Obama’s losing strategy

January 9, 2012

It’s very clear what Obama and the Democrats’ 2012 strategy will be: “The people versus the powerful.”

They will paint the “do-nothing” Republican Congress, and the Republican presidential nominee, as puppets of big business and evil corporations.  Mitt Romney is a perfect target for this, because of his work at Bain. The #Occcupiers have laid the foundation, and can continue to help Democrats in 2012.

The problem with this: They’re trying it at the wrong time, in the wrong country.

This is 2012, not 1932 or 1948.
Several decades ago, the world was more accepting of statist solutions. Communism and socialism were on the rise everywhere, and even Americans were much more left-leaning.

Today’s world is very different. Free enterprise has proved to be the only viable economic system, and people all over the world are much more suspicious of statist solutions. Even the Communists in countries like China are Communists in Name Only.

This is the United States of America.
Not Latin America, or other countries where catchy populism holds sway. Americans are much more economically sophisticated than Democrats give them credit for. Suburban soccer moms and office park dads, who decide elections, depend on corporations for their livelihoods. They think of themselves as value creators who would do much better if only government could get out of their way. They only vote Democrat when circumstances are unique, or when Republicans scare them off with social conservatism. An economic-populist message has very little appeal to them, and will scare them right into the arms of the GOP.

Obama’s strategy will get him to about 45 percent of the vote by revitalizing his base. But it’ll be hard for him to get beyond that. And it’ll cost Democrats seats all the way down-ballot.

It’s a losing strategy, but he doesn’t have much choice. He can lose big gracefully, or he can lose small in an ugly way. He’s chosen the latter.

6 Responses to Obama’s losing strategy

  1. Sarah says... on January 9, 2012 at 10:50 am

    … that MSM and Obama want to face Romney as they see him as the most “beatable”.


    and it has a good chance working with Romney as the GOP candidate.

  2. Sarah says... on January 9, 2012 at 10:56 am

    if Romney is the candidate … real conservatives may shun Romney for his flip-flopping, Romneycare, embracing cap-n-trade, TARP, bailouts, ties to Wall Street elitists and sit home on election night or go 3rd party if a 3rd party candidate exists. r we sure we want Romney? r we sure he’s ‘electable’? he still hasn’t sold his case to most would be GOP voters and when he tries to sell it, he’s gonna have a lot of explaining to do based on his past views and flip flops. will they believe his sales pitch that he’s now really a ‘conservative’?

  3. unclefred on January 9, 2012 at 11:24 am

    Sarah – Real conservatives care more about saving their country than refusing to vote in an ideological fit of pique. Romney is far from the first choice of conservatives, but, should he be the nominee, the vast majority of them will turn out to vote, and a substantial number of them will work their hearts out to get him elected. 2012 is about ending the reign of the ONE, not about the purity of his opponent.

  4. I am on January 9, 2012 at 11:46 am

    Romney won’t get that much of 10-15% hardcore un-RINO’s and being a Mormon will probably cost him most of his shot at the 10-15% that makes up the religious right. The right is going to continue to kick the stuffing out of him all the way and still he is probably going to be GOP candidate. I think it’s almost a lock at this point that Obama is going to get another 4 years.

  5. anonymous un-RINO on January 9, 2012 at 3:15 pm

    Romney is Obambi’s preferred candidate. He dispirits his own ostensible voter base, and pumps up Obambi’s.

    The populist Tea Party is the driving force in politics right now, and is largely animated by massive revolt against ObamaCare, and the RINOs want to send up the guy who INVENTED ObamaCare… Willard?!?

    It really is beyond comprehension that the RINOs would insist on sending up this progressive crapweasel as the nominee. I realize RINOs are stupid, but they can’t be THIS stupid, can they?

  6. Berlet98 on January 9, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    Parties, Dissensions, and Eruptions at the White House

    Writer Jodi Kantor had better watch her back. Her simply-titled book, The Obamas, set to be released January 10th, is simply a blockbuster which could bust the White House.

    Described in part on Amazon as, ”Filled with riveting detail and insight into their [the Obama] partnership, emotions and personalities, and written with a keen eye for the ironies of public life, THE OBAMAS is an intimate portrait that will surprise even readers who thought they knew the President and First Lady,” the book does far more than that.

    The tell-all book based on interviews with 30 administration aides exposes the First Couple as frauds and dissemblers, liars and back-biters.

    Pre-release details of The Obamas have been leaking out in little dribs and major drabs and one of the latter is that during the depths of the Great Recession in 2009, Obama and Company threw a Halloween party at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that would have rivaled anything Hollywood or Broadway could have ever conceived.
    In fact, Hollywood may have conceived it. At least Tinseltown was well- represented at the Alice in Wonderland-themed event, with megastar Johnny Depp, director Tim Burton, and Star Wars’ Chewbacca along with White House staffers, military families, and D.C. kids in attendance as well as the mainstream media.

    Sounds like an extravaganza, right?

    Well, it seems to have been–with the state dining room decorated by Burton in full Halloween regalia, Depp decked out as the Mad Hatter, Michelle Obama as a black and yellow cat, fruit punch served in blood vials, huge stuffed animals, etc.

    Yet, it was as if it never happened since only one member of what BigJournalism.com calls Obama’s Palace Guards–the MSM–reported on the festivities. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=12062.)