• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Herman Cain: For real or not

Is Herman Cain for Real?

  • Yes he can win the nomination

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • No, He's just the GOP's flavor of the week

    Votes: 12 41.4%
  • Other/Unsure

    Votes: 7 24.1%
  • Something else. Like maybe a Turtle

    Votes: 4 13.8%

  • Total voters
    29
I hope that there aren't too many Republicans who delude themselves into thinking this. Otherwise they'll have to find out they were wrong the hard way.

Why exactly would he have a serious disadvantage?
 
Cain's biggest plus is that he is not Perry or Romney.

You'd be surprise :-D.

I voted other since it depends on the media willingness to investigate his past decisions and make it a headline.

I think Rommey is destine to win with him having the blessings of Goldman Sachs. Regular americans don't really care or don't have the time so they pick whomever msm tells them to pick.
 
Last edited:
Nobody is going to have a serious disadvantage against Obama.

Cain's biggest plus is that he is not Perry or Romney.

I wouldnt put all my eggs in that basket...the fight for the whitehouse hasnt even started yet perry...it wont start until the gop pick their candidate...
and there are indications all over the place that moderates are getting sick of the far right and libertarian hard line positions...as I said eventually would happen..
I think its beginning...
 
Why exactly would he have a serious disadvantage?

Any reason, depending on the candidate. Bachmann, for example, would start with a really serious disadvantage that she would probably never overcome, no matter how unpopular Obama is. Same with Palin, and to a lesser degree, Perry.
 
I was a bit disappointed when Caine piled on Perry over the racial slur on a rock thing but all in all I really like him and I bet if Romney wins he picks Cain for VP.

Yanno thats a strong possibility...good thinkin sawyer...
 
I was a bit disappointed when Caine piled on Perry over the racial slur on a rock thing but all in all I really like him and I bet if Romney wins he picks Cain for VP.
If Romney gets the nomination, Cain will be in charge for getting pizzas for the celebration. That's as close he will get to any ticket. He would be just another Palin.
 
I was a bit disappointed when Caine piled on Perry over the racial slur on a rock thing but all in all I really like him and I bet if Romney wins he picks Cain for VP.

I'm not sure I agree. Romney is running on his experience in the private sector already, so I don't think he'd want to take another person who is running on private sector experience as his VP. I bet he'd pick someone socially conservative to try to draw votes from Republicans who aren't thrilled with him.
 
To be honest, I think he got a chance. There hasn't really been that many flavours of the week, apart from the begining.

Bachmann: When she was doing her best, she only had a positive intensity score of 13 and was polling around 11. This is not a tea party election. Her surge was entirely due to social conservatives finding her more appealing. If Rick Perry didn't come into the race, she would have remained popular among social conervatives. Her fall was mostly due to Rick Perry entering the race.

Rick Perry: He was next in turn. He was hyped up, and was the natural choice for everyone who didn't want Romney. No one could really know he was that terrible in debating. After tons of screw ups, he has lost all credibility. If he didn't screw up, he would have been the front runner right now.

Herman Cain: Most of his support is due to Rick Perry screwing up. Republicans are a little bit hesitant to nominate someone without governmental experience, but they like Herman Cain very much.

If Cain doesn't screw up, then he will have a shot for the nomination, since he has the highest positive intensive score of everyone in the race, he is a good speaker and he has lots of private sector experience. For the Republican party sake, Cain better do well in the future. If he screws up, the Republican party will nominate Mitt Romney, and they will be despirited. If Romney is going to win, he shouldn't win on walkover.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Of the other candidates, I think none of them will experience Herman Cains surge.

Newt Gingrich:: Career politican, had two bad affair, not interesting. Also some of his opinions are quite unpopular. He can not get a surge like Cain, because once he get media attention, he will collapse. nice guy for VP though.

Rick Santorum:: Too social conservative. I think it has been pretty obvious from this election that fiscal conservativism is more important then being a social conservative. He can only get a surge among social conservartives like bachmann.

Ron Paul: His opinions won't be able to stand the daylight. It is too easy for media to crush him.

Jon Huntsman: No explanation needed. No chance, even though I like the guy.

