Whoa! Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll


Straw polls don’t mean anything, of course, unless your candidate wins, then it becomes monumentally important. That’s why this is monumentally important to me.

Fox News reports:

Businessman Herman Cain won the Florida straw poll Saturday, beating Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the GOP presidential frontrunner who just two days earlier delivered a debate performance that was widely panned.

Cain finished with 37 percent of the vote, while Perry trailed with 15 percent. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney followed with 14 percent while former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum drew 11 percent. U.S. Rep. Ron Paul finished with 10.5 percent, while former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman finished with 2 percent.

 U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, who won the Iowa straw poll in August, finished with just 1 percent of the vote.

Perry, who was expected to finish strong had told the more than 3,000 GOP activists who came from across the state that his rivals made a mistake by skipping the straw poll..

Cowabunga!
This comes fresh off of a particularly good showing by Cain in  Thursday’s debate. I was wondering when all of his fine debate performances were going to pay off.
Allapundit has more, including the possibility of some skullduggery on the Romney campaign’s behalf:

Here’s what Florida state representative Matt Gaetz tweeted before the vote:

Romney campaign is having their #Presidency5 delegates vote for Cain to skew results. #dirtytricks

If that’s true, and no one knows if it is, then Romney’s supporters might have pushed Mitt to second and Perry all the way down to third simply by sticking with their guy.

Hat tip: Drew at AoSHQ.

See Also:

Hot Air: Video: Where Herman Cain won the debate

Here’s Herman Cain’s speech at The Faith and Freedom Coalition event, held just hours before the the 9/22/11 Republican debate:

Herman Cain is hitting back at Morgan Freeman for calling the Tea Party racist.

The Republican presidential candidate called the Oscar-winning actor’s eyebrow-raising remarks “short-sighted” on Friday.  “Most of the people that are criticizing the Tea Partiers about having a racist element, they have never been to a Tea Party,” Cain told Fox News.

Freeman, who endorsed Obama in 2007, created a firestorm when he told CNN’s Piers Morgan earlier this week that conservative opposition to the President has enflamed racism in America. He added the Tea Partiers have the mentality of “Screw the country, we’re going to do whatever we can to get this black man out of here…It is a racist thing.”

Despite the criticism, Cain said he wasn’t offended by Freeman’s comments.  “Name calling is something that is going to continue in this because they don’t know how to stop this movement and this movement is making a big difference in politics,” said Cain, the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza

The Other McCain: ORLANDO GOP STRAW POLL RESULTS UPDATE: Herman Cain Beats Rick Perry:

I’m told that people trying to make online donations at Herman Cain’s Web site have reported difficulty getting through because the traffic is so heavy. So while you’re waiting, how about hitting my tip jar instead?

If you’re interested in hearing about the behind the scenes maneuvering that led to this upset, Stacy’s been blogging about Cain, all day. While I was at Oktoberfest, riding the Octopus and eating funnel cake,  he was busy reporting :  CAIN-MANIA IN ORLANDO? UPDATE: 7 Standing Ovations for Cain; Vultures Circle Perry’s ‘Sunshine Special’?


CNN’s political reporter, Peter Hamby, offers his insights on Cain’s big win, today:

Share

Flight 93 Memorial Blogburst #74: Mother on Crescent jury: “I don’t want to reach out to those people! THEY MURDERED MY DAUGHTER!”

Photobucket

Alec Rawls, who has been working with Tom Burnett Sr. to stop the Crescent of Embrace memorial to Flight 93, explains the circumstances (related by Mr. Burnett in 2008, but not published until now).

Mr. Burnett had been telling his fellow design competition jurors that the crescent is a well known Islamic symbol. In addition to the giant central crescent (now called a broken circle) Tom also objected to the minaret-like Tower of Voices. “I made a point at that meeting,” says Mr. Burnett, “to tell people that we have an Islamist design here that can’t go forward, please, stay with me.”

One of the left-wing design professionals on the jury, Tom Sokolowski (then director of Pittsburg’s Andy Warhol Museum) thought that objecting to the crescent shape, just because it happens to be used by Muslims, was anti-Muslim bigotry. In a rude attempt to shut down criticism, Sokolowski actually called Mr. Burnett “asinine” for objecting to the huge Islamic-shaped Crescent. (Sokolowski would later repeat this performance to the press, calling a local preacher “asinine,” “small minded,” “bigoted,” “repellant,” and “disgusting” for protesting the Crescent design.)

It was in this atmosphere, charged with universal awareness amongst the jurors that the giant crescent was indeed a well-known Islamic symbol shape, but also charged with uncertainty as to whether people would be allowed to mention this fact, that another family member, Sandra Felt, started to explain what she liked about the Crescent design. She liked the “embracing” nature of it, says Mr. Burnett. She liked the way it “reached out…”

At which point another family member “lost it” (Mr. Burnett’s description), screaming in agony: “I don’t want to reach out to those people! THEY MURDERED MY DAUGHTER!”

