Perhaps worse than Palin! On Taxes and Fences, Cain Stumbles a Bit:
When Mr. Gregory asked if Mr. Cain would describe himself as a “neoconservative” — the foreign policy approach championed by the Bush administration that favored the aggressive use of military power to promote American interests and values abroad — Mr. Cain seemed unsure.
“I’m not familiar with the neoconservative movement,” he said.
This is idiotic. Is he joking?
If he says yes, he’s aligning himself with the devil. If he says no, the neo-cons will go after him (and they have all the money).
He can’t win. So he says “I don’t know”. It is a sensible answer.
He could have just said he doesn’t like to be labeled.
jjt, perhaps. i think he’s probably that ignorant.
There is no way in hell that “I don’t know” was a sensible answer. To admit — whether true or not — that you are unaware of neoconservatism is to admit ignorance of perhaps the most highly publicized and debated American political idea of the past ten years (at a minimum: for political junkies, it would be more like 30 or 40 years).*
Anyone who knows what neoconservatism is would also know that admitting ignorance of it would be to court ridicule.
Sorry, the guy is ignorant. His platform consists of a single decent, but still half-baked, idea. That does not presidential timber make.
I wish we didn’t have to take candidates more seriously than they deserve simply because they are black. Huntsman is polling at 1.5% (according to the chart posted on Secular Right). Does anyone want to seriously argue that John Huntsman is less qualified than Cain? Steve Forbes has been presenting meaningful tax reform ideas for DECADES: is he a less knowledgable or qualified person than Cain?
I like Cain and can see him as some sort of spokesman for a tax code simplification movement but there is simply no way the guy is prepared for the presidency.
*In fact, a good question to test how old someone is would be to ask “Is neoconservatism mainly about domestic affairs or foreign affairs?” If they say “domestic affairs” or at least understand that the question presents a legitimate choice, chances are they are over forty (or spend way too much time reading about American political history).
His response to the “right of return” issue (Israel-Palestine) earlier in the campaign points more towards the ignorance explanation. He seems to be adept at generating sound-bites on the fly, but the amount of knowledge key to being an effective President (or national politician of any stripe) that Cain doesn’t have looks to be vast.
Cain seems like a nice enough guy (gives great sound bite), but his depth of knowledge seems only surface deep. I think Obama would mop the floor with him in a debate (and I want someone to absolutely mop the floor with Obama). It would not be pretty.
I realize he hasn’t gained much traction, but right now, I’m for Gingrich, because I think he could really clobber Obama on all substantive issues (and in debate), and he can articulate his ideas clearly. That’s important to me. I’m tired of Repubs putting forth old has beens and inarticulate dullards as their standard bearers. Romney’d be my second choice, I suppose At least he too is smart, although not nearly the thinker Newt is.
Ignorance, not calculation. Did you see his answer about Guantanomo and hostage exchange? He is genuinely clueless about the world outside the US.
He IS a likeable person. But his 15 minutes seem about over. Fox News is his next stop.