Cain’s rise changes racial dimensions of presidential race

I’m surprised I haven’t heard it yet, but I’ll hear it soon enough, “The Republicans are just hyping Herman Cain so the Tea Party doesn’t look racist.”

There will also be the similar, “Oh, now the GOP throws a black candidate to try and out-black Obama.”

CNN ran an excellent analysis of the rise of Cain, a relatively historic mainstream black conservative candidate.

It is interesting that Cain has already taken the time to assert himself as the “blacker” of the two candidates as this article points out.

Cain has slowly earned his right wing stripes among values voters and his 9-9-9 policy, while not foolproof, does have some appeal to fiscal conservatives given the low, flat-tax rate.

With another GOP debate looming tonight, there is a somewhat uncomfortable question that hasn’t really been asked yet, can a black Republican really get elected?

That leads to the secondary question, if he does, can we put to bed some of this talk about the Republicans and Tea Partiers in particular, being racist?

The second question is easier: there is nothing inherently racist about either the Tea Party or the Republican Party. In fact, part of the reason for Cain’s rise is the Tea Party’s hatred distaste for Mitt Romney. While the polls have deemed Romney exceedingly electable, he’s not a true conservative.

Cain is and Tea Partiers appreciate that.

Would he have higher poll numbers if he were white? Maybe. Maybe not. We have no way of truly knowing.

We know that Republicans and conservatives hate soon-to-be-former President Obama. In fact, the majority of America has lost faith in Obama and believe his policies are destined to fail.

As a conservative, you hope that means plenty of people will vote for a Republican candidate no matter who it is.

Doesn’t that make Cain an even more appealing choice?

What will be interesting is to see how African-American and other minority voters respond to the former pizza giant.

Cain has said more than once that minorities, particularly African-Americans, have been brainwashed into believing they had to vote Democrat, had to vote for big government because they needed government help to survive.

Given that disproportionate number of people currently living in poverty from minority backgrounds, it may be fair to assume that since their well-being hasn’t improved since Obama took office,working-class minority voters would find Cain a satisfactory alternative.

Furthermore, it may assuage the “white guilt” of so many white voters who proudly voted for Obama (also ameliorating their concerns to not appear racist), then watched his presidency go up in flames if they have another minority candidate to vote for.

Oh, and did I mentioned Cain has steadily gotten better during debates, actually has some good ideas and has some experience in business outside of the financial sector (unlike Romney. Trust me, there’s a huge difference).

The 9-9-9 plan isn’t perfect, but the lower base taxes coupled with the sales tax is aimed at taxing wealth not just income. Unfortunately adding a tax to the books just gives the government something to raise, so it isn’t without flaws, but the guy has a plan.

Kudos to him for having the balls intestinal fortitude to put one forward. Obama has been in office three years (and campaigned for what seemed like three before that) yet still has no real long-term plan for addressing income inequality and our tax system.

The question I originally asked was could Herman Cain, as a black conservative, win an election? Well, Republicans hold an overwhelming majority in the most historically racist parts of the country if there is some concern about that.

If he loses votes it will be in those states, but when the alternative is another minority, what is a racist voter to do? Stay home?

A low turn-out favors Cain given the intensity of Tea Party support and their propensity for getting out for the vote. Maybe a few racist voters simply sit this one out, there are plenty of true-blue (well red) conservatives who will vote for Cain in southern states.

If the red states stay red, Cain can absolutely take purple states like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio and Missouri.

The current support received by Cain indicates that race is not a factor given his rise as a candidate is taking place in a race where his opponent is also a minority.

Furthermore, Cain’s current lead is over a host of other stuffy white people, the same kinds of faces who have run for president in America for more than 200 years.

Elected Cain doesn’t mean America is  post-racial or even less racist than it was three years ago. Race relations haven’t changed much since America elected its first black president.

Electing Herman Cain would give America the chance to have its first ever successful black president. That sounds like change we can all believe in.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

8 thoughts on “Cain’s rise changes racial dimensions of presidential race

  1. Sorry, you “young right” guy! I like the tagline! But Cain is a joke when it comes to Presidential politics. He may be able to put together a great pizza (although, to be honest, I’ve never had a Godfather Pizza…have you?) but, as far as putting together an “adviser team”, he must sit in the back of the bus…er…class! His apparent “economic adviser” has neither an economics degree nor the experience required to put together and evaluate a tax proposal that seeks to replace the current complicated, loopholed, impossible to decipher, tax code. Rich Lowrie is a financial planner for Wells Fargo, in Ohio. LOL From experience, I can tell you that financial planners are good with the Rule of 72, putting together untestable retirement plans, and telling their clients they need to save more if they ever hope to retire! They are incapable of being able to pit together a tax plan for the most sophisticated economic model on the planet, then proceed to test it in every possible scenario so that it at least APPEARS like it might work!

