Someone just asked me, does this Politico story hurt Herman Cain? My answer: I don't think so. According to the folks at Pew
, American trust of the media has never been lower. 66% percent think news stories are often inaccurate, 63% see the media as biased, and overall 55% percent have very little or no trust in the media. (No small irony in where that link takes you!)
Among conservatives those numbers are higher. So right off the bat, roughly 70% of people interested in learning about Herman Cain for the purposes of voting in a Republican primary probably think the story is a biased, politically-motivated attack. This will generate sympathy and give Cain a chance to both showcase crisis management skills and toughness in the face of media confrontation. So, I see it as a minor plus for Cain and a potential bigger plus if he handles it well.
That is just the media dynamics at work. There is a second dynamic, which is the laughable state of the "rights" movement manifested in these very thin claims of harassment. Civil rights, women's rights, and various other victimology aspirant rights' groups have descended into a caricature status as payola seeking opportunists. From Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Push shakedowns to the tens of thousands of laughable claims of harassment/rights violations based on the painfully low, subjective standard setting of the victim-mongers - Americans are beyond suspect of such claims. They are beyond tired of such claims. They are now quite incensed at what is now a shakedown industry operating outside of any normal rules, wreaking havoc across society. Certainly conservatives feel that way, and likely many independents. So the same reaction is in play here - Cain will garner at least some small sympathy, perhaps more depending on the ultimate course of this story. If it turns out that these allegations are as lame as they appear at first blush, Cain will garner more support inversely proportional to Politico's lameness.
If Cain survives the gauntlet and actually secures the Republican nomination, the media might want to ask themselves, do they really want to remind a small army of core Republicans as well as independent swing voters just how cynical, biased and journalistically corrupt they were in service of Barack Obama in 2008 by reprising the same tactics in 2012???
We don't live in a world where someone might write an angry or skeptical letter to the editor anymore. Swarms of independent voices, self-styled watchdogs, and alternative media outlets will tear this story to shreds, if it is tearable, in a matter of minutes; and the ranker the media practice proves to be, the more it elevates its opponents. It is amazing that they haven't learned that.
Yesterday was Herman Cain’s biggest campaign fundraising day, the candidate told Laura Ingraham this morning on her radio show. …
About the fundraising news, Ingraham said: “What does that tell you? Don’t let the media set the message for you. He didn’t cancel anything on his schedule. He’s not a hermit. He’s not hiding behind some wall of privacy.” Clearly, she said, “People want a fighter. They see right through the media haze.”