Better Call 'The Wolf'
There's a lot of angst among Republican political elites that an unequivocally strong 2012 front-runner has yet to emerge. No worries. In many respects, the 2012 election dynamic is shaping up to be quite similar to that of 2008—only with both parties cast in opposite roles.
As I stated repeatedly during the 2008 campaign cycle, given the electorate's Bush fatigue and heightened disdain for partisan politics, there was very little chance of a positive outcome for Republicans. A Democrat loss was not impossible, but pretty damn close. Such a defeat would have signaled apocalyptic problems for the Left for a generation or more. If a Democrat couldn't win in that climate, when would one ever win?
Remarkably, the party that benefited from its rival's self-destruction in 2008 is exhibiting the same destructive behavior, and in near record time—demonstrating that arrogance and ineptness are kryptonite for both sides of the isle, and voter fatigue is even more quickly inducible when somebody (or some government) is in your face 24/7.
Voter fatigue, however, is probably the least serious of Obama's problems. There are many more ominous harbingers of doom.
Consider that 65% of the electorate believes the country is on the wrong track (versus only 25% who think it's on the right track). Does that seem like an environment in which the conductor is going to be rehired?
Or, how about that fact that more than twice as many voters self-identify as conservative, rather than liberal?
Not enough? What about the fact that the group who decides all presidential elections, Independents, have turned against Obama's policies in droves.
Not convinced, yet?
Other than 'Republicans are evil' (which will certainly be his favorite tactic), what will his argument be? What is it he can say that will be believable to enough voters?
We know that Obama built his 2008 campaign around two central pillars—one, that he was a transformative figure who would completely reshape the way Washington works, and two, that he had a fix for everything. He was The Cleaner—Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction.
"I'm Winston Wolf. I solve problems."
Well, he did reshape Washington—unfortunately, it was into Chicago, probably the only place (save Louisiana) that's more toxic.
And how about those boastful claims that he could fix it all? How's that worked out so far?
The Cleaner's turned out to be Pig Pen.
Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, though. For the sake of argument, say his policies didn't take a difficult situation and make it orders of magnitude worse. He still hasn't lifted us out of the doldrums. That leaves an inescapable and logical conclusion, either he is completely incapable of doing as he promised, or he is intractably and ideologically opposed to doing what's necessary to recapture our prosperity and prestige.
In either instance, probably not good for his reelection chances.
Still worried?
How's he going to get it done in the electoral college? Given reapportionment based on the last census, the Republican candidate will get 14 additional electoral votes just by winning the same states as in 2008. No where near enough, but a start.
Despite all the issues with the Bush presidency and the unbridled enthusiasm (particularly in the media) for the supposedly transformative Obama, he still won by a relatively narrow margin.
Now that the bloom is off the rose and Obama has proven to be far from advertised, do you think he's going to win North Carolina again, or Indiana, or Virginia, or Florida—all traditionally Republican or Republican-leaning states that were decided by very thin margins? Just losing three of those four states is likely more than enough to flip the election to the GOP.
Maybe you think the Dems will be able to scare enough seniors regarding Medicare and Social Security so that Obama eeks out another narrow win in Florida, or the influx of Dems into Northern Virginia will be sufficient to keep that state in the blue column?
Not likely perhaps, but certainly possible.
Well then, what about Ohio, or Pennsylvania, or Michigan, or Colorado, or New Hampshire? Each of those states could flip to the red column, any of which (other than New Hampshire) would likely spell disaster for Obama.
So, can the Republicans blow it in 2012? Absolutely. But it will take some herculean stupidity on their part. It's the GOP's to lose.
If the Dems don't want to rely on a GOP stumble, they had better get Winston Wolf on the phone...and fast. Shooting the economy in the head is awfully messy.
It's a 30 minute trip, but he can be there in 10.
As I stated repeatedly during the 2008 campaign cycle, given the electorate's Bush fatigue and heightened disdain for partisan politics, there was very little chance of a positive outcome for Republicans. A Democrat loss was not impossible, but pretty damn close. Such a defeat would have signaled apocalyptic problems for the Left for a generation or more. If a Democrat couldn't win in that climate, when would one ever win?
Remarkably, the party that benefited from its rival's self-destruction in 2008 is exhibiting the same destructive behavior, and in near record time—demonstrating that arrogance and ineptness are kryptonite for both sides of the isle, and voter fatigue is even more quickly inducible when somebody (or some government) is in your face 24/7.
Voter fatigue, however, is probably the least serious of Obama's problems. There are many more ominous harbingers of doom.
Consider that 65% of the electorate believes the country is on the wrong track (versus only 25% who think it's on the right track). Does that seem like an environment in which the conductor is going to be rehired?
Or, how about that fact that more than twice as many voters self-identify as conservative, rather than liberal?
Not enough? What about the fact that the group who decides all presidential elections, Independents, have turned against Obama's policies in droves.
