by Robert Ringer
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
While I’m sure there’s a lot of historical evidence to back up their lack-of-money-and-staff argument, I don’t think they understand the mood of the average American today. They are victims of what I call the Paradigm Restriction.
Metaphorically speaking, we are all restricted by our unique mental paradigms. It’s difficult to comprehend ideas and circumstances we are not accustomed to hearing and seeing within the invisible parameters that surround our lives.
Thus, one of the causes of our differing perceptions of reality is that we all start from our own set of assumptions. To break through one’s Paradigm Restriction requires a willingness to let go of comfortable, long-held beliefs and look at the world the way it is today rather than the way it was ten or twenty or thirty years ago.
The idea that Herman Cain can’t win because of his lack of financial support is based on a pre-Tea Party view of the world. People are angry, and the more they are told that someone like Herman Cain can’t win because of a lack of funds and/or staff, the more determined they are to prove the pundits wrong.
In addition, Cain doesn’t need much money for advertising, because with nonstop debates on the horizon, he will get more and better exposure than ads could ever buy him. And that exposure showcases him as the least uptight, most pleasant candidate, traits that are only magnified by the nasty behavior of guys like Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum.
Given that Ron Paul is the only candidate who is a 100 percent pure libertarian-centered conservative, Cain can afford to stumble now and then. After all, the others stumble repeatedly because they lack purity in their words and actions.
All this by way of saying you should not be surprised if Cain wins by a wide margin in Iowa. And don’t be shocked if he comes close to winning in New Hampshire. Finally, unless Rick Perry gets much better very quickly, Cain could very well win in South Carolina.
Herman Cain may not be ideologically perfect, but, contrary to what we’re hearing from the pundits, he can win the nomination. And if he does, pundits are wrong in thinking he can’t beat Barack Obama. Just think of the contrast between the two:
Nasty and hateful (Obama) vs pleasant and likeable (Cain).
Hard-core Marxist (Obama) vs hard-core capitalist (Cain).
No experience in the private sector and creating jobs (Obama) vs tremendous success in the private sector and creating jobs (Cain).
Focus on raising taxes (Obama) vs a focus on lowering taxes (Cain).
Elitist background financed by public and private handouts (Obama) vs pulling himself up by his bootstraps from humble beginnings (Cain).
Above all, how in the world would the worst racist ever to set foot in the Oval Office handle a real black person in head-to-head debates? It would be fun to watch the Master of Malevolence squirm while trying to figure out how to cope with a black conservative. Obama’s beloved race card would be off the table!
We can hope for a surprise Ron Paul victory, but if we can’t get that, don’t count out the man whom the establishment is so certain cannot win. A victory for Herman Cain would throw all the old rules out the window — and into the trash bin of political history.
Reprinted with permission
Copyright © 2011 Robert Ringer
ROBERT RINGER is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.