Done Fighting

From 23% to 8% support in Iowa in one month, Herman Cain’s race for the presidency ends. Herman Cain suspended his bid for president on Saturday, claiming there was too much “hurt caused on me and my family”.

Cain had been rising in the polls since late September, gaining a large amount of media attention. From the increase in media attention came a large amount of criticism on his political views and an increasing amount of allegations that proved to be too much to beat. As he said in his speech suspending his campaign, it is “not because I am not a fighter”.

When Cain suspended his bid he was at 8% support in Iowa, tied with Representative Michele Bachmann. If that isn’t a reason to suspend his campaign I don’t know what is. 

Although Herman Cain was not the best candidate for the presidential nomination, the candidates we are left to choose from are not exactly the best choices either. With that said who will Cain choose to endorse? 

In September, when the candidates were asked to hypothetically say who they would support if they were not in the race Cain said he would support speaker Gingrich, whom he “has the greatest admiration for in all seriousness, because of his history and his depth of knowledge. With Gingrich at the top of the polls this seems like a possibility for Cain. 

(go to 9:58 seconds or use this link:  http://youtu.be/qVMa1rVv7XA?t=9m58s)

Although Cain joked about supporting Romney if he were to throw out his jobs growth plan and replace it with 9 9 9, it doesn’t seem like Cain would support Romney whether he did that or not. Let’s get real, Cain is a tea party, very conservative republican and Romney has been criticized for being too liberal. However, Romney has surprised us by gaining the endorsement of high-profile conservative Ramesh Ponnuru. Although saying Romney’s “health care plan in Massachusetts was Obamacare in one state. He’s a flip-flopper. Inauthentic”, Ponnuru also said, “[Romney] is the candidate that should be elected” in the primaries. 

We have seen almost everything in this race for the republican nominee. We have seen a candidate forget his reform plan, inappropriate jokes about electric fences and foreign policy, unsupported accusations towards certain drugs, candidates acting drunk at a speech and much more. As we have witnessed so much in this race even before the primaries have even started, anything can happen. Cain may surprise us all and endorse a candidate we wouldn’t have even have thought about.

Sources and articles used for quotes and pictures:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/us/politics/herman-cain-suspends-his-presidential-campaign.html?ref=politics

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/high-profile-conservative-endorses-romney/?scp=1&sq=romney%20endorsement&st=cse 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/11/30/us/politics/ups-and-downs-of-the-cain-candidacy.html

Who will it be?

It seems, just as Herman Cain’s campaign dramatically comes to an end, Newt Gingrich took Cain’s spot at the top. Nearly 1 month ago Cain was 23% support in Iowa, while Gingrich was at 7% support. Now the tables have turned, putting Gingrich at 25% and Cain out of the race. 

What could this mean for Romney who is now at 18% support and in third place, less than one month before the Iowa caucus? 

Romney has lingered near the top of the polls for nearly the entire race, never really reaching front runner status but always staying in the line of sight. Now, as we approach the Iowa caucus, Romney is being beaten out by Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich. 

Many have claimed that Romney is most likely to gain the nomination for the republican candidate, although he has always been near the top and in the media, but never the number one. It seems Rick Perry with 6% support and Michelle Bachmann with 8% support in Iowa, have almost no chance of winning after the many stumbles both have had throughout their campaigns. 

Seeing as almost all of the candidates have had their day’s in the sun, I had though John Huntsman might come out from nowhere and rise to the top of the polls, just as Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, and now Newt Gingrich have done. With only one month till the Iowa Caucus it doesn’t seem like this will happen. Seeing as, Huntsman is at only 2% support in Iowa as of November 30^th. 

Will Gingrich maintain his spot at the top through the primaries and gain the vote from republicans or will Romney be the republican choice in the end?

What surprises me is the fact that Herman Cain got so much criticism from allegations of a 13 year affair and dropped in the polls, later suspending his candidacy. However, Newt Gingrich had an affair as well in the 90’s and is now married to the woman he had the affair with. It is not the affair that surprises me as much as the fact that he was on the committee to impeach Clinton for lying about his affair, while at the same time he had hypocritically carried out affair as well. Why this hasn’t hit the media beats me. Maybe because it is old news, or maybe the media will pay more attention the longer Gingrich stays at the top of the polls. 

Seeing as most of the candidates have only stayed front runner for a month or less maybe Gingrich being at the top of the polls now is not such a good thing. We will just have to wait and see what the outcome will be. 

Sources:

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/03/iowa-poll-gingrich-leading-the-pack/

The Politician and the Person

Forget his complete lack of understanding of foreign policy, his many ignorant comments, and the fact that he has little political experience. After, almost a month of being the front runner, Herman Cain is only now being pressured to step out of the race. 

Herman Cain’s alleged 13 year affair is what is causing some to rethink their view on Cain? An affair should be the least of anyone’s worries. How Herman Cain even became the front runner is what baffles me. 

 

When I think of a politician or a presidential candidate, I want to support them or oppose them based upon whether their political views and stance on topics is similar to my positions and whether or not they have actually done anything noteworthy as a politician. I also factor in whether or not they seem capable of achieving what they want to achieve. 