Not convinced, yet?
Other than 'Republicans are evil' (which will certainly be his favorite tactic), what will his argument be? What is it he can say that will be believable to enough voters?
We know that Obama built his 2008 campaign around two central pillars—one, that he was a transformative figure who would completely reshape the way Washington works, and two, that he had a fix for everything. He was The Cleaner—Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction.
"I'm Winston Wolf. I solve problems."
Well, he did reshape Washington—unfortunately, it was into Chicago, probably the only place (save Louisiana) that's more toxic.
And how about those boastful claims that he could fix it all? How's that worked out so far?
The Cleaner's turned out to be Pig Pen.
Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, though. For the sake of argument, say his policies didn't take a difficult situation and make it orders of magnitude worse. He still hasn't lifted us out of the doldrums. That leaves an inescapable and logical conclusion, either he is completely incapable of doing as he promised, or he is intractably and ideologically opposed to doing what's necessary to recapture our prosperity and prestige.
In either instance, probably not good for his reelection chances.
Still worried?
How's he going to get it done in the electoral college? Given reapportionment based on the last census, the Republican candidate will get 14 additional electoral votes just by winning the same states as in 2008. No where near enough, but a start.
Despite all the issues with the Bush presidency and the unbridled enthusiasm (particularly in the media) for the supposedly transformative Obama, he still won by a relatively narrow margin.
Now that the bloom is off the rose and Obama has proven to be far from advertised, do you think he's going to win North Carolina again, or Indiana, or Virginia, or Florida—all traditionally Republican or Republican-leaning states that were decided by very thin margins? Just losing three of those four states is likely more than enough to flip the election to the GOP.
Maybe you think the Dems will be able to scare enough seniors regarding Medicare and Social Security so that Obama eeks out another narrow win in Florida, or the influx of Dems into Northern Virginia will be sufficient to keep that state in the blue column?
Not likely perhaps, but certainly possible.
Well then, what about Ohio, or Pennsylvania, or Michigan, or Colorado, or New Hampshire? Each of those states could flip to the red column, any of which (other than New Hampshire) would likely spell disaster for Obama.
So, can the Republicans blow it in 2012? Absolutely. But it will take some herculean stupidity on their part. It's the GOP's to lose.
If the Dems don't want to rely on a GOP stumble, they had better get Winston Wolf on the phone...and fast. Shooting the economy in the head is awfully messy.
It's a 30 minute trip, but he can be there in 10.
Posted by Chuck Dietrick at 6/27/2011 4:02 PM 
Categories: Obama Performance, Obama Popularity, 2012 Campaign
Categories: Obama Performance, Obama Popularity, 2012 Campaign
Chuck- I like your thinking, but I am very concerned about how the Republicans are going to with stand the (demogogic) trashing that will come their way on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Any suggestions about how they should deal with that? keep up the good work.
Reply to this
John, you are absolutely right that the Left will demagogue the hell out of Medicare and Social Security. The difference this time, I believe, is that that they can no longer (assuming an appropriate GOP response) get away with blurring the line between theory and fact.
There is hard evidence, domestic and international, of the consequences of runaway entitlement spending. That is certainly resonating with a growing percentage of the populace.
The GOP, of course, will have to make a convincing case that they are for a reasonable social safety net, but that there can be no such safety net with the status quo. Reform is absolutely necessary. The Greek situation is the perfect example.
Republicans must hammer home that Obama and the Left are offering a false choice--Medicare and Social Security as we know it (aka the status quo) versus total elimination. Many recognize that the status quo is not a viable option (having seen the European and other examples). Republicans must illustrate that the actual choice is between bankruptcy (if we maintain the status quo) and a vibrant, reformed alternative that will be there for generations to come.
No doubt some percentage will be blinded by the demagoguery, but a material percentage will respond to a reasoned argument that is underpinned with solid analysis, and more importantly very explicit examples. The examples are what differentiates this time from debates in years past. We are now living and seeing the very real consequences of governments out-of-control. That's powerful.
Enough concerned seniors and near seniors should recognize that they will not be impacted by reform and their loved ones will be better off if we save the system with intelligent reforms. Similarly, thinking younger people should understand that the only hope for something of significance being there for them is through pragmatic reforms.
It will be an interesting and critically important back and forth "debate."
Reply to this
I felt so good until the last paragraph when you pointed out the Republicans could still blow it. I guess I'm just in denial. Unless there is a miraculous improvement in the economy, which seems unlikely given the administration's absolute anti business policies (just ask Boeing), how could the GOP possibly lose? But I can't overlook the stupidity of the electorate, so many of whom are on the gov't doll. I'll keeep my fingers crossed that the Republicans can nominate a decent conservative candidate and over come the media.
Reply to this
Short of nominating a really bad candidate, the primary path to defeat would be if they let themselves get twisted up in social issues.
Reply to this