Social Question

marinelife's avatar

Why is Herman Cain getting a pass on sexual harassment?

Asked by marinelife (62485points) November 8th, 2011

So far, four or five women have come forward with allegations of sexual harassment against Herman Cain. Some of them were investigated and settled by the National Restaurant Association (which I believe shows they had merit).

Yet Cain’s support has not budged in the polls.

To me, this many women constitutes a pattern of behavior not suitable for a CEO, much less the President.

Why is it being virtually ignored by potential voters?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

56 Answers

john65pennington's avatar

Bill Clinton was essentially in the same situation and it did not effect his ability to run our country.

This may or may not have happen, but its strange that its just now brought before the public, since he is running for President.

Allegations are just words. The proof is in the pudding.

wundayatta's avatar

Cain’s negatives are up, according to NPR. But his support has not dwindled. I think that the people who support him don’t believe these allegations. Or they won’t until greater proof comes up. Or they don’t think it matters. This may even get him more support with those who think he must be a strong and virile man. Women, as well as men, might think this—which is a pretty scary thing.

Judi's avatar

@john65pennington ; It DID effect President Clinton’s ability to govern in that the same people who are defending Cain made sure his time and energy were consumed with it. I don’t understand the hypocrisy. At least the left aren’t accusing Cain of murder like the right did to Clinton.

marinelife's avatar

@john65pennington I don’t think it is strange that it is just now being brought before the public. Cain was not a public figure before. There was a confidentiality clause in the settlement.

tom_g's avatar

I have mixed feelings about this whole thing. I’m aware I’m about to get killed for this post…

It could be that I assume that all politicians – especially the ones running for president – are bad people (even the ones I support). I supported much of Weiner’s politics, but assumed the guy was a douchebag, so the photo thing was not much of a surprise.

Herman Cain is applying to be the figurehead of an organization that wishes to bring political and economic changes to the country. The positions he supports (like his ridiculous tax plan) should be evaluated. If we determine that they’re extremely regressive and will cause a great deal of harm, then we won’t vote for him. If you like redistributing wealth upward, then maybe he’s your guy.

But why does it always come down to this stuff coming up again and again? Do you have any idea how these guys live, and how they have attained the power and wealth they have? I’m sure this harassment is probably the most palatable of the guy’s crimes, which will never come to light.

So, yes – I have mixed feelings. One part of me wants to see this be the thing that gets Herman Cain shoved back in his irrelevant little box and out of the presidential race. Another part of me is just so f$%king tired of this coming up over and over again. Herman Cain is bad for most people in this country because of his proposed policies (or not). And candidate x (everybody else that is or will be on the ballot) has done – and is doing some bad shit right now – that may never become public. Their policies are either good or bad for most americans. I’d rather have the conversation be about that.

Coloma's avatar

No surprise, considering the vast majority of politicians suffer from narcissism and sociopathic issues.

Kinda a no brainer IMO…like being surprised when the bear rips off the tourists face when he runs out of marshmallows. lol

Judi's avatar

I love in California, where we have a ridiculous rule that you can vote in an opposing parties primary. I am tempted to vote in the Republican parties primary just to vote for Cain since Obama has no opponents. That way, If Cain wins, Obama will have no problem being re elected.

tedd's avatar

probably because he’s going to be passed on the whole presidency thing

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
wundayatta's avatar

I’m sorry, @tom_g, but I think there’s a huge difference between consensual hanky panky and unwanted advances. In theory, no one should advance at all when there is a power difference between the individuals, unless it is very, very, very clear that such advances would be genuinely desired. Like all those porn films where the producers ask the young woman if she is 18 before proceeding with the seduction, anyone in a position of power should ask if the woman is interested in such advances before proceeding.

There is no one who shouldn’t know this in this day and age. There are sexual harassment trainings everywhere. Maybe Cain skipped his because he’s a big shot. Well if he gets sued or causes his organization to have to pay out chunks of money, and he still doesn’t learn, then I have no sympathy for him. No excuses. This stuff is well-known. If you take a risk and it backfires, you deserve what you get.

