Long time CBS network anchor Bill Kurtis has an interesting spin on the Gloria Allred client in the Cain mess. The first 3 or 4 minutes of this podcast done this morning on Chicago's WLS are the most interesting. It seems the accuser's reputation isn't very good around the building at CBS and Kurtis says he's efforting a source on the story:

http://wlsam.com/FlashPlayer/default...2329023‏

Not to worry; she'll be ripped a new one over the next few days.

I think one of the major issues for Cain is that one of his key appeals was that simply he was among the most likeable people on the stage. I remember quite distinctly being amused by him in the first couple debates when he was a nobody. Obviously concision and the 9-9-9 also played a part but he is undeniably a nice, friend likeable guy. Other candidates have appeal because they appear like they are real serious and competent or they have experience or they have good policies. However, the potential serial womanizer is a real dent to the notion that he is a likeable guy and so it actually hurts him more than it would hurt candidates whose appeal was other personality traits.

Being thought of as a serial womanizer is better than being thought of as a serial harasser and/or assaulter. But his explanations/on-and-off stonewallings/denials have been all over the map for the last week so he risks being thought of as a serial liar.

I just hate that Cain, Romney, in some polls Perry, lead Ron Paul, the only candidate in either Party in 2008 or now that predicted the collapse of the economy (the number one issue).

I'm not at all positive and hopeful about the intellgience of the average voter. No wonder argumentum ad populum is an informal logical fallacy...and this is how we decide our leaders lol!

Cain literally said two days before the housing bubble popped that the media was drumming up an "imaginary recession". Won't see that on Tv or radio though. He supported the bailouts...the ones the DemoCrips and many RepubliBloods say "kept the economy from falling off a cliff"...meanwhile if you use the measurements they used in the Great Depression we have 19+% unemployment and 9% inflation. I'd hate to see "off a cliff"...oh wait, that is off a cliff and exactly what they SAID we wouldn't have happen if we did the bailouts. All they did was change the CPI and unemployment measurements. Consumer Price Index no longer takes into account, macro or micro, the cost of energy and food, and unemployment only counts those who still file. Who still files after they can't get benefits anymore after 99 weeks? Almost no one.

So numbers and media are fixed, the sheep are falling for it, and they want more liars and economic non-predicters in office. GREAT. That's like backing degens. They continuously make bad predictions and gambles, but why not keep bankrolling the degens, right?

For me to regain any hope of ending this Depression in the next 2 years instead of the next ten we need a major swing in the American public's intelligence level. Insulting or not, it's the truth.

This is why polls and voting are just illogical mostly...it's ad populum. It's a beauty pangeant for liars.

Anyone who thinks they are leftist and yet puts social issues above ending wars and torture, you're fake.

Anyone who thinks they're conservative and yet puts ANY issue above who predicted this economic collapse, you're fake.

Read everybody, it's patriotic I swear.

I suggest Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson for leftys and Robert Pape's Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism for conservatives (it's the most comprehensive study ever done on it).

From the I told you so files:

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-a...080946066.html

Cliffs:

Anon #1 after the Cain mess moves to the INS as a flak.

She asks numerous times to work from home and is denied by boss.

Get in a 'serious' car accident and asks to work from home and is again denied.

Accuses manager of circulating "sexually charged e-mails."

Filed a complaint against boss.

Asks for a 5 figure compensation.

Any of this sound vaguely familiar to anyone? Anon #1 Has the look of a professional workplace victim.

But for the lolz of the day:

Sounds like Cain taking advantage of his authority and sexually harassing her made her, rightly so, a more sensitive and suspicious person.

LOL the best part of that is definitely:

I'm certainly no Mark Block, but I think you can do better than "she could not find anyone to corroborate her story" in terms of denials. At least try to sound innocent, Herman.

Shame on you for blaming the victim, you're basically harassing her over and over again.

Proof that she's a victim? She may or may not be.

A combination of things make it probable that she is a victim. Including Cain's inconsistency and the fact that she's not the only accuser.

Oh rly? What combination of things?

Preponderance of the evidence (way far away from "beyond a reasonable doubt") is pretty much the standard of proof required for civil cases in the US (typically a unanimous jury verdict is not required in civil cases). So you think that this combination of things you cite and that fact Bialek or Krashaar(sp) aren't the only accusers would carry the day in a civil suit? Highly doubtful in my view. You've got an opinion but that doesn't make them victims obviously and then chastising another poster for attacking a victim is pretty low brau.