The Park Service claims it “lost” the minutes

This extreme level of conflict on the jury over perceived Islamic symbolism should have come out years ago. The jury included a designated, non-voting, minutes taker. This was not supposed to be a private deliberation. These were volunteer citizens, doing the people’s business, and the jury minutes were supposed to be made available to the public.

The Memorial Project and the Park Service claim that the minutes were “lost.” No doubt, but that doesn’t mean the loss was accidental, and defenders of the Crescent design had good reason to make the minutes go away. Any faithful record would have been explosive, revealing these fierce objections from multiple Flight 93 family members to the blatant Islamic symbolism in the Crescent design.

The ballot wasn’t supposed to be secret either, but the Park Service refuses to account for what they claim was a 9 to 6 tally in favor of the Crescent design. What does 9 to 6 even mean on what was a ranked vote amongst three designs? Did every ballot that did not rank the Crescent last get counted as a vote in favor?

The whole thing is fishy, and there is one most obvious reason why the defenders of the Crescent might want to keep the vote details hidden. The seven family members on the jury were outnumbered by eight academics and design professionals. Thus all six of the votes against the Crescent could have come from the kin, with only Sandra Felt voting for it. This is more than just possible. It is likely.

Another mother of the murdered said only that she agreed with Mr. Burnett, and he thought that the other two men amongst the family members (Gerald Bingham and Ed Root) were on his side as well, though both have since spoken out against his ongoing effort to rescind the chosen design. Bingham and Root are angry at the anguish that the families are still being put through over the memorial design, but could such men have voted for the Crescent in the first place, in the face of that mother’s anguished cry?

A vicious left-wing ideologue like Sokolowski, yes, but it seems almost inconceivable that family members could vote for a design that other family members saw as a tribute to the terrorists, or at the very least, as reaching out to Islam. Since Bingham and Root are willing to speak out, can they please tell us whether they voted for the Crescent? If they didn’t, then the vote amongst the family members was at least 5 to 2 against.

Continue reading

Saturday Movie Matinee

Via The Right Scoop: Amazing speech by Bill Whittle at Beverly Hills Tea Party

Peter Schiff explains why “Operation Twist”, the Feds’ latest attempt to artificially stimulate the economy will fail :

Herman Cain via Freedom’s Lighthouse: Herman Cain Destroys ObamaCare in One Minute: “I Would be Dead Under ObamaCare” – Video 9/22/11

Student Suspended for Saying Homosexuality is Wrong:

Outrageous and wrong:

Black Caucus member Confronts Allen West on Sarah Palin & Tea Party Ties:

A mixed bag from Steven Crowder:

Bill Whittle sets the record straight: Debunking the Palestine Lie:

Lee Doren aims to tick off just about everyone with: Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Repealed And Class Warfare

Mark Levin, Sept. 19: If This Does Not Smell From The Stench Of A Totalitarian Mind Set, Than What Does:

Companion  read: Charles Krauthammer: Return of the Real Obama:

Obama himself has said that “you don’t raise taxes in a recession.” Why then would he risk economic damage when facing reelection? Because these proposals have no chance of being enacted, many of them having been rejected by the Democratic-controlled Congress of Obama’s first two years in office.

Moreover, this is not an economic, or jobs, or debt-reduction plan in the first place. This is a campaign manifesto. This is anti-millionaire populism as premise for his reelection. And as such, it is already working.

Obama’s Democratic base is electrified. On the left, the new message is playing to rave reviews. It has rekindled the enthusiasm of his core constituency — the MoveOn, Hollywood liberal, Upper West Side precincts best described years ago by John Updike: “Like most of her neighborhood, she was a fighting liberal, fighting to have her money taken from her.”

Added Updike: “For all her exertions, it never was.” But now with Obama — it will! Turns out, Obama really was the one they had been waiting for.

That is: the new Obama, today’s soak-the-rich, veto-threatening, self-proclaimed class warrior. Except that the new Obama is really the old Obama — the one who, upon entering office in the middle of a deep economic crisis, and determined not to allow “a serious crisis to go to waste” (to quote his then chief of staff), exploited the (presumed) malleability of a demoralized and therefore passive citizenry to enact the largest Keynesian stimulus in recorded history, followed by the quasi-nationalization of the one-sixth of the economy that is health care.

Considering the political cost — massive electoral rebuke by an infuriated 2010 electorate — these are the works of a conviction politician, one deeply committed to his own social-democratic vision.

That politician now returns. Obama’s new populism surely is a calculation that his halfhearted feints to the center after the midterm “shellacking” were not only unconvincing but would do him no good anyway with a stagnant economy, 9 percent unemployment, and a staggering $4 trillion of new debt.

Read the whole thing.


Share