Qingu's avatar

For me, Cain himself is a sideshow.

The real story is his supporters. Who are these creatures? Why are they not bothered at all by Cain’s complete ignorance on virtually every important issue facing this country? I’m assuming they mostly supported the Republican inquisition against Clinton; are they aware of their hypocrisy?

How troubling is it that this egomaniacal joke of a candidate is the front-runner of one of two political parties. What does that say about the state of our country?

Cruiser's avatar

@Qingu Because his supporters already have 3 years of conditioning to be oblivious to a leaders shortcomings. Plus it says EVERYTHING about the current state of affairs BO has gotten us into and how desperate we are for “change”!! lol! ;)

tom_g's avatar

@wundayatta: “I’m sorry, @tom_g, but I think there’s a huge difference between consensual hanky panky and unwanted advances.”

Sure. And…?

Mariah's avatar

Normally I mostly try to ignore leaders’ personal lives. I don’t think Bill Clinton is any less capable of running a country because he cheated. I don’t think Newt Gingrich is less capable because he’s had divorces. I don’t think Sarah Palin is less capable because her daughter got pregnant. Mistakes happen; presidents and presidential candidates are humans, much as we’d like them to be better.

So I could have written this off too if it was just one mistake. And maybe some of the allegations aren’t true, or maybe they are true but he has reformed since then. But if he really did harass upwards of four women, that’s not just a mistake, that’s a habit, and it tells you a little something about the level of respect he has for women, and I don’t want someone who disrespects women to have a position of power in which he has a say on issues that affect women.

Qingu's avatar

@Cruiser, sweet burn, bro. Sweet burn. Unfortunately like most of what you say on Fluther it makes no goddamn sense whatsoever.

Cain’s supporters hate Obama and have been anything but “oblivious” to his shortcomings.

Also Obama—unlike Cain—is highly intelligent, clearly knows a lot about both foreign affairs and the domestic economy, had political experience as a senator, is honest, has repeatedly given complex speeches and policy proposals instead of vague, vapid soundbites, and on top of that is not accused of having sexually assaulted multiple women.

It’s also amazing that you think Obama has “gotten us in” to the current state of affairs when the recession happened on Bush’s watch, but lord knows you’re not really concerned with facts when it comes to criticizing Obama.

zenvelo's avatar

I think Cain got cut some slack originally because it was back in the 90s, not at all recent, and the victims were keeping quiet because of the confidentiality clauses, and it sounded like the idiot old jerk who keeps bugging women but isn’t that dangerous.

But as the news has come out, he has dropped a bit in the polls, and the latest news from yesterday is actually assault it it’s true.

One thing to remember, the Koch Brothers really don’t care about all this, so they’ll keep backing Herman all the way to the Convention.

Coloma's avatar

@Qingu How DARE YOU, in your usual dismissive and egocentric manner speak that way to @Cruiser! who is one of the finest jellies around!

tom_g's avatar

@Coloma – In @Qingu‘s defense, @Cruiser‘s post was a bit nonsensical, even though I really enjoy @Cruiser‘s contributions to fluther. But more importantly (and I should follow my own advice) – maybe we can take these comments to private messages in order to keep the thread going.

Coloma's avatar

Forgive me, I’m centered again.

Cruiser's avatar

“Also Obama—unlike Cain—is highly intelligent, clearly knows a lot about both foreign affairs and the domestic economy, had political experience as a senator,”

OMG! LOL! @Qingu You have most definitely have had WAYYY too much of the Kool-aide! I live in Illinois and know first hand Obama’s “track-record” There is NONE! I am NOT a Cain supporter but he has a lifetime more experience than Obama ever will have. I think Obama’s “track record” on our economy speaks for itself and most if not all of our allies think Barack is a laughing stock. And that sir are FACTS! ;)

Judi's avatar

I love @Cruiser too even if we disagree on politics. I didn’t like @Qingu disrespectful approach, even if I agreed with his argument.
EDIT: Darn you @Cruiser! Now you are being just as mean! You posted that before I hit send!

