White guilt and 2012

President Obama’s approval ratings are slipping and support for his policies are likewise sliding; this has caused an early but seemingly plausible forecast for both 2010 and 2012.

Last night on The O’Reilly Factor, Dick Morris pointed out that Mr. Obama is in the same boat Bill Clinton was in his first term – tacking too far to the left after running as a center-left moderate and then staying there in hiding until the republican’s won the majority in the House in 1994. Morris also pointed out this made Bill Clinton reassess his presidency and we all know what came of it, Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay got their agenda through the White House. Bill Clinton was now a bi-partisan, centrist president.

Fast forward to 2009, wherein President Obama finds himself in the same dilemma; just as in 1993, Congress’ approval ratings were also tanking as they are now. The momentum has shifted since 2006, and the republicans look primed to pick-up many seats, if not outright win the majority in the House.

And herein lays the road to 2012: should the republicans win control of Congress, Obama can win a second term, should the republicans not win control of Congress, Obama may still win a second term.

How so? One answer: white guilt.

Should the republicans win control of the Congress and move against Mr. Obama, come 2012, white liberals will rally to their President because of the mean, dastardly republican majority. Any problems won’t be his fault, after all he tried to fix this or that, but the right-wingers in Congress just wouldn’t let him. And let’s not forget the black and Hispanic vote; they’re well likely to share the same sympathy – not letting the first black President succeed.

Should the republicans win a Congressional majority as they did in 1994, Mr. Obama would likely have no trouble throwing his party under the bus, move to the center and ride bi-partisan popularity to reelection.

In the event that the democrats keep control of Congress that too could work in Mr. Obama’s favor. The sympathy wouldn’t be all that different – just replace a republican majority with boogie man right-wing zealots and the huge mess George W. Bush left behind.

Though the tide is definitely against Mr. Obama and his party, the tide is largely comprised of distrust and anger. As Rush Limbaugh has pointed out, that might be enough for republicans to take back the majority, but it won’t be enough to sustain them through 2012. They’ll need to keep in a leadership mode and continue to offer better ideas. But that may be all Mr. Obama needs to get enough white guilt to eek out a second term in 2012.

-- KillswitchPolitick

4 reasons Mr. Obama can’t sell health care

1) “It’s the economy stupid.”

Bill Clinton’s camp bludgeoned Bush 41's reelection chances to death with this little observation. Apparently, the same myopia that tunnel-visioned the elder Bush right out of office is blinding President Obama. Americans respond and are concerned for their pocketbooks (oh, and two wars still being waged). So when the Commander in Chief becomes Dr. No, there’s a two-fold problem: one, he isn’t fixing the economy that Bush broke and two, he’s talking about reforms that everyone (everyone but he and his administration) believes will cost consumers more. Which brings us to the next reason Americans continue to reject health care reform.

2) “What are you talkin’ about Willis?”

A quick anecdote: my brother is a mechanical engineer. I once asked him how a thermostat works and this was his answer verbatim, “It’s a bi-metallic strip of two dissimilar metals affected by the coefficient of thermal expansion.” Wow thanks; that clears it right up, how could I have missed that?

There’s not much difference in my example than what Mr. Obama is telling seniors (the biggest demographic actually listening). They don’t have a clue as to what he’s saying because it’s always something different without being new. Get it? First it was about reform, then about competition, then about stabilizing the economy and now it’s been hijacked by talk of racism. While the reasons purporting for it have changed, the devil in the details have not.

3) “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!”

When big pharmaceutical airs ads backing the President’s health reforms, people are naturally skeptical. Why in the world would big pharm be backing this plan? The inescapable logic is they want to make more money. While average Americans are all for the American way, they tend not to be so keen on gigantic corporate entities that manufacture costly prescription drugs. Although big pharm’s profits are under 5%, seniors don’t care as they pony-up the dough for their prescriptions or have to wade through Medicare red-tape to get prescriptions.

4) Trust me, I’m with the government

As President Obama’s agenda tanks in the polls, out onto the public stage comes former President Carter to throw in his two cents. Jimmy Carter really? Arguably the worst president in the history of the republic; a man that was tossed out of office on a 34% approval rating, who left the economy in shambles, botched foreign affairs and relations, unchecked high interest rates and unemployment and this is your surrogate?

I’m sure it doesn’t help Mr. Obama’s cause when the former President says the opposition are a bunch of racists and because of that, they don’t have the mental capacity to see how great Mr. Obama’s plans are. (For those of you “George Bush was the worst president in history” types, I beg you to ask yourself one simple question…why was he reelected? While his second term economic policies surely paved the way for the crisis we’re in today, he kept the country safe. He kept his eye on the ball and the one issue that mattered to Americans most, national security.)

Today, the issue is the economy and Mr. Obama is not only not doing anything about it, it doesn't seem to be important to him).

-- KillswitchPolitick

With Friends Like These (or, Sympathy for the Messiah)

Amongst the fan-fare and media/electorate honeymoon, once aspiring state senator, and electoral promotion via opponent disqualification to US Senator, the 44^th President became the last man standing in last years national election.

Following what Dick Morris cites as a LBJ inspiration, keeping political enemies closer so they’d be standing inside “pissing outside the tent” rather than in; President Obama trapped the Clintons: the former First Lady as a powerless Secretary of State and pigeon-holed the 42^nd President as a special envoy to Haiti. Former also-twice-ran presidential candidate, Joe Biden became a running mate and has since moved into the Naval Observatory residence.