Throughout his campaign Herman Cain seemed to speak before going over in his head what he wanted to say. Herman Cain hasn’t seemed to take this campaign seriously, making a plethora of inappropriate jokes. Talking about an electric fence on the border, claiming democrats are brainwashing blacks, and much more. 

Why Herman Cain was ever a serious contender in the race for the republican nomination still surpasses my understanding. 

In my opinion there are two parts to a politician; the politician and the person. The politician is who we vote for; their views and policy positions. The other half of the politician is the person, their personal life and what they do outside of politics. It is possible to like the politician but find the person irresponsible and unethical. One example would be Bill Clinton. Although, I like him as a politician, he would not exactly be the kind of guy I would want to be friends with. Many always said the opposite for George W Bush. He’s the kind of guy everyone wants to be friends with but they don’t necessarily want him as a politician.  

It should not matter that Herman Cain had a 13 year affair with someone. If he wants to ruin his personal life, that is his own prerogative. When choosing a presidential candidate we are not voting for the candidate we think is the best person, we are voting for the best politician. 

Herman Cain’s run for presidency should have been questioned long before the affair allegations, and even before the sexual harassment allegations. 

Now, my question is, will this turn into another John Edwards situation? Four years ago during the 2008 run for president John Edwards was found to have had an affair leading to investigation of how his campaign funds were spent. The biggest question was if he in fact was using campaign funds to cover up the affair. Now with everything that has happened with Herman Cain and all of the allegations that keep popping up out of the blue, you never know.

Campaign Ads.... Bob Dole

Here are a few campaign advertisments used for the Bob Dole campaign against Bush. Are they effective or not? This video shows four Dole advertisements and talks about the effectiveness. I think the one comparing and contrasting the two is somewhat effective however, who wants to read  words on the television. The first ad appeal to emotion a little more and to me seemed an effective ad at getting people to like him as a person and the second one is better at show who he is as a politician. Together they work well but who is going to watch both together? They can both be effective but in different ways.

Campaign Advertising

Is 30 to 60 seconds enough to persuade a person onto one side or the other in a presidential campaign. This video talks about the time of campaign ads and if it is better to have multiple 30 second ads or maybe just one 2 minute ad. Although two minute ad's may get more information in, in today's day and age everyone likes things quick and concise. We have talked about the media sound bite and it is true. No one will pay attention to a two minute ad unless it is really intriguing. 30 seconds is quick and to the point. It could go either way. To me it is all about the execution of the ad versus the time of the ad. If it is an interesting two minutes than it is effective but even a 30 second ad could be ineffective it is not properly executed.

Campaign Ads- Mike Dukakis

It is interesting to see in these ads that education is an important topic even in the 90’s. The first ad seems relevant and seems like it would be effective, seeing as education has always been an important topic for a lot of people. Here they are talking about how they are the type of ads that are engaging. It is interesting to see how engaging ads then, most likely would not be as engaging now mostly because of the rise in technology and what we can do with it now.

More Shockers....????

As much fun as the presidential debates are, as I commented in my last blog, I got through about 30 minutes of Wednesday night’s debate and had to shut it off and finish it later. 

The first answer by Herman Cain in the debate in Michigan, should have told me that this debate would, once again, reinforce the opinions I have about the republican candidates. 

In his answer to the first questions, Herman Cain continued to reinforce the fact that we need to strengthen the American economy. How exactly does he plan on doing so? That, I am not entirely sure. 30 seconds of his first answer continues to repeat that we need to strengthen the American economy and the second half of his answer stressed the fact that a “dollar needs to be a dollar”. I understand he is talking about strengthening the value of the dollar and getting back its value but he doesn’t go any further in his answer.

The question Herman Cain was asked to answer was, how would he prevent Italy’s struggling economy from effecting the American economy. To me Herman Cain did not answer this question at all. He stressed what needs to be done with the American economy, but gave no way of actually fixing anything. Obviously, Maria Bartiromo felt as if Herman Cain did not answer the question either, based on her response. She tried to bring what Herman Cain said back to the original question, although tough to do. 

Herman Cain seems to do this a lot. He says what needs to be done but doesn’t explain it well, or even at all. 

However, Herman Cain was not the only one to falter at this debate. 

About 13 minutes into the debate, John Harwood, asked Mitt Romney about his changing positions on topics, including the bail out of the auto industries, through the years. Now, Mitt Romney responded, saying he is consistant and steady, using his long “marriage of twent…. Excuse me I’m going to get in trouble, 45 years”. Honestly, I don’t care that he and his wife has been together for 45 years. That is great and all, but I want him to use examples of the policy positions that have stayed the same throughout the years. 

His explanation about his view on the auto bailout contradicted the statement that he is steady and consistent because his view, once again, changed from what he had said before. 

 

On top of all that, there is Ron Paul, whose extremist positions make him not a viable candidate either. I agree that the debt from students coming out of college is extreme and ridiculous. However, due to the increasing demand for college degree’s in the workplace it does not seem like an option to get rid of all federal student aid and the federal department of education. I agree, maybe it needs to be fixed, but getting rid of it all together would cause more problems than it would help. If people can’t afford to go to school, then more people would be unemployed because they are not educated.

Let's just say the candidates need to go over their ideas a bit more, until they remember them or actually make sense in terms of everyone in our country.