Qingu's avatar

@Cruiser, Cain ran a crappy pizza company, was involved with a local branch of the Fed, and was involved with the national restaurant association where he, apparently, racked up some sexual harrassment settlements. Since then he has been a motivational speaker.

In what universe do you think this counts as better experience than a succesful community organizer, constitutional law professor, state senator, and United States senator? Speaking of “Kool-Aid.”

And I live in Illinois too, and some of my friends worked on Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign.

I’m not sure what you mean “most of our allies think Barack is a laughing stock.” You are talking about the president who secured the most comprehensive sanctions against Iran and negotiated New START?

You have said so much about Obama that is demonstrably BS, Cruiser, that I wonder if it even matters to you. I think this actually gets to the heart of the matter about Cain and his supporters, since they’re Republicans like you. I think Republicans don’t care so much about facts or positions or consistency, or whether or not what they say is true or if it makes sense. They care about “sides,” like ancient tribes, and they’ll say and do whatever it takes if it means supporting their “tribe.”

Ron_C's avatar

You know, I can’t stand the man, he’s cold, self serving, and clueless. That being said, his fellow republicans are doing the same thing to him as they did to Clinton. They couldn’t attack his policies because all of the candidates seem to be cut from the same muddled mould. The only thing left to do was attack the man. It is a good thing he doesn’t have a parent from Kenya.

Whether the attacks happened or not, it is just noise to deflect from the real problem, no Republican has any idea of ways to create jobs.

Qingu's avatar

The Cain campaign’s response to his latest accuser is repulsive and of course par for the course for Republicans.

Cruiser's avatar

@Qingu Look, you obviously know I am not an Obama fan and it is for one reason and one reason only….is he got elected because he was not a Republican. That is not why I am unhappy with him either cause I HATED GW Bush. What I am upset about is Obama campaigned on “Change” big hopeful ideas that anybody and I mean ANYBODY that had their eyes on the road and hands upon the wheel would have seen flat out that his “changes” had zero method of paying for these wonderful ideas and changes he was filling everybody’s head with during his campaign because our country was flat broke.

You cannot deny that we are no better off and in many case worse off than we were THREE years ago. You cannot spend your way out of debt any one who has ever had a bank account knows this. Anyway I don’t want to go into the week long lecture it would take to show you the lack of logic to what Obama has done and wants to do for this country. His record number of pieces of legislation doesn’t mean squat when our country is deeper in debt than it was 3 years ago. Blame Bush for getting us into the mess 3 years ago but it is time that we the people start demanding some accountability and change that we were promised 3 years ago! I would be among the proudest of Americans had he delivered on his promise and believe you me I have not stopped writing and e-mailing my congressmen and Senators both Democratic and Republican and telling them to get their shit together or else. So instead of debating me here join me and help put these elected officials feet to the fire and get some stuff done already.

Qingu's avatar

@Cruiser, not sure what you mean when you say “had zero method of paying for these wonderful ideas and changes”

HCR was “change,” it is paid for. It decreases the deficit.

Financial reform does not add to deficit.

Ending DADT costs no money.

Withdrawing from Iraq saves money.

Is there a specific policy you are referring to here, Cruiser? Because your statement appears to be complete nonsense.

As for whether or not we’re better off—2007–08 recession burned down the house. We’ve started to rebuild. But no, we don’t have our house fully back yet. What on earth is your point? How are you aiming to pin that on Obama? I’ll notice you have not put forth a single idea for how to get more people employed. You have talked about the debt—well, the Bush tax cuts are the biggest contributor, and Obama wants to end them. Republicans have blocked him repeatedly.

Finally, I’m not sure what you even mean when you urge me to tell my congressman to “get some stuff done.” What stuff do you want done? You appear to have no idea what you want done, or how you think it should be done. You’re clueless, Cruiser. But the worst part isn’t that you’re clueless—it’s that you lack the humility and honesty to see how clueless you are.