I think the only ones who got any chance left is Herman Cain and Mitt Romney. I don't think there are going to be any other surges. If Cain screws up, Romney will win. If Cain doesn't screw up, he will have a shot for the nomination. Judging from his media performance the last 2 weeks, he is doing quite well.
 
Last edited:
It's also kind of weird/disappointing that Huntsman seems to have taken a "I'm too damn sane for these right-wing crazies" campaign strategy. He's way more fiscally conservative than conservatives or misguidedly-adoring liberals give him credit for, yet torpedoed himself and blew what might have been a good chance at the nomination. I don't get it. Maybe he really is more moderate than his record would suggest?

First, I love that it seems like since the last time we talked you did do some research into Huntsman. I wish more would.

Second, I kind of wonder if its an issue of being almost too honest (as much as a politician is able to be) for his own good. He breaks with many republicans on global warming and evolution and such and I think it bothers him that based on those type of disagreements he's largely being written off by people. And as such rather than trying to combat it is just embracing it. Which I think is a stupid move, but its the only reason I can kind of figure that is causing it.
 
Why exactly would he have a serious disadvantage?

Cain?

He's got NO government experience at all, something that is likely to make people seriously stop and pause when it comes to their President. Historically speaking I believe its more than 90% of our Presidents have had either government executive experience or experience as a General...the two components of the job of the POTUS as chief executive of the country and Commander in Chief. From there the next group that is largest represented is senators, being viewed as the next "highest" type of political experience to being an executive of a state/country. Finally, the smallest would be those running as a Representitive.

Cain would have to buck a 200+ year trend of this country trusting its Presidency to people with relative experience. That alone is a significant disadvantage he would need to overcome on a national level. One of the biggest things Republicans had on Obama last time out was Experience and they drummed it constantly...turning around to place someone with even less relevant experience the following cycle is not going to go well.

When it comes to foreign policy as well, I believe the gap between Obama and Cain is going to be gigantic and a significant disadvantage for Cain when it came to those things in any kind of debate.
 
If this battle spreads it will only help romny ...and hurt the far right... Has the traditional GOP finally had enough of a handful of teapartiers hijacking the agenda, I think so ...I think theres lots going on behind the GOP scene...that isnt being reported

A top House Republican on Tuesday attacked conservative tax activist Grover Norquist in a blistering floor speech, saying his no-taxes pledge has “paralyzed” Congress from tackling the deficit.
In a short but powerful speech, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), laid out a remarkable indictment against one of the most powerful figures in conservative politics.


Frank Wolf rips Grover Norquist for ?paralyzing? Congress - Seung Min Kim - POLITICO.com
Sigh...remember back when there were no Tea Party politicians and the republicans and democrats worked together to resolve the nations problems...

Yeah...I dont either.

A handful of Tea party oriented republicans elected within the last few years oppose the insane spending that has gone on in the fed for decades...and it is the Tea Party's fault. I dont know who is more foolish...the politicians that say it or the muppets that believe it.
 
Any reason, depending on the candidate. Bachmann, for example, would start with a really serious disadvantage that she would probably never overcome, no matter how unpopular Obama is. Same with Palin, and to a lesser degree, Perry.

His name isn't spelled Bachmann and she has no chance. His name isn't Palin nor Perry either. The accusation was that Cain would start with a serious disadvantage. I asked why that would be.

Now, I then said that nobody that runs against Obama would have a serious disadvantage. Bachmann nor Palin, and it seems less and less likely that Perry will be running against Obama.

Things can change but it seems right now Romney and Cain are the front runners. Will either be at a serious disadvantage and if you believe so, why?
 
Cain?

He's got NO government experience at all, something that is likely to make people seriously stop and pause when it comes to their President. Historically speaking I believe its more than 90% of our Presidents have had either government executive experience or experience as a General...the two components of the job of the POTUS as chief executive of the country and Commander in Chief. From there the next group that is largest represented is senators, being viewed as the next "highest" type of political experience to being an executive of a state/country. Finally, the smallest would be those running as a Representitive.

I think right now this can be a major advantage. In the end though, Obama really had no government experience. He really had no practical experience at all. Granted, one can point out how that didn't turn out so well, but Cain does have practicle experience.

