Can Herman Cain Win?

I have been following the Republican Presidential candidates debates with a great deal of interest. I have been charmed and disappointed a few times and I was beginning to think that Mitt Romney was Mr Inevitable. I actually voted for Mitt Romney in the 2008 Florida Primary, so I was thinking it was something I could live with. He’s not everything I hope for, but he seems very smart, prepared, and he’s NOT Barack Obama. Yet, there are things that bother me, and I would get off the Romney bus if I found a more compelling candidate who could also WIN.

I am familiar with Herman Cain. I like him a lot, but I did not consider him early in the process because of the win-ability issue. I did not take him seriously. But, with each new poll, it seems that he is getting a response from potential voters that now makes him a real contender. Of course, other contenders have been abandoned by the likely voters who have answered these polls. What would it take to give him the staying power he would need to be the eventual nominee?

Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Ron Paul, and Mitt Romney have all failed the smell test with conservatives. Bachmann seemed like a lightweight. Perry seemed soft on illegal immigration. Paul seems like a flake on foreign policy. Romney has a record of supporting big government health care and Global Warming initiatives. Can Herman Cain maintain his high approval with an electorate that wants a winner that they can believe in?

Cain is getting a close look from more people than ever. The key for him will be how Independents warm up to him. A recent Rasmussen poll showed him as a 2 point winner over Obama. If he keeps making the sale to more an more Americans, then win-ability will no longer be a problem.

I am going to keep watching, and right now I am more open minded about the real possibility of a President Cain.

Aren’t the 99% to blame?


Occupy Gainesville has been going on for over a week, and it’s of little consequence here. But it is pretty much a clone of the Wall Street version that is scape-goating the 1% richest Americans as the cause of all our troubles. This is not only infantile. It is incorrect.

I believe the errors of the Occupy movement begin with the government propaganda coming from Washington that tells us we need more money to solve the current economic crisis. Actually, it has been the rampant creation of money that has gotten us here, and government spending is only a part of it. Private credit, which many Americans have abused, is the rest of it.

Easy credit has increased the money supply far and above everything we need, so that it has inflated the price of everything. Most Americans have credit card debt. Many Americans bought overpriced homes before 2008. And many Americans have student loans in excess of a year’s salary, and sometimes 2 or 3 years’ salary. And we have not even touched car loans.

I guess the point I am making is that the vast majority of us can trace our own troubles back to decisions we have made about how we live our lives. I know that my own financial well-being, or lack thereof, is much more a result of choices I have made. You don’t have to be rich to be greedy. All you have to do is charge something you cannot really afford to join that club. What makes you both greedy and ignorant is to think that someone else should bail you out.

So, be angry if you want to. Shake your fist at the big pigs at the top who were too big to fail. (Actually, we should have let them fail, and then jailed the CEOs for malfeasance, and impeached every politician who enabled them.) Or, you can shake your fist at the millions of little piggies who demand that the wise and prudent bail them out. (I don’t think there are enough wise and prudent Americans to pull this off.) At any rate, it would be good for yourself and America if you would start by changing your own evil ways and consider meeting your own obligations.