Poser's avatar

If I want President Obama to lose what little credibility he has left, do I only need to accuse him of sexually harrassing me, with no proof, or indeed, evidence?

Dutchess_III's avatar

He’s not getting a free pass. And I don’t think they’re making things up, @Poser. And they DO have evidence. We just have to wait for it all to surface. Plus, Poser, don’t you think that’s been tried on Obama?!

Look…Just from watching the guy I can feel sexual harassment all over him…touching the females, hugging them, telling them how cute they are, how fine they look. As a woman, I can feel icky down in my bones just looking at him and listening to him.

dappled_leaves's avatar

There’s pudding?

Poser's avatar

@Dutchess_III Well I guess that’s all the evidence we need. You feel “icky.”

I don’t know whether they have any evidence. I just know that what there is is circumstancial at best. And Cain has been a public figure for a long time; this is actually his second run at the Republican nomination. But it is only now that these women are coming forward. Odd, if you ask me.

Cruiser's avatar

@Qingu I made it very clear to you many times over…I want a smaller Government with less taxes and stand back and watch me grow my business….is that really such a difficult concept for you to understand?? Next you are going to try and convince me Quinn is doing a stellar job here in Illinois!...

bkcunningham's avatar

I suppose it would be if you’ve never owned and/or operated a business, @Cruiser.

Cruiser's avatar

@bkcunningham I suppose it would be much easier to equate having a decent job with believing in Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy!

Qingu's avatar

@Poser, I’m sure you express the same level of skepticism when Democrats are publically accused of sexual harassment.

@Cruiser, unless you make over 250k, Obama has cut your taxes and has cut taxes for small businesses. And the number of government employees under Obama’s administration has plummeted. You are clueless.

bkcunningham's avatar

The number of local government jobs have plummeted under the Obama administration, @Qingu. “The number of federal workers has increased by 38,000 over the same period—an increase of 1.4 percent,” according to your source.

Do you mean The Making Work Pay tax cut, @Qingu, or the extension of the Bush tax cuts?

Qingu's avatar

@bkcunningham, not sure what your point is. There aren’t that many federal employees to begin with. Plus a lot of that increase was temporary census work. As I understand the conservative argument, public school teachers are part of the hated “big government” too, are they not?

I was referring to Making Work Pay, which was part of the stimulus, although the 2010 extension would also count; Obama has also said he wants to extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone but the top 5%.

Linda_Owl's avatar

Well….... you have to remember that Clarence Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court by Congress despite the fact that Anita Hill gave detailed information about his sexual overtures to her. People simply do not pay attention to what women say about powerful men (other than to try to find ways to discredit these women).

Qingu's avatar

Anita Hill was just a golddigger too. Why did she wait so long to come forth with her accusations? And she was a ho. Clearly the Democrats just wanted to smear the conservative black man.

Yeah, sarcasm.

bkcunningham's avatar

My point was to clarify your statement, @Qingu, “And the number of government employees under Obama’s administration has plummeted.” I think it was misleading. The figures in your Politifact link show increases in federal level jobs through June 2011. I would think that the increase is without the temporary census workers being counted.

What is your point with public school teachers? The link you provided showed the number of state education workers increasing. Non-education workers at the local level took the biggest hit in job loses.

It was a tax cut. Yes, it was a less than $16 a week tax cut for a family, but a cut nonetheless.

Qingu's avatar

@bkcunningham, so, you want to move the goalposts? “Big government” is only federal employees and schoolteachers, and not other government workers? The bottom line is the public sector’s employment has plummeted under Obama, while since the recession, iirc, the private sector’s has grown faster than it did under the Bush administration. Good luck spinning that into a big government scare.

I also fail to see what your point is about the amount of the tax cut. It was comparable to the amount most families got under the Bush tax cuts and other tax cuts heralded by conservatives. Or do you only support tax cuts that save wealthy people hundreds or thousands of dollars a week— most of which that they wouldn’t spend anyway?

bkcunningham's avatar

@Qingu, the only points I am making are from your Politifact link. It is almost like you are arguing with yourself.. I’m only pointing out things in the link you posted friend.

