Herman Cain: Mitt Romney Can’t Win Because He Hasn’t Explained His Religion

Herman Cain’s obsession with divisive religious commentary continues, this time tossing the bomb of Mormonism into Mitt Romney’s tent in an Editorial Board interview with the Washington Times:

This man is pathetic.

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2012, Quick Takes, Religion, US Politics, ,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Gustopher says:

    On the other hand, the more that Herman Cain explains about anything, the more obvious it is that he cannot win.

  2. I must confess, noting that Romney’s Mormonism might cause some trouble with conservative southern voters in the GOP primary electorate doesn’t strike me as all that controversial.

    Of course, I have low expectations for Cain, so that may be influencing my response.

  3. Kylopod says:

    I frankly don’t get his argument. Cain isn’t just arguing about Mitt’s viability as a candidate for the GOP nomination, but about his electability against Barack Obama. So what does he mean by saying Mitt can’t win the South? Is he saying that Obama will sweep the South because Southern Republicans would prefer a Democrat to a Republican Mormon? That’s inane.

  4. @Steven L. Taylor:

    There’s no doubt that Mormonism is an issue for some segment of evangelical voters, but Cain takes it a step further. He says that even if Romney won the nomination he couldn’t win in states like Florida and Georgia because people who are Republican would rather see Barack Obama re-elected than see a largely conservative Mormon in the White House.

    Or, as someone said to me in a comment just now on Twitter, he’s saying that Republican voters in the South are basically all religious bigots. Perhaps he’s projecting.

  5. Stereo says:

    No one is going to vote for Cain; we already have a black president and he is a disaster, why would you want to vote for another one?

  6. Neil Hudelson says:

    No one is going to vote for Cain; we already have a black president and he is a disaster, why would you want to vote for another one?

    @Stereo:

    Let me guess, Stereo. You are one of those individuals who can’t figure out why people think you are racist. “What, because I criticize the President I’m a klansman now?” you often exclaim?

    There is a support group for you. They are call Stormfront. Go check them out. And please don’t come back.

  7. sam says:

    @Stereo:

    No one is going to vote for Cain; we already have a black president and he is a disaster, why would you want to vote for another one?

    Golly, we can only hope that the Republicans nominate a noncaucasian-nonblack because the last white president, a Republican if memory serves, was a disaster, too. Jeepers, but we’re in pickle.

  8. mattb says:

    @Neil Hudelson:

    Let me guess, Stereo. You are one of those individuals who can’t figure out why people think you are racist. “What, because I criticize the President I’m a klansman now?” you often exclaim?

    Neil ftw!

  9. stereo says:

    Get the name of the user STEREOtype? It was satire on Cains bigotry. It is pretty pathetic if you have to explain satire, did ANYONE get it? Bigotry against Muslims and Mormons is still bigotry, and Cain is a bigot. Does anyone around here actually think anymore.

  10. Neil Hudelson says:

    Stereo,

    No, that was a pretty subtle satire. Considering the type of comment you posted in jest is often seen here with due seriousness, it was an easy mistake. I appreciate sardonic comments, but they due get misinterpreted sometimes, even by those known to be sarcastic themselves.

    Does anyone around here actually think anymore.

    Yup, taking what seems to be a racist quote from a commentor oft or never seen constitutes a lack of thinking.

  11. mattb says:

    @stereo:

    In order for satire/irony to work it needs to be clearly signaled. If you had posted under the name “stereotype” that probably would have done the trick. Without a signal that, like Neil says, it’s way too close to what some people have said here in complete seriousness.

  12. ken says:

    What I want to know is what does Romney believe about the foundation myth of the Mormon religion. Does he take any of the Book of Mormon to be true? Any of it at all, including its supposed origin?

    Now that would tell us something interesting about Romney. We know that nothing in the Book of Mormon is true. It is a complete fabrication. We also know that the guy who founded the faith was a con man.

    Is Romney willing to state these simple facts as facts? If he is then his credibility goes up considerably, imo.