Poll Shows Cain Slipping After Sexual Harassment Allegations

A Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Herman Cain's popularity down 9 points with Republicans following the publicity of sexual harassment allegations against him:

The poll showed the percentage of Republicans who view Cain favorably dropped 9 percentage points, to 57 percent from 66 percent a week ago.

Among all registered voters, Cain's favorability declined 5 percentage points, to 32 percent from 37 percent.

Cain insists he is "back on message." Where's he going to deliver it? Late Night TV. He'll be on Jimmy Kimmel Live Monday.

< A First Hand Account of Solitary Confinement | Sunday Night Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It's an on line poll (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 06, 2011 at 08:32:54 PM EST
    What's next? Reading the entrails of frogs?

    Is it possible (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by NYShooter on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 01:44:52 AM EST
     for you to make a comment without resorting to your best Eddie Haskell impression?

    Or, is that the way you strike back at society for having your butt kicked too many times by the girls in grade school?


    Jealous, eh? (none / 0) (#4)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 08:35:29 AM EST
    Well, sarcasm is beyond many people.

    Especially when it is used on things they love.


    It's not an opt-in, ... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 08:11:32 AM EST
    ... self-selecting poll like the wingers do on Newsmax or Drudge.

    Since it was an online poll, typical margins of error do not apply. Despite that, various recognized methods were used to select as representative a sample as possible and weigh the results.

    I'm sure it's not as good as Gallup, but it's miles ahead of any information you've got.

    You're sure it isn't (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 08:39:19 AM EST
    as good as Gallup????

    Please, my sides are hurting from the laughter.


    It might be (none / 0) (#6)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 08:50:28 AM EST
    But I'm not sure why you're laughing.

    Unless your non-existent/imaginary polls show something else ...


    I'm laughing at you (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 10:36:46 AM EST
    for trying to defend a poll that, at best, can be described as non-scientific, because you have a bias against the person who is the subject of the poll.

    What will real polls show? I'd guess a drop. But that doesn't mean this one means anything.


    Apparently (none / 0) (#8)
    by cal1942 on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 11:23:47 AM EST
    you missed the word NOT in Yman's comment.

    Heh ... a guy who ... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 12:11:54 PM EST
    ... cites unsupported opinion pieces from MMGW deniers as evidence while overlooking dozens of peer-reviewed, scientific studies is dismissing a poll as "unscientific" because it was taken online.

    Now that's funny.


    I love it when you try to (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 03:02:37 PM EST
    change the subject.

    It shows that you know you have shown, again, that you can't debate.


    No change at all (none / 0) (#16)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 04:53:38 PM EST
    It's just funny watching a MMGW denier compare a poll to "reading frog entrails" because the poll was done online.

    FOURTH woman comes forward (none / 0) (#10)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 12:17:34 PM EST
    What we need is for all (2.00 / 2) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 03:04:29 PM EST
    to come forward.

    Let's hear all the claims and let's have a good look at Cain and the women involved.

    Nothing like a little sunshine, eh??


    I'd agree (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 04:49:26 PM EST
    ... but it's not my decision.  I think all of the women should come forward and tell their stories publicly, but I can also understand why they wouldn't want to become public figures and be subject to harassment, loss of employment, etc.  it's really up to each individual woman to decide for herself if she wants to do so.  The latest woman to accuse Cain of harassment has already done so.  The same for the Republican consultant who witnessed yet another episode at a restaurant in Crystal City.

    Although I have to admit ... it is a lot of fun to watch Cain twist himself into pretzels with conflicting statements.


    A couple of the women (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Zorba on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 05:16:44 PM EST
    signed "non-disclosure agreements" when they received a settlement from the NRA.  I would think that, if they came forward publicly, they might very well be subjected to hefty monetary (civil) losses for breaking that agreement.  That, and the fact that they would most likely be subject to harassment, news idiots camped out on their doorstep, and maybe more, would certainly make me think twice about coming forward.  I can't blame any woman for not wanting to go through this.

    Couldn't agree more (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by Yman on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 09:04:01 PM EST
    As much as I'd like the women to come forward with details to answer Cain's dismissal of their claims, I understand some of the women signed non-disclosure agreements.  I also wouldn't blame them in the least if they didn't want to subject themselves to the harassment and invasion of privacy that would accompany going public.

    One of the women was (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 05:31:36 PM EST
    released from the NDA but declined. Don't know about the other two.

    Jim, would you (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Zorba on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 05:58:33 PM EST
    be willing to subject yourself to the newshounds, the harassment, the possible threats, that the women might very well be subjected to (leaving aside any monetary problems)?  Have you ever been subjected to sexual harassment?  This is not a snark- I'd really like to know.  I would say that, as a woman who has been sexually harassed, it's very much scarier than many men can even imagine.

    I understand the position of the women (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 05:40:43 PM EST
    But the man, in this case Cain, also has a lot to lose.

    I'm basically against settlements with NDA's. They protect the villain in some cases and are tools to just let someone make money in others.


    This is a fun parlor game (none / 0) (#13)
    by jbindc on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 03:36:00 PM EST
    But it means nothing since Cain wasn't going to get the nomination anyway.

    Bets are on as to how long he lasts until he drops out to "spend more time with his family."

    Apparently being a moron (none / 0) (#15)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 04:50:13 PM EST
    ...didn't disqualify him, but being a sexual predator does.

    I never got past the moron part, so it's hard to care much about the predator part.  He's a wonderful example of the Peter principle.

    Irrespective of guilt or innocence (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 07, 2011 at 05:33:21 PM EST
    calling someone a moron who came from where he did to where he went is .... well, need I say it??

    Pretty f*cking accurate. (none / 0) (#23)
    by observed on Tue Nov 08, 2011 at 12:18:13 AM EST
    Brains in business executives?
    Don't make me laugh.