If he would argue that he refuses to be and is running against being another politician, I believe it could make him even more popular. Do you really want another politician running things?

Cain would have to buck a 200+ year trend of this country trusting its Presidency to people with relative experience. That alone is a significant disadvantage he would need to overcome on a national level. One of the biggest things Republicans had on Obama last time out was Experience and they drummed it constantly...turning around to place someone with even less relevant experience the following cycle is not going to go well.

Granted being a general does have political implications but Ike was a soldier. You do touch on the Obama thing and that would be the only negative IMO on not having political experience.

When it comes to foreign policy as well, I believe the gap between Obama and Cain is going to be gigantic and a significant disadvantage for Cain when it came to those things in any kind of debate.

Obama would have an advantage as far as foriegn policy. But he has got us into another war, bombed Yemen and Cain will be able to argue, how much further are we going to escalate this war that is doing nothing but killing our kids.

I also believe this will be an election of 75% economy and 20% how do we get our soldiers home with 5% let's blow more people up.
 
Cain would have to buck a 200+ year trend of this country trusting its Presidency to people with relative experience. That alone is a significant disadvantage he would need to overcome on a national level. One of the biggest things Republicans had on Obama last time out was Experience and they drummed it constantly...turning around to place someone with even less relevant experience the following cycle is not going to go well.

That may be true, but Obama supporters can't criticize him for it, because they know that Barack Obama had less management experience than Cain. By discrediting Cain with his political experience, then they will discredit Obama and make themselves look like hypocrites.

When it comes to foreign policy as well, I believe the gap between Obama and Cain is going to be gigantic and a significant disadvantage for Cain when it came to those things in any kind of debate.
From what I see, Cain is good enough. He knows more than Perry, and he learns faster. Also, his non-interventionism policy for Libya will be popular.

If Obama wants to beat Cain, he need to paint Cain as an extremist. To focus on his lack of experience didn't work in 2008 and won't work now either.
 
Cain talking about Libya. Something tells me, he won't have too much problems with foreign policy. ;)

 
Cain is the GOP flavor of the month in a store full of rotten choices. I like Gary Johnson. What's happened to Ron Paul? Too bright?
 
I think right now this can be a major advantage. In the end though, Obama really had no government experience. He really had no practical experience at all. Granted, one can point out how that didn't turn out so well, but Cain does have practicle experience.

That's just not true, at all. I mean, its patentedly false. I'm not even sure why to continue to go forward when that line alone obvious shows you're not trying to have any kind of honest discussion but just wanting to hunker down into the world view you've fashioned for yourself.

Obama spent multiple years in a state legislature, and a number of years in the federal legislature. You're just wrong, factually and completely.

Do you really want another politician running things?

Its not what I want. You asked about a disadvantage. Unless Cain massively was able to spin it expertly, which is yet to be seen so can't be assumed, its likely to be a massive disadvantage based on historical trends in regards to the electorate and their voting record with regards to experience.

Obama would have an advantage as far as foriegn policy. But he has got us into another war, bombed Yemen and Cain will be able to argue, how much further are we going to escalate this war that is doing nothing but killing our kids.

Cain definitely has potential arguments to make, the problem is making them. Making them in an articulate and knowledgable way that imparts confidence in people regarding their grasp. Obama has, if nothing, a decent grasp of Foreign policy after living it day in day out for the past few years. Cain has little to no experience with it save for a few things he may've read or been told. The presentation of who grasps the situation and understands it better when it gets to the nitty gritty is likely to look decidingly different as already presented in some of Cain's responses concerning foreign policy in the current debates.

Not to mention the fact that I don't believe a Republican message of "Bring the troops home" is going to resonate at ALL with anyone outside of their core base as those people aren't going to forget the past 12 years prior where the Republicans were roundly beating the war drums and attacking the patriotism of people calling to "bring the troops home". I could be wrong on that, but I really see zero indication to lead me to believe that somehow this argument would actually win Cain any significant support or votes other than what he'd already have.
 
That may be true, but Obama supporters can't criticize him for it, because they know that Barack Obama had less management experience than Cain. By discrediting Cain with his political experience, then they will discredit Obama and make themselves look like hypocrites.

