The US presidential election now has its main characters in place as Mitt Romney has vanquished each of his foes. Now the never ending Media speculation takes place; every utterance of candidates is analyzed. President Obama drew first blood when he came out on side of gay marriages at the same time (an amazing coincidence!) that it was learned that Romney had bullied gays when he was at school.
It’s commonly held that the economy very much including unemployment will be the deciding factor and I’ve no doubt that it will be an issue. Mr. Obama will have been in charge for four years and the Republicans will lay the blame for all economic grief on the President. That this is not fair is irrelevant – even though the genesis of the problem happened when George W. Bush removed enforcement rules that covered banks and the Stock Market.
One should not be surprised, as the Republicans are ingenious at turning issues to their advantage. One needs only to look at the last election when much decorated war hero, John Kerry, was made out, by the Republicans, as a craven coward. In Bush’s case. Karl Rove and the Republican gnomes had many believing that this draft dodger “W” was a hero.
In 1988, the Democrat candidate was painted by Bush I as being soft on crime because a black killer, Willie Horton, had been released under the Parole laws of his state. This played oh so neatly into American visions of crime all over the place and, especially catered to their unspoken but deeply held fear of Afro-Americans.
What makes it so difficult to predict November’s election is that the dirty tricks are yet to be played. They will be, of course since both parties know that negative ads, the dirtier the better, work.
The unity of each party is important and here Mr. Obama has the clear edge as the Republicans have serious fault lines, the main one being the section known as the Tea Party. This hard “right” wing only plays out well with those who will vote Republican anyway. Its downside is that it scares hell out of “mainstream” Republicans who in fact support government assistance to the disadvantaged, if not with the same enthusiasm as Democrats. It’s here that one of the main battles will be fought. Mr. Obama will point out that the Stock Market crash and the resultant Recession happened under the Republicans. Again, with their extraordinary ability to turn facts on their heads, Mr. Romney will claim that the fault lies in the corporate giveaways by the Democrats since they took office. President Obama will use the successful tactic of President Truman in 1948 when he ran against the “do nothing 80th Congress” and pulled off one of the great upsets in history. As Mr. Truman went by train, whistle stop by whistle stop, he would address the crowds and, and a suitable point, someone would holler “give ‘em hell, Harry” which he proceeded to do.
Mr. Obama will do his own version of this though, no doubt, by plane, not train.
Health Care is a popular issue in the US principally because they don’t have a fully operative public one, unique in the “western” world. Mr. Obama’s health care system has been delayed and blocked by Congress which is in thrall to the immensely rich complete with lobbyists to match. This remains, however, a pretty good issue for the President with this drawback – most of its appeal is to those who will vote Democrat anyway.
In the hotbed of conservative religions, one would think that Mr. Romney, a devoted churchgoer, would have the advantage over the not very religious president. Not necessarily so for religion is hottest in the South and Mormonism, Mr. Romney’s religion, is there looked upon as heretical. Since the South has been Republican since Nixon’s Mr. Romney might actually lose support in that vital area.
What about the Vice-Presidential nomination? Curiously, this seems to be a non issue with voters, with the result that Presidential candidates can do much as it wishes.
In a rare moment of humour, President Nixon was able to say that he didn’t fear being assassinated because that would bring Spiro Agnew into the White House! The thought that Sarah Palin might have become President would, one would think, be a sobering thought but there’s no evidence of that yet. I suspect that may have changed, if only because the former Alaska governor on the ticket most surely had an adverse effect for the Republicans in 2008.
The enormous powers co-opted by Dick Cheney in the Bush II administrations has also focussed the issue and I would suspect it will affect the Romney selection. Mr. Obama will stick with Joe Biden. The VP selection is not made on competence but for very political reasons. The phrase is “balanced ticket” and involves geography, religion, political history – in short, matters that have little, if anything, to do with ability.
Surprisingly, foreign affairs have a minimal impact on presidential elections as evidenced by the victory of Bush II in 2004 in the face of a most unpopular war in Iraq and an unsuccessful one in Afghanistan.
What is relevant are the televised debates. They don’t usually create a winner so much as a loser. To avoid a clanger – such as when President Ford denied that Poland was under USSR control – is the object of the exercise. No one suggests for a moment that the debates focus attention of the candidates on issues – clearly the event is for the benefit of the media. It’s also clear – to me, at any rate – that President Obama will have a very clear advantage. Mr. Romney is stiff, wooden in his replies to questions; these are things that President Obama clearly is not. The president is loquacious if not glib, and is good under pressure, a trait Mr. Romney does not have.
These debates will no doubt draw out opinions on foreign matters but unless one or other badly screws up, the issue, sadly, is not important to voters. The winner? Mair’s Axiom II is that “you don’t have to be a 10 in politics, you can be a 3 if everyone else is a 2”. President Obama wins on that comparison. The election is President Obama’s to lose – and he won’t.