    As for just a few examples: Cain’s plan makes no distinction between profits and revenues for a business…so, if a company has revenue during the year, but still has a loss (which many businesses do for their first few years, at the least), they STILL have to pay the Sales Tax 9% AND the Corporate tax 9%, for a total of 18%…even though they show a loss!! How do you think THAT will fare with business owners? I’m one of them and I would NOT be happy!

    Also…right now, everything a company invest’s in its business is tax-deductible, including worker salaries, rent, utilities, etc…not so, under the Cain plan. The figures show that companies (especially small companies) will pay more under Cain’s plan than current. For instance, if a company has capital expenses now, they’re deductible. Under Cain, they’re deductible ONLY if the purchases are for products made in America! Sounds really good until you realize that we are a world economy today and that there are no (or very few) semiconductors or integrated circuits (and other computer parts) that are made in America. (One of the reasons why a financial planner cannot possibly make the cut). Without those deductions, MOST companies would go bankrupt, being unable to deduct their product & inventory (cost of goods) purchases…they just couldn’t get by without the deduction, and then add 18% tax on top of that (corporate income 9% and sales tax 9%). EXAMPLE: if a company wants to buy 500 Apple computers because of expansion, would they be deductible because they are being purchased from an American company? I (or you) would probably say, “No, because it’s component parts are foreign and assembly was done overseas.” Herman Cain’s answer to that very question is, “Ahhh…I don’t know!” LOL. “I DON’T KNOW????” Mr. Cain, you wrote the plan…if you don’t know, who does?

    Sorry, on a purely simple financial analysis, Cain’s 9-9-9 plan is untenable and will drive businesses into bankruptcy and lose many more American jobs! If someone out there has a different analysis, I’d love to see it. BTW…if a Democrat had proposed this plan, the right-wing would be up in arms against the “anti-business” socialist who wants to destroy business in America!

    As another aside: Cain’s preference for American goods only, would be a direct violation of the many international trade agreements that we have signed over the decades. Sure, we could say, screw the agreements…BUT, then, America would not be able to sell our products overseas…then what!?? Sometimes, what seems to be so simple is just impossible…at least for someone with only Lowrie’s (or Cain’s) credentials!

    • youngright says:

      Conservatives thought the same thing about Barack Obama. How could this guy win? He has no experience, no platforms and no plans. Furthermore,the point I was trying to make is that I’m not sure Cain can win, but he’s the “hot conservative candidate” right now. We’ll see

      • That’s not exactly true about Obama; he had very good senior advisers, who had years of direct experience in their areas of expertise. Also, whether you agree with Obama’s policies or platform, he certainly had a platform that rang true with most Americans. I definitely agree with you that Cain will find it hard to win the GOP nomination, not because of race or lack of experience in politics, but because he’s making very basic mistakes…if you don’t have experience in an area (i.e. economics, global warming, etc) you don’t try to find a guy with the least (or no) experience; you need to hook up with someone who has some credibility in their field. You make yourself look smart by the degree of smartness you bring aboard! So far, Cain is in a tie for the lead in the National Tour of Dumb & Dumber! I predict he’ll be out after the first primary, if not before! Also, I predict Romney as the GOP nominee, excluding any major faux pas in the next 3 months…in politics, that can be a lifetime!

  2. youngright says:

    I was also making no distinctions about Cain’s 9-9-9 plan itself. I don’t mean to defend it, I just think it takes courage to put forward a plan even if the actual numbers dont’ really work. If he becomes the Republican nominee the RNC will make sure he has people around him who know what the hell they’re doing.

    To say that Obama is somehow more qualified because he had a more experienced team however is lunacy. His top aid, Mr. Emmanuel now runs Chicago, he has an AG under congressional investigation, a press secretary resign, and countless other economic advisers and appointees resign because they haven’t gotten results.

    To say “Hope and change” is a platform is to misunderstand what it means to have a platform.

    His administration has proven his inability to make a decision is based on the fact that he has no clear ideology other than to blame everyone else for mistakes made during his own rudderless campaign.

    Look, I don’t know if Herman Cain can win. I don’t know if he’d make a good president. The point of the post was more looking at this interesting racial dynamic with the hottest Republican candidate at the moment. That’s all.

    I’m not advocating for him, or defending his policies.

    • Gotcha! But you are opposed to another 4 years under Obama, from what I can tell. I’m not trying to attack you or your post, but if you are a journalist, don’t you think it takes more to denigrate a President than to simply say:

      “His administration has proven his inability to make a decision is based on the fact that he has no clear ideology other than to blame everyone else for mistakes made during his own rudderless campaign.”