They can, correctly, however point out Obama may not have had executive experience in the government but had political experience. They can mock the notion of being the CEO of a Pizza Company is somehow a parrellel to being the chief executive of a nation which functions significantly difference. Additionally, Obama currently does now have executive experience, DIRECT executive experience in relation to the job.

I was one of the biggest critics of Obama's experience on this forum in the 2008 election. Frankly, the hypocrites to me would be more the Republicans who made such a big deal about experience nominating someone so woefully underqualified as Cain more so than Democrats who'd have a legitimate argument criticizing Cain's experience when its less historically relevant to the office of the President then even Obama who was arguably the least qualified candidate based on experience ever to win.

And this isn't just about "experience" in the way its used in most campaigns. Painting a politician as unexperienced is one thing. Its an entirely different thing and more damaging to be able to paint them as someone who doesn't even fit into the realm. It'd be like taking the 15 year tenured local manager of a McDonalds and suggesting him as the Chief of Staff for the White House because he's got experience managing people and thus can do the job.

To politically involved people, especially partisans looking for a way to justify "their guy" in their minds, things can be contorted easily in their head to directly link him being the CEO of a regional pizza chain to him having relevant experience to run the nation. However, to the average person, that leap is going to look like insanity imho unless its expertly massaged and presented right and I haven't seen anything yet out of Cain to make me think he can sell that to the masses.
 
Last edited:
Cain is the GOP flavor of the month in a store full of rotten choices. I like Gary Johnson. What's happened to Ron Paul? Too bright?
Ron Paul is a nut! Most Americans are slightly conservative, and want a safety net.

Also, what solutions do Ron Paul have, apart from abolishing everything?
 
New polls have come out today, showing Herman Cain with large primary leads in West Virginia, North Carolina, Nebraska, and a 24 point lead in his home state of Georgia. This is coupled with some strong momentum in national polling over the last two weeks. So what do you think? Does he have a real chance of winning the nomination or is he just the current holder of the "Anyone but Romney" weak support right now? I personally think he will fade in the coming three months as this "Anyone but Romney" feeling continues to cycle between Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain, and maybe Palin if she decides to run.

Ya, he's for real. A for real clone of Bush/Obama.
 
They can, correctly, however point out Obama may not have had executive experience in the government but had political experience. They can mock the notion of being the CEO of a Pizza Company is somehow a parrellel to being the chief executive of a nation which functions significantly difference. Additionally, Obama currently does now have executive experience, DIRECT executive experience in relation to the job.
Obama's only experience is being a senator. That's not impressive!

Also Herman Cain has much more experience than a CEO of a pizza company. He responds to the critique quite well, and mention the dozens of achievements in his life.

I was one of the biggest critics of Obama's experience on this forum in the 2008 election. Frankly, the hypocrites to me would be more the Republicans who made such a big deal about experience nominating someone so woefully underqualified as Cain more so than Democrats who'd have a legitimate argument criticizing Cain's experience when its less historically relevant to the office of the President then even Obama who was arguably the least qualified candidate based on experience ever to win.
Both of them are hypocrites, but what I'm saying is that the management experience of Obama is less than Cain. Hence, they won't be able to criticize Cain for not being experienced enough. Also, Cain can criticize Obama for being a lightweight career politician. Mark my word, the experience tactic will fail in the general election. Most people don't even want a politician.
 
Last edited:
That's just not true, at all. I mean, its patentedly false. I'm not even sure why to continue to go forward when that line alone obvious shows you're not trying to have any kind of honest discussion but just wanting to hunker down into the world view you've fashioned for yourself.

Obama spent multiple years in a state legislature, and a number of years in the federal legislature. You're just wrong, factually and completely.

His experience was in voting "present". His Senate experience consisted of running for president and being against things he then became for once he was president.

Its not what I want. You asked about a disadvantage. Unless Cain massively was able to spin it expertly, which is yet to be seen so can't be assumed, its likely to be a massive disadvantage based on historical trends in regards to the electorate and their voting record with regards to experience.

The history is that very few non politicans have run. Who would have guessed that a (R) would ever win Ted Kennedy's old seat? An African American had never won before.

