Posted on 11/08/2011 1:21:28 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Was it wise for Mitt Romney to offer any opinion on Herman Cain’s campaign crisis? Romney tells George Stephanopoulos in an interview today that he finds the allegations “serious” and particularly disturbing,” although Romney declines to answer whether they are disqualifying if true. All he says in that regard is that Cain has to address the allegations directly:
Mitt Romney today for the first time characterized sexual harassment allegations facing fellow GOP candidate Herman Cain as “particularly disturbing.”
“These are serious allegations, George,” said Romney in an exclusive interview with George Stephanopoulos that aired on ABC News and Yahoo. ”And they’re going to have to be addressed seriously. I don’t have any counsel for Herman Cain or for his campaign, they have to take their own counsel on this.”
“Any time there is an accuser that comes forward with charges of this nature you recognize this is a very serious matter and it should be taken seriously,” said Romney.
There is a strategic concept that argues against getting in the way of an opponent’s collapse, and for good reason. Let’s say Cain’s campaign survives these allegations and goes on to contend in Iowa. Will Romney’s commentary help him convince Republican voters to peel away from Cain? Almost certainly not; he’ll be seen as opportunist, and his comments an unnecessary shot while Cain was trying to defend himself. If the allegations end up sinking Cain, it won’t be because Romney spoke out, either, and it makes Romney less likely to convince former Cain supporters to support Romney instead. Granted, that’s not a terribly likely outcome, but that’s what Romney is supposedly campaigning to achieve, right?
Sometimes the best move one can make is to stay out of an argument, especially when one has no direct connection to the issue involved. All Romney needed to say here was, “I’m concentrating on my own campaign, and you should direct those questions to Mr. Cain.” Or to paraphrase one elder statesman a few years back, Romney missed a good opportunity to shut up.
Cain supported Romney, when it was between Romney and McCain.
Before that he supported Huckabee and gave $2300 to his campaign in 1/2008 (opensecrets.org)
Before this, if it was Mitt vs. Obama, I would've voted for Mitt. Now, I'll go ahead and throw my vote away on a 3rd party.
People in glass houses better be squeaky clean, and not play with rocks. Mitt has been around too long for that, and we know Newt isn’t always faithful. The liberal media doesn’t care which Republican they destroy, or how they go about doing it.
Times are a changing!
It's ALWAYS a good time for Myth Romney to shut up.
I'm considering not casting a vote if mittens is the nominee but I would NEVER vote for the pos marxist obama!
OK, Flip.
Maybe then we can expect you to address your “church” relegating blacks to the back pew prior to 1978.
Maybe, in the same press conference, we can expect for you to summarily refute Brigham Young’s claim that “You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind....Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.”
Maybe then, Flip you might summarily refute Brigham Young’s contention that “Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned,”
You go for it there, Flip.
yeah Cain supported Romney when it was a choice between McCain and Romney while Newt supported McCain and Perry supported Gullianni.
No different than Cain jumping on Perry over the “niggerhead” rock non-story.
I am thinking that Gingrich probably has the most skeletons in his closet. A guy that “hot-switches” wives as he has will probably have some ticked of female companions waiting in the wings.
"Beyond reasonable doubt" is the standard for a criminal conviction. This is more like an employer (us) deciding whether or not to hire someone for the most important job in thier company. It comes down to a gut decision that people will have to decide for themselves.
A gridlocked Ubama would be better than a Romney with a green light.
It's a simple fact.
anonymous charges?
And now the charges of Sharon Bialek? Have you listened to her and Gloria ALL RED?
What credibility?
I haven’t yet decided to support Cain, but if Cain were that Amish guy that takes people’s wives and locks their husbands in a shed, I would vote for him before Romney.
Does that mean he shouldn’t smile and giggle the whole time he is calling the accuser a gold brick’n liar?
This Bialek story is so full of holes it is about to fall apart in front of the media's very eyes.
The other "named" woman has not even made allegations that I have been able to find, and the last one was a story about Cain going to dinner with three women, two of whom invited themselves, and where nothing happened. So much for "serious charges." Mitt is a twit.
Tell Mitt to define the word “Is”, first.
He won't be able to recover from these allegations.
Ya see, the damage done is not about whether the allegations are credible, but the damage caused by the allegations themselves. The seed has been planted, and will grow.
Interesting. I detest them both but turncoat McCain threw the election, where Romney just might have pulled it out. What I'm saying, lesser of two evils-wise, is that supporting Romney over McCain one on one may have been a good position to take.
Mr.Plastic hair hat you are predictable
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.