I am too cheap to buy cable so I didn’t watch and will need to catch it on youtube. However after hearing snippets on the radio where I was thinking Cain was not defending his plan as well as he could and after reading the papers I still like Protein Wisdom’s general analysis and this in particular [bold is mine]:
Cain — who it’s become fashionable to bash, if you happen to be in my Twitter feed (his rise is simply too precipitous, and if so many people are taken with him, the way to distance yourself is to show that you are unimpressed) — is, both as a candidate and as a person, just plain refreshing. He says what he thinks, and he acts like a leader. I don’t expect a candidate to know everything about everything. I do expect him to have the courage of his convictions, and the capacity and curiosity to assimilate information and delegate authority, and Cain has that. I’ve been arguing for some time — and it was echoed by Gingrich tonight — that the specifics of Cain’s 9-9-9 plan don’t matter as much to me right now as does the fact that he is taking the “bold” step of running on a complete reform of the tax code. I like the flat tax idea better, but that’s really beside the point. Cain is willing to bring up reforms that, to politicians, have long been thought of as non-starters. Cain makes up in charisma what Steve Forbes lacked.
Bottom line: every candidate is an improvement over Obama, and in a debate that pits conservatism against Obama’s brand of democratic socialism, the American people will be able to chose the path going forward based on a clear demarcation. Where Romney fails — and why I desperately don’t want to see us make the mistake of nominating him — is that he is not a reformer, not a movement conservative, and he rides the political winds, saying what he anticipates people want to hear. He is, in my parlance, the losing more slowly candidate. Yes, he is far better than Obama; but he is also the kind of status quo politician who kicks the can down the road.
Read the whole thing.