Cain definitely has potential arguments to make, the problem is making them. Making them in an articulate and knowledgable way that imparts confidence in people regarding their grasp. Obama has, if nothing, a decent grasp of Foreign policy after living it day in day out for the past few years. Cain has little to no experience with it save for a few things he may've read or been told. The presentation of who grasps the situation and understands it better when it gets to the nitty gritty is likely to look decidingly different as already presented in some of Cain's responses concerning foreign policy in the current debates.

Seems to me the video posted shows that he can indeed make an articulate arguement concerning foriegn policy. Even the left is asking what we are doing in Libya even if they only ask it behind closed doors.

Not to mention the fact that I don't believe a Republican message of "Bring the troops home" is going to resonate at ALL with anyone outside of their core base as those people aren't going to forget the past 12 years prior where the Republicans were roundly beating the war drums and attacking the patriotism of people calling to "bring the troops home". I could be wrong on that, but I really see zero indication to lead me to believe that somehow this argument would actually win Cain any significant support or votes other than what he'd already have.

"To get our finances in order, we have no choice but to bring the troops home".
 
Cain is the GOP flavor of the month in a store full of rotten choices. I like Gary Johnson. What's happened to Ron Paul? Too bright?
When Democrats and liberal pundits are on TV touting the value of Ron Paul, its a pretty safe bet that they know who they would like to see run against their guy...
 
9-9-9
Cain’s proposal, which he has been touting for several weeks, would restructure the tax code to include a 9 percent corporate flat tax. a 9 percent personal flat tax and a 9 percent national sales tax. Taxes on repatriated profits would also be eliminated along with payroll taxes and the estate tax.

As for experience, Mr. Herman Cain is the Founder of T.H.E. New Voice Inc., and has been its Chairman of the Board since 2004 and Chief Executive Officer and President since 1996. Mr. Cain served as Chief Executive Officer and President of Digital Restaurant Solutions since July 1999. He served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Godfather's Pizza, Inc. from 1988 to December 1996 and its President since 1986. He served as Chief Executive Officer and President of National Restaurant ... Association from December 1996 to June 1999. From 1977 to 1988, he joined Pillsbury Company and served as its Vice President of Corporate Systems and Services and served there in Senior position until 1982. He began work at Pillsbury's Burger King Division in 1982. Nine months later, he managed 400 Burger King Units in the Philadelphia region, AGCO Corp.'s poorest performer. in 1988, he led his Executive team in a buyout of AGCO Corp. from Pillsbury. Mr. Cain started his career at the Department of the U.S. Navy, as a Mathematician. Upon completion of his work with the U.S. Navy, he served as a Business Analyst of The Coca-Cola Company. He served as the Chairman of The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City from 1995 to 1996. He served as Chairman of New Voice, where he developed the organization into a pro-business voice through national debates and speeches concerning healthcare reform, employment policies and taxation. From 1994 to 1995, he served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of National Restaurant Association. In 1999, Mr. Cain sought to leverage his restaurant experience with the technology market and he became CEO and President of Retail DNA. He has been a Director of Aquila Inc. since 1992 and also serves as its Lead Independent Director. He serves as a Director of Hallmark Cards Inc., Godfather's Pizza, Inc. and Retail DNA. He serves as a Director of UtiliCorp. United Inc., a subsidiary of Utilicorp Canada Finance Corp. He serves as Director of Bell Research Companies, Inc. He served as Director of Whirlpool Corp. since April 2005. Mr. Cain served as a Director of AGCO Corp. from December 20, 2004 to March 17, 2011. He served as a Director of Nabisco Holdings Corp. since 1995, National Restaurant Association (NRA) since 1988, Reader's Digest Association Inc. since June 2001 and Whirlpool Corp. from 1992 to December 2003. He served as a Director of Nabisco Inc. of Nabisco Holdings Corp. He served as a Member of The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City since 1992. He then became a senior advisor to the 1996 Dole/Kemp campaign for the Presidency. He is a Member of the Board of Trustees of Morehouse College. He was appointed to serve on the U.S. Economic Growth and Tax Reform Commission.
 
Back
Top Bottom