BTW I'm not claiming that the fact they didn't sue means they're not victims either. Just showing that a greater than 50% chance is consistent with the burden of proof in civil cases. I just think that substituting opinion for proof and then chastising someone for attacking a victim is really an underhanded tactic.

someone doesn't understand the difference between political court and civil/criminal court. The same can be said for Herman Cain, but then again he feels his blackout days should not be discussed. If Herman Cain don't remember, it couldn't have happened.

eta: or as Stephen Colbert would put it, #thatwasnotintendedtobeafactualstatement

Wow, a reporter makes up a speculation out of thin air and now it's being cited as something that actually happened. Maybe it did, but so far actual first person accounts from people who worked with him, contradict this.

Its the Steve Martin defence, I can't remember. Say you're on trial for armed robbery, when the judge asks how you plead, 2 little words will be your savior. I forgot armed robbery was illegal. In his case it's 3 words, I can't remember.

We are not talking about an average person who can't recall what they had for dinner last thursday. This man claims to be qualified to be the chief executive officer of a country with currently the largest economy. Yet his recollection of facts from his own past is hazy at best, or obfuscated (even after his press conference to clear the air, he still practiced obfuscation during it). Someone who is truly organized would have files to research, especially anything of a personal nature wrt allegations without foundation. Why, because he has the resources to maintain those files. Its a sign of successful CEO.

I mean, big corporations have in-house counsel because they're dealing with legal complaints (both frivolous and meritorious) all the time. It's not quite as weird as you're making it out to be that he could be genuinely fuzzy about a few individual claims over the years.

Jfc Cain is a terrible candidate regardless of these allegations. Can we move on?

This is where I'm at too. Unfortunately I think he's sincere about not going anywhere. I bet he'll be around for the Iowa caucus.

South Carolina poll from Clemson...
Romney 22%
Cain 20%
Gingrich 10%
Perry 9%
Paul 4%
Bachmann 3%
Santorum 1%
Huntsman 1%

*Honestly, the take-away with regard to Cain isn't much here. He has led most SC polls in the past month, but there was a pre-allegation CNN poll that had him trailing Mitt by the same two points. Also this poll started on 10/27 and ran for 11 days, so it includes some pre-allegation polling.
*Gingrich not quite getting the foothold here that he'd like, though yesterday polls showed him 2nd in Ohio behind Cain and 1st in Mississippi.
*Perry polling in single digits in the Bible Belt is actually the most significant take-away, good or bad, for anyone in the race. That's awful for him and is two straight SC polls that place him below 10%.

Uh, yeah, so I'd expect him to not remember every individual case for a big company or whatever. I have no idea how big the NRA is but we will say it's big enough.

But these were complaints involving HIMSELF.

That's what makes him so dangerous. No matter what scandals or idiotic comments he makes it is only slightly more stupid to vote for him than it was before.

Reminds me of a quote from King of the Hill I think somebody posted here a while back

COTTON: I guess he was just born a pile of mush.
HANK: Well, I guess you could say that, but maybe mush isn't so bad. You can keep stomping on it, but it's all give. It just stays mush. You can't build it up, but you can't break it down either. In a funny way, mush has the edge.

this is where all the Cain defenders have no grasp on reality. Everyone remembers all the bad stuff that happened to them personally. Not the business ups and downs, not the speeding tickets or parking tickets. But if a person is questioned about a crime, or their personal integrity, they will remember it vividly. That recollection doesn't go away if no charges were filed.

Unless it is a pattern of normalcy to them with their actions, then they can't see any wrong doing. Which is the foundation for sexual harassment policies today, that guys like Cain couldn't see back in the freewheeling days. His conduct was routine, so it should be accepted to everyone.

Disagree. His RCP average was 30% over the last month in South Carolina. No one else in the field gained, but it knocked a lot of his supporters into the ranks of the undecided. And the fact that it started before the allegations indicates he's doing even worse than the poll suggests. Also, South Carolina isn't paying a ton of attention at this point in the race, so if he's sinking hard here, you have to imagine he's absolutely tanking in Iowa and New Hampshire.

I don't think anyone doubted that as they tar the accusers you would use all of it to reinforce your preconceived belief that Cain is innocent and that its all a vast conspiracy to tar him. Confirmation bias at its best!

Here's something that some deeply unfair and biased people might see as a symptom of Cain's leadership style:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1083427.html