Qingu's avatar

Really? It sure sounds like you’re nitpicking so as to contest the overall point.

bkcunningham's avatar

Nope. Just quoting your link.

martianspringtime's avatar

I haven’t been following very closely in terms of politics lately, but let me get this straight – are my eyes playing tricks on me, or are we really comparing Bill Clinton having an affair with a consenting co-worker to Hermain Cain (allegedly) sexually harassing multiple people? Am I completely missing something?

Qingu's avatar

@martianspringtime, I would like to see details of Cain’s accusers before coming to a final judgment, but I do see your point. On the other hand, I don’t want to give Clinton too much slack. The power imbalance with Lewinski made the act repulsive even if she consented.

Mariah's avatar

@martianspringtime Very good point. I guess the only comparison that really exists in my mind is that both showed some level of disrespect for women. The disrespect shown in Clinton’s situation was not so much to Lewinski, who, yes, was a consenting partner…it was to Hilary. But it still doesn’t really compare.

Ron_C's avatar

@Cruiser “You cannot spend your way out of debt any one who has ever had a bank account knows this.” That is not exactly true. If you spent money to build a bridge (for example) and hired a Canadian contractor whose workers sent the money back home to their families, you are right, the money did no good. However, if you hire American workers, they spend their money at home. The supermarket may need to hire another clerk, they may finally replace their old gas guzzler with a nice American built car, they go shopping for Christmas presents or pay tuition for their kids college. Of course if there was a factory, in the U.S. that made the Christmas presents the economy would get a bigger boost. The point is that people working provide the incentive for other people to be hired. The net result is that more people buy and pay taxes. Add that to actually taxing the people that can most afford additional taxes. Add a transaction tax to stock purchase that decreases depending on the time a stock is taxed, you have the basis for a real recovery.

The problem is that both parties are fighting for business as usual and the conservative ideas exacerbate the problems that will send us into an unstoppable downward spiral.

Qingu's avatar

@Ron_C, most Democrats are not fighting for business as usual.

Ron_C's avatar

@Qingu I would say that a minority portion of the Democratic House and Senate are trying to change things but the “Blue Dogs” like things as they are.

Qingu's avatar

I agree, but most dems are not blue dogs.

martianspringtime's avatar

@Qingu Oh, I have no idea whether the accusations are true or not, so I’m not implying one way or the other – I’m really behind on everything going on with him – I’m just baffled by the comments I’ve seen equating Clinton’s actions to what Cain has been accused of.

Ron_C's avatar

I notice that the black guys the Republicans pick have a lot of trouble dealing with family and moral issues. Look at Clarence Thomas. I suspect that abandoning your values and moving to the dark-side causes some sort of psychic overload and the conscience is wiped out.

Obama stayed on the good side, he has values, a good family life, and works to help people. Black people on the right seem to do the opposite. I think they question their self worth, therefore assume everybody else has the same low standards.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Poser you said, ”@Dutchess_III Well I guess that’s all the evidence we need. You feel “icky.”” I did not realize I was testifying under oath. I was giving my opinion. I was under the impression that I’‘m allowed to give my opinion here. Guess with you it just ain’t so.

Qingu's avatar

From NYT:

At the interview in Milwaukee, after he was asked his thoughts on Mr. Obama’s handling of Libya, Mr. Cain leaned back and appeared to search for an answer: “O.K., Libya,” he said.

“President Obama supported the uprising, correct?” he said. “President Obama called for the removal of Qaddafi — just want to make sure we’re talking about the same thing before I say ‘Yes, I agree,’ or ‘No, I didn’t agree.’ ”

Mr. Cain said he disagreed with the president’s approach “for the following reasons” — then changed course.

“Nope, that’s a different one,” he said. “I’ve got to go back and see.”

He added: “I’ve got all this stuff twirling around in my head.”

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW_nDFKAmCo&feature=channel_video_title

__________________

What a fucking moron.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther