Yep, Cain is toast.

I guess I don't really care who leaked it and it doesn't really matter. Cain has completely blown his response and is imploding. I could have been talked into overlooking the whole thing if he had just said, "well, it was a long time ago and I didn't understand that some people interpret my hearty friendliness as harassment but I've learned to tone it down." But accusing Perry with no way of proving that Perry did it? What a gift to Romney!

This is classic Rove. He's a party first type of guy and Perry and Romney will fall in line. Cain is an outsider and getting too popular right now. Has to be taken down. Ann Coulter is happy to point the fingers at liberal media to take any suspicions off of Rove. She's a ROmney supporter and this all just helps him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cain says that it is Perry's people.

My guess is that this is correct. Perry benefits most from the timing of these revelations now. No doubt Obama's people would have waited until the general. They'd rather see Cain than Romney as the nominee is my guess.

And Romney would rather have Cain in there diluting the tea party vote in the primaries.

Anonymous wrote:Cain says that it is Perry's people.

My guess is that this is correct. Perry benefits most from the timing of these revelations now. No doubt Obama's people would have waited until the general. They'd rather see Cain than Romney as the nominee is my guess.

Anonymous wrote:Perry said that Romney's people leaked the information

Of course he did.

Perry said that Romney's people leaked the information

Personally I think it is the GOP establishment who is leaking the info. I think they thought he would disappear quickly, but that isn't happening. He's a threat as it is obvious he's not their choice.

FYI, I heard this morning on NPR that Cain is raising more money since all of this brouhaha started.

Anonymous wrote:The Dems are saving their resources for hitjobs until someone emerges as a clear frontrunner. I'd also argue that Cain's history of speaking off the cuff could be just as good -- if the Dems were to focus on dirty tricks, it'd be on Romney or Perry.

Why waste any resources at all on a guy who is polling 4th in many of the early primary states?

I would think that Cain would be close to the Dems' favorite to face - inexperienced, gaff-prone, and black. Maybe they'd prefer Santorum or Bachman, but not by much.

Anonymous wrote:The Dems are saving their resources for hitjobs until someone emerges as a clear frontrunner. I'd also argue that Cain's history of speaking off the cuff could be just as good -- if the Dems were to focus on dirty tricks, it'd be on Romney or Perry.

It's more like "when your opponent is imploding, it's best to get out of the way".

The Dems are saving their resources for hitjobs until someone emerges as a clear frontrunner. I'd also argue that Cain's history of speaking off the cuff could be just as good -- if the Dems were to focus on dirty tricks, it'd be on Romney or Perry.

Anonymous wrote:Is it one of his Republican opponents or is it the Democrats?

No offense intended, but this strikes me as a "duh" question. IMO, the dems are not really worrying about any of the top GOP frontrunners -- this hit on Cain is purely an inside (republican) job. The good thing for the GOP is that this effectively gets Cain out of the picture (he's nowhere near presidential material anyway). Now republicans can focus on the real candidates (said with a chuckle in my voice).

Cain says that it is Perry's people.

Is it one of his Republican opponents or is it the Democrats?