But in lassoing in his former rivals to hedge his bets, Mr. Obama has to constantly egg-shell walk day by day: he has a Vice President whose gaffes explode without warning, a Secretary of State that’s itching to plunge the knife into his back at the first opportunity, a Press Secretary that bungles his way through one press conference after another, going so far to tell the press core to contact the White House for an explanation of the now infamous Air Force One/NYC photo-op.

And it doesn’t end there.

His Treasury Secretary, like many of his other appointments, has a inexplicable tax problem and runs a field with overreaches on talking head programs, a House Speaker who can’t seem to keep from impeaching her own credibility, a Senate Majority Leader whose re-election prospects are waning fast, a rabid hard-left fringe base that is turning ever more angry and a European fan club that cheered him into office that won’t lend a hand other than to shake and send him on their merry way.

Aside from the personalities, there’s no end of real crisis:

The imploding American auto industry, a seemingly bottomless housing free fall, two wars, a credit calamity, uneasy suits on Wall Street, an insolvent west coast state, ever expanding unemployment and debt larger than any one can possibly count.

Not to mention, a maniacal Persian dictator just itching to start a war with our only true ally in the Middle East and a crazed half-pint NorK who likes to launch missiles as a backdrop to end-of-nuclear proliferation speeches.

The Devil is in the details

Many conservative and liberal talking-heads (among them Rush Limbaugh and Howard Wolfson) have said that Barack Obama needs to get specific and come-down from the lofty hope and change politicking; I even have been engaged in anecdotal conversations purporting the same.

It is understandable that many have arrived at this given Obama's sliding poll numbers and the backfire of the high-minded Berlin speech, the absence of a VP bounce and to-date a mundane convention.

But there's one problem with this idea: when it comes to experience, there's no there there.

Let me explain this the way I have in ordinary conversation: I first qualify my question with "Whether you may agree with them or not, do you give credibility to Bill Clinton when he speaks on foreign policy, economics, or American politics?" Then I continue to ask the same about Newt Gingrich. The answer is inevitably "yes".

The answer is "yes", because , they have to their credit, first-hand experience...Clinton was a professor, state attorney general, Chair of the National Governor's Association, and a two-term governor; Gingrich a history professor, congressman, Speaker of the House, and author.

Barack has an unremarkable state representative record and just half a national senatorial term, which translates into a real deficit on credibility.

Should Obama begin to espouse specifics on his policy intentions, the door to questioning his credibility deficit swings wide open into his own face.

He can't get specific because of this fact and if he does and is questioned he can only revert to relating to his time as a community organizer (which will not stand the test of reality) or that he's relying on his advisers and veep (which begs the question, why then is Obama on the top of the ticket).


Moreover, conspicuous by it's absence is any political rung climbing. That is, the run for and holding of lesser offices -- as is the recognized standard. Barack seems to be reaching too far and when one considers how he arrived at his previous office, it looks all the more like a leap of faith (hence the hope and change identity).

So the senator is left to talk high ideals and chant hope and change, sloganeer overcome, but that too makes clear that the democratic nomination when to the wrong gender.

The Hillary 2012 Strategy

The Internet is buzzing with the news that Phillip Berg, a Hillary Clinton supporter, has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Illinois Senator Barack Obama, the DNC and the FEC claiming that the presumptive democrat nominee is not constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

(Berg is a former gubernatorial and senatorial candidate, ex-chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County, PA, past member of the Democratic State Committee, and previous Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania).

We also know that Hillary has not released her delegates and rumors fly that her supporters lobbied the super delegates, which assisted in placing her name in nomination for a roll-call vote at the Democratic Convention.

Likewise known is the lack of support from Obama’s campaign to aid in retiring her campaign debt and her tepid stumping for Obama, while getting prime billing at the convention for herself, Bill and Chelsea.

What is one to make of this?

The most convenient and simplest answer is trying to figuratively secure the nomination for herself. I use the adjective “figuratively” because she is attempting to place her viability before the DNC and the average democrat voter.

The more her supporters are able to undermine Obama’s run for election, the more she looks to be the obvious choice in 2012. One might then contend that her inevitability didn’t bring her nomination to fruition in this go-around.

That is because it’s now painfully obvious that Nancy Pelosi, the DNC and beltway dems tried to jettison her (and Bill) from the party leadership. Clinton fatigue has assuredly set in, and the time was right to rid themselves of the couple from Hope.

However, if her supporters (who are not by-and-large backing Barack) are successful at putting the kibosh on Obama to the extent it costs him the election, she becomes the natural choice in 2012.

And with Obama doing so poorly in the polls (he should be well ahead of McCain by at least 15 points among likely voters), it makes evident the fact he is not connecting with the American public – no matter what the mainstream media has reported.

There are of course other factors that have kept him from running further ahead: his guilt by association scandals, his inability to speak off-the-cuff and his lack of experience make it all-the-more-difficult.

But with all of the ancillary help he’s received (e.g. favorable media coverage, endorsements, the shutting-out of Bill and Hillary, et cetera) he’s still not been able to capitalize on it.

Hillary knows these facts full-well and won’t hesitate to use them in her favor. As we’ve learned about the Clinton’s, that which doesn’t kill them only makes them stronger.