we could have chosen, which is why the State Media cleared the field for Romney in the primaries, taking on each alternative as they popped into consideration.

The Democrats have been preparing to run against Romney since 2010, and Romney has to ignore his own record to present himself as anything but Obama-lite.

Romney might still win because Obama and friends have done so much damage to the country, but if Romney wins any of the other major Republican candidates could have won.

18-1 on September 21, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I don’t know. Romney may be the best candidate *at this time* (note the disclaimer) because of the media’s constant hysterical shrieking about anything and everything and the glut of low information voters out there.

Romney is so bland that all they can do is BS nonsense like dogs and tax forms and dubious tape recordings and out and out lies, most of which are easily combated.

On the other hand, Cain would have been on the defensive half the time with the women and his background and, let’s face it, he’s not as disciplined with regards to soundbites.

So it’s hard to say. I liked Cain and especially Gingrich, but knew *at this time* they would have been nightmare candidates in some respects.

That’s not fair and we shouldn’t gauge our decisions upon media reaction, but it would have been extremely difficult to get around all the static generated.

kim roy on September 21, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Do my observations match others in blue areas?

mpthompson on September 21, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Southern California, haven’t seen anything Romney (bumper sticker, lawn sign). Seen a few Obama stickers, but only a fraction of what it was like 4 years ago. Interest in the election seems very low.

El_Terrible on September 21, 2012 at 5:06 PM

I have been a supporter of Cain, but 40 days before an election these types of comments are not helpful at all. If Romney and Cain were swapped places, would he appreciate Romney saying the exact same things? Does the GOP have any team players?

mpthompson
on September 21, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Cain was always too proud of himself and thought because he could smirk good, that made him a good candidate.

I’m glad he left the race…….way too late IMHO. But, he was in it for the glory despite his stupidity (“those mountains in Afghanistan were TOOOO high”) If he’d left sooner, he could have helped a few more get more support. Since he’s been treated on Fox as if he knows something, that old self pride is sneaking up on him, and he thinks he can begin the show off again and start dissing other people and gain something…..he does….Disrespect.

avagreen on September 21, 2012 at 5:07 PM

He was on Greta last night and he can speak.

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM

In an extremely clear, no-nonsense, FACT BASED way. Like only Palin can on our side and no one else.

Too bad we are where we are today.

riddick on September 21, 2012 at 5:10 PM

The math was presented to the entire damned world in Tampa…

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 4:51 PM

The entire Republcan establishment, nominating rules, main stream media, Fox News, and money bags of the Republican party is what gave Mitt the nomination. If all 5 were for any other candidate, we would have another nominee.

What precisely did Mitt do to win otherwise? What speech? What policy issue? What interview? What spectacular debate? Name me the 3 things that Mitt DID to win?

He hid and let the process win for him. Rope a doped to victory.

KMav on September 21, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Yup… You certainly did win that trophy all right. No, for the love of god please pull your head out of your ass and quit sulking like a spoiled child.

Mitt won, because unlike any other candidate, he managed to amass 10,031,336 primary votes, won 42 states and collected 1524 delegate votes. Nobody else even came remotely close. Yes… that is the MATH, and it’s obviously way to damn hard for you to understand.

SWalker on September 21, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Do my observations match others in blue areas?

mpthompson on September 21, 2012 at 5:02 PM

I’ve seen almost as many Ron Paul stickers as Obama stickers. You have really got to give them credit for optimism in the face of adversity.

bitsy on September 21, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Gingrich would’ve definitely been 1000x fun. Palin even more so.

sauldalinsky on September 21, 2012 at 4:46 PM

I agree. I, personally, would be having more fun if Palin ran/won. I’m only mildly appeased with Paul Ryan on the ticket.

Fallon on September 21, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Don’t laugh at Cain! He was the Republican’s best and brightest for a couple of weeks.

ZippyZ on September 21, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2