The rise of Cain, the downfall of Perry

I chose the article Herman Cain Rising written by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann from  the Texas Insider on September 26th, 2011. Since the debate, Rick Perry has shown to be a weak opponent of illegal immigration and an even weaker debater. The performance of candidate Herman Cain caught the public’s eyes of the conservatives with his “superstar” quality. A phenomenal debate performance by Cain led to a third place victory in the president’s straw poll in Florida. It also landed him a third place finish in the Michigan straw poll right behind Romney and Perry. Cain is a candidate that offers something different to the table. He offers “an alternative to Obamas class warfare.” Cain takes a new perspective on this issue giving another alternative for minorities to be successful. Obama’s way to the top was through community organizing, affirmative action, and a slow rise up the political ladder. Cain’s alternative to this is dedicating hard work to the private sector, having entrepreneurial initiative and managerial skills, and this is exactly what Cain did. He looks at the upper-class as models, not as envy and doesn’t despise the healthy class. Apparently, he “wants everyone to be rich.” Cain and Mitt Romney’s views are almost parallel to each other, both agreeing that experience in the private sector is better equipped to solve America’s economic problems rather than experience in government service. As Perry slowly fades, Romney is rising and Cain is not far behind him! This editorial caught my eye because although it was fact based, there was an immense amount of opinion evident throughout the editorial. The writers, Dick Morris & Eileen McGann, seemed a little bias to me in this editorial. It was obvious that they had biased feelings towards Herman Cain, calling him a “superstar” and saying how he blew everyone away in the debate. They made sure not to leave out the fact the Perry didn’t do well at all, and even had a downfall in the debate. It was a good editorial, but I would have liked to see opinions about the other candidates as well. It was obvious who the writers were rooting for, and that could be dangerous to a reader that lacks knowledge about other candidates. This editorial could easily change anyone’s mind. Although I think this editorial was biased, I do agree with some of the statements. I agree with Cain’s and Romney’s opinion that experience in the private sector is better equipped to solve America’s economic problems over the government service argument. Perry has devoted years of government service and was not able to have a reasonable explanation for illegal immigration and other factors that affect our economy during the debate.