DONATELLI: Obama’s ‘smart’ campaign

[OldMercsRule]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/6/obamas-smart-campaign/

"There were two major political announcements this week, one from President Obama and the other from a leading House Republican. The content of each tells more than you need to know about the direction of the two parties and the tenor of the upcoming presidential campaign.

The country is facing a third consecutive year of trillion-dollar deficits and unemployment near 9 percent. We are now involved in a third war in the Middle East. Health care and energy costs are rising again and Mr. Obama announced his campaign for re-election.

That election is not for another 18 months. The Democratic convention is 15 months away. The president has no primary opponent and no primaries to win, but why wait when there’s a billion dollars to be raised and so many speeches to give?

The president is good at campaigning. He gives a great speech, interacts well with crowds and can truly offer an inspirational message. The problem is that he already is the president and should be doing the things he talks about doing on the campaign trail."

Obamaprompter knows his followers luv the reverb when he flaps his lyin' lips... :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

[Kathianne]

Where the electorate will be at election time psychologically is always tricky tea leaves reading. I don't think the political class of either party has an inkling though to journey most Americans have been over the past 2+ years.

During 2007 and 2008 most Americans were anxious, they knew the real estate markets were falling, but they weren't selling their home yet. They hoped that things would improve by the time they needed to. Most had jobs though many knew of someone who'd lost their job or had to take cuts. They saw businesses closing, but it wasn't theirs or likely someone they knew.

By 2009 many more had lost jobs and people's behaviors were fundamentally changing. It no longer was someone else, most were afraid of their own debt and their own source of income. By the time of the inauguration most of the country hoped that a new president would bring the 'hope and change' he'd campaigned on, even if they hadn't bought it for their vote. The optimism lasted longer than it's effect. Housing kept tanking; new 'emergency spending' by Washington turned into mountains of dollar printing. People did notice that while they were trying to pay down their debt, the government was acting in ways opposite. They might have learned their own lessons late, but most knew the government seemed to be ignorant of any need to learn.

So the people, not wanting to be called racist rubes, tried to keep liking the man, while losing confidence and support for the actions coming out of the government. Most saw their municipalities begin cutting back when they did, spending less even on necessities but beginning to panic not fast enough. States held out for the most part on the cut backs until mid 2010, people noticed the stories of their state deficit. In IL the magic number was $13 Billion and by law they were to hand in a balanced budget. Would states go bankrupt? So far that hasn't happened, but people know something else is coming.

But Washington? No cuts. Oh they couldn't get a budget, but they just kept going. The story died in the newspapers and nightly reports. Yet, most people knew that this couldn't keep going. They'd done it and they still were trying to pay down. For most their debt wasn't nearly as overwhelming as the worst case stories. They stopped adding to their debt and paid down their balances. Some walked away from their mortgages or short sold. Most kept paying and decided they'd have to ride it out.

But not the government. They spent more and kept borrowing from foreign lenders at non-fixed interests rates. The newly economically aware populace had already started wondering, 'what if inflation hits?' Now it has.

As I said at the beginning, I don't think the political class understands what most people do. This ignorance isn't Democrat or Republican, the political class is of both parties. They both fear the Tea Parties where the message is very different that what the political class believes. That message is resonating with many voters, even if they have serious doubts about many of the candidates being linked to the Tea Parties, willingly or not. The political class hopes that by saying, "Tea Partiers" candidate to their challenger they raise fears. They hope that the economy will somehow come back enough to make the fears good enough to win.

Somehow I think the new reality will result in results that none really can be clear about. People want the cuts that the political class seems unwilling to deal with. They want a budget, they want plans. They do fear what may happen to those dependent on the government in significant ways. They don't want homeless or hungry or sick. At the same time, they know that things can't keep going the way they have. Any candidate that taps into this new reality, that isn't a apparent 'nutter' will rise.

Dangerous times.

[CSM]

Very well said! I think people (at least the ones who pay bills of their own) are beginning to realize that the government cannot continue the crazy spending spree. Let's face it, even with unlimited power to raise taxes, eventually the debt can and will overwhelm even a 100% tax rate for all. The politicians at all levels MUST understand that even the United States of America cannot sustain the burden of debt they are creating.

[Gaffer]

One thing the media and politico's don't understand, is calling someone a teapartier makes them walk a little taller and stand a little straighter. It's only a bad name to libs, politican's and the media.