Herman Cain would be my third choice for President, behind Gary Johnson and Ron Paul. Something occurred to me whilst reading about the sexual harassment accusations against him: Since there are two “anonymous” complainants who can ostensibly document their claims by the National Restaurant Association¬† settlements with them, wouldn’t it be a good tactic (for the Cain campaign) to bring out a new accuser who’s allegations can be discounted (rightly or wrongly) thereby casting any other accusers as copycats who are equally dubious? Especially when one of the “anonymous” complainants turns out to be employed by the Obama administration?

And why is this a big deal? Didn’t Clinton establish that sexual harassment was no biggie?

To be clear: I HAVE NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT THE CAIN CAMPAIGN HAS DONE THIS. THIS POST IS PURELY A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT IN POLITICAL TACTICS.

About these ads