If you haven’t heard that Herman Cain flirts with women in the workforce a bit too much, you probably don’t care about politics. Earlier on Freethunk I asked, “Why not Herman Cain?” when every one was talking about Rick Perry. I couldn’t stand the idea of another Republican candidate with Perry’s Texas mentality. It seemed to me that a Cain versus Obama race would be fascinating. I was and still am leaning towards Obama, but at the very least Cain had his 999 plan instead of vague answers of what he planned to do or kept changing his mind like Mitt Romney.
Well, now Cain has screwed himself with moderates I believe. Republicans, especially Tea Partiers, may rally around him, but the problem with sexual harassment is that it is a legal issue and an important moral issue on how we treat women. I wouldn’t care if Cain had a series of adulterous affairs because it’s his personal life and the sex would be consensual. Sexual harassment has to do with intimidation in the workforce and Cain now has 3 women saying it happened. The problem with him saying the accusations are false is he paid to shut them up. I understand paying them off may have been the smart thing to do at the time even if he was innocent, but now it’s less than convenient to determine if Cain’s ego overrides ethical and moral concerns. I don’t think I could justify voting for him even if I didn’t like Obama.
As much as I think Mitt Romney is a stereotypical politician flip-floppin’ like a fish out of water on any stance he takes, he’s the best choice at this point. Rick Perry is the fish you throw back. Cain is just all wet.
SIDENOTE: Some sexual harassment concerns may be exaggerated or retaliatory, which is unfortunate. My definition of sexual harassment is simply someone who has authority over another in their workforce and uses it to get sexual favors. Innuendo and sex jokes by themselves are not sexual harassment, but could be used as part of an arsenal. My co-workers and I at my dayjob have told plenty of inappropriate jokes to each other (male and female) but none of us have told them with the expectation to get into each others ‘ pants.
Cain could have been a target because he was a CEO, however, the only way for a voter to make a determination is if they could someone do away with the lawsuit settlements and release all the documentation to the media. I don’t think that will ever happen. So if Herman magically somehow does become the Republican candidate I guess voters have to dismiss the allegations in favor of the greater good for their party or for the country if they think Cain is the lesser of two evils. Seems to me for conservative Christians this does away with black and white morality and floods Cain’s run for president with a whole lot of gray.
SIDENOTE 2: Can we ever allow a candidate to say I changed my mind? Mitt Romney comes off as a flip-flopper because he wants to hide his past opinions/decisions. I don’t have a problem with someone saying one thing, thinking about it and researching it, and then saying they now have a different opinion. I don’t have a problem with someone being flat out wrong. But we as a whole, especially the media, view that as a weakness. We don’t allow politicians to change their minds or admit errors. Literally, the media will dig up a candidate’s college essay and use it against them. Who retains all their opinions from college?
I don’t trust Mitt Romney to be honest with me, but I see how we have helped exasperate the situation with the idea that he and others have to stay true to one set of ideals for life. …And I still like Romney for the sake of making conservative fundamentalists question how they should vote (“Can I vote for a Mormon?”). I think the only reason Rick Perry had a chance with Republicans was because he was supposedly a “true”, white Christian American and that doesn’t seem to be enough these days.