If you mean predicting actual delegates won/votes received in primaries and caucuses, I know of no research that finds a direct connection. My point was to explain why Cain’s recent surge in the polls might have more legs than did Bachmann’s. Of course, if you buy my argument and also Mayer’s model, which predicts primary votes on the basis of polling and funding in the “so-called” invisible primary, you could argue that there’s indirect evidence that substantive the claim that policies do influence primary outcomes. But I’m not making that claim yet.

For now, I’ll just say that sometimes the conventional wisdom is right. I think this is one of those times. Cain cain’t win but he cain be a royal pain in Romney’s behind!

There is also the racial issue . . . On this issue, at least, it will be hard to question the motives of Cain’s supporters.

Not that hard.