      “Rudderless?” The proof, they say, is in the pudding…and if you look at his win in ’08, I think it’s obvious that his platform, whether you agree or disagree with it, was overwhelmingly successful, having brought back states to the Democratic fold that had been Republican for years.

      I think Obama had, and has, clear ideological differences with his opposition. AND, I believe he has quite rightly blamed others for what they deserved to be blamed for…but that’s another issue. My biggest dissatisfaction with Obama has been his willingness to compromise and give in with negotiations, too easily, and without corresponding benefit. I think his attitude is changing since the GOP has made it clear that they’re unwilling to cooperate on anything put forth by the White House, until there is a new resident there. (see numerous quotes on the subject, by Mitch McConnell).

      Regarding your “racial dynamic” issue; do you really think that is a major issue at this point? Of course, for the staunchly racist voter, it is always a major issue. Aside from them, I don’t think it is much of an issue. From what I’ve read and heard, it seems that the strongest support for Cain is from small-business owners and common, down-home kind of folks. In fact, did you see the latest bumper-sticker? It has a pic of Cain and it says, “Honkies for Cain!” LOL

  3. youngright says:

    Obama’s platform was successful in as much as he won with it. Has he delivered on his promise to change politics? No. Has he delivered on his promise to put people back to work? No. What his platform REALLY was let’s turn hope INTO change. That would have been an awesome campaign slogan.

    He turned hope into destitution. Read some of my other posts where I present the statistics on the horrendous decline since he took office. The enormous rise in food stamp use, in unemployment, in home values, in debt. The list goes on.

    The only success Obama has had as a president is the killing of Osama bin Laden and to a lesser extent the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell issue, which hasn’t really been a relevant issue since Clinton.

    When I talk about his lack of an ideology leading to poor decision making, what I mean is he refuses to take a stand. He said he’d work across the isle, but that doesn’t mean backing down when you believe firmly in something.

    Speaking to the racial point, I think it IS relevant because there is still a perception by many that the Republican party (And George Bush) hate black people. The Tea Party in particular has and continues to face this issue.

    Specifically stating that they want to oust Obama is being characterized as racist. That’s silly. No one cares if he’s a black failed president. He’s a failed president. Period.

    Unfortunately, race does still matter. A black on black presidential race would be historic.

    • I have two sons, 27 and 21, and we discuss these things all the time. I’m proud that I raised these guys, both of whom refuse to take a statement on its face. I’m glad to be able to discuss these issues with you, too. I think that being able to talk to each other means that there’s hope for the future!

      With that said, I must tell you that I disagree with your analysis of Obama’s achievements (or lack, thereof). Your quid pro quo is based on faulty analysis. The fact that all the negative things that have occurred over the last few years doesn’t mean they are the fault of Obama…much of what you refer to is actually the result of the Republican-controlled House to introduce and support the legislation needed to put people back to work. Further, the increased rate of poverty has been going on since Reagan, and is magnified over the last 4 years, in large part, because of Wall Street’s mortgage scam and the destruction of $20trillion in Middle Class wealth. As a result of the mortgage/financial meltdown (which is directly attributable to the big banks/investment houses), the unemployment rate climbed, people lost careers, savings, homes, etc., and were forced into poverty.

      One of the best, most readable, books I’ve read on the mortgage debacle was “The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine” by Michael Lewis. Read THAT and tell me that the financial collapse wasn’t Wall Street’s fault! And who was prosecuted for the biggest fraud (bigger than Madoff’s Ponzi scam) in American history?

      I can name 100 positive effects of Obama’s tenure in the White House. Let me know if you want to have that conversation. I predict a second Obama term…how’s that for balls? lol

      • youngright says:

        While you are right to mention Obama is not the cause of the problems, it is neither the fault of a GOP controlled Congress.

        If you read some of my earlier posts you will see I do not blame Obama directly for the economy nor for his lack of reasonable solutions to that problem.

        Furthermore, I do not believe it to be the role of government to intervene into what you call the mortgage scam, which was really just banks doing what banks do (just being reckless when doing it).

        I do not now, nor have i ever supported the bail-outs for the banks, coupled with ultra-low interest rates (which only help banks, not you and me).

        What I blame Obama for is his inability to show ANY leadership during this time of economic crisis.

        He has further divided this country by blaming Republicans who don’t believe in raising taxes (not truly the issue), while failing to address the drivers of government debt (Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid), or the drivers of unemployment.

        Obama has said his policies will do certain things (keep unemployment below 10% etc.) and they have failed to do that.

        Nearly everything he ran on as a candidate has born out empty promises.

        Read that and tell me what you think.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: