Hank Williams Jr. included Hitler with Netanyahu. THAT went well. On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM, David R. Block <[email protected]>wrote:
> "Cult of Personality."--Living Colour (see You Tube). Of course, you > might not like it, they include FDR and Kennedy with Stalin and Mussolini. > They're BLACK. > > David > > "Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than > people do is a swine."*--**P. J. O’Rourke * > > On 10/10/2011 2:16 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > American politics is about coalitions and seizing the center > --especially winning over > Independent voters. Winning Indies is important because the base of each > party > will vote for their party's candidates at 80% rates almost no matter what. > For all > practical purposes the only voters in play, who are persuadable, are > Independents, > roughly 1/3rd of the electorate. > > These factors are absolutely crucial for electoral success. > > American politics is also about economics, but only in the sense that > focus on > the economy is essential in bad times and only one issue among others in > good times. > In bad times the electorate demands results which correct economic > problems. > In such periods the economy must be issue #1 and the very highest > priority. > > All of this is --or should be-- completely obvious, especially to serious > politicians. > > Incredibly none of this registered on the Obama White House. It was from > the outset > and has been ever since, personality centered, apparently with no other > plan than > to make the most out of Obama's popularity. Economic issues were approached > as if with the passage of a mega-billion dollar bailout for Wall Street > everything > would be made whole again, and no need to "ride herd" on the economy > as long as it took to get the job done. This simply never seems to have > occurred to Obama. > > Such ineptness is breath-taking. As much as I detested the presidency of Wm > Clinton, > the man was a skilled politician who, like JBJ before him, knew the game of > politics > by second nature. Obama has been notable for governing like an ideologue, > for running away from the center ( while emphasizing centrism rhetorically > , a case of > hypocrisy like nothing else for many years ), and not having any real > comprehension > of what Independents are all about. > > Now, finally, he is paying the price. > > Billy > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Real Clear Politics* > > October 10, 2011 Obama Team Split on How to Rally Unruly Coalition *By* > *Michael > Barone*<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/?author=Michael+Barone&id=14827> > > President Barack Obama obviously is scrambling in his attempt to win > re-election. He has proclaimed himself the underdog and has given up his > pretense of being a pragmatic centrist compromiser in favor of harsh class > warfare rhetoric. > > But it's worth taking note of what he has squandered. In 2008, Obama won 53 > percent of the popular vote. That may not sound like a landslide, but it's > more than any other Democratic presidential nominee in history except Andrew > Jackson, Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson. > Higher than Woodrow Wilson and Grover Cleveland, higher than Harry Truman > and John Kennedy, higher than Jimmy Carter and (but don't bring up the > subject with him) Bill Clinton. > > Why have so few Democratic nominees won 53 percent or more, as 10 different > Republican nominees have? The historical reason is that the Democratic Party > has been an unruly coalition of disparate groups -- big-city Catholics and > Southern whites for the century after the Civil War -- which usually has > been hard to hold together. > > Obama's 2008 coalition included two-thirds of young voters and Latinos, > majorities of those earning more than $200,000 and those earning less than > $50,000, non-college whites in the upper Midwest, and 95 percent of blacks > nationwide. Some obvious tensions there. > > Now his strategists feel obliged to pick which groups he'll concentrate on > to get back up to 50 percent. What's interesting is that his demographic > strategists and his issue strategists seem to be eyeing different groups. > > The demographic targeters, in their quest for 270 electoral votes, have > decided to concentrate on traditionally Republican states that Obama carried > in 2008, according to a report in The New York Times. They note that some of > these states -- e.g., Colorado, Virginia and North Carolina -- have > above-average percentages of college-educated voters, who trended strongly > toward Obama. > > They add that those three states have more electoral votes (37) than > Florida (29) and twice as many as Ohio (18), which were both target states > in each of the past three presidential elections. But Ohio and Florida have > lower percentages of college-educated residents, and the movement toward > Obama compared with past Democrats was relatively minimal. > > This may be smart targeting. For years, Democrats have been seeking to > regain the majorities they won from blue-collar whites in the days of > Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy. But they are a declining percentage of > the electorate, and it's been a long time since they have given Democrats > any majority at all for president. > > Statewide polling since June has shown Obama with majority disapproval in > Florida (43 percent approves; 53 percent disapproves) and in Ohio (44-52). > That supports the view that his chances are tenuous in those states. > > But unfortunately for these strategists, recent polls don't show Obama > doing much better in Virginia (45-50), North Carolina (45-51) or Colorado > (46-50). The Obamaites point to Sen. Michael Bennet's 2010 victory in > Colorado as a model to follow. But Bennet won by only 48 to 46 percent, and > the Democratic governor won with just 51 percent against split opposition. > And Republicans carried the state's popular vote for the House. > > There's also an enormous gulf between the so-called Colorado strategy and > Obama's stance on issues. It's not clear that lambasting Republicans for not > raising taxes on millionaires and corporate jets is going to win votes or > rally the enthusiasm of currently disappointed college-educated and young > voters. > > They may actually have looked past the campaign rally cries of "pass this > bill" to notice that it doesn't have 50 votes in the Democratic-majority > Senate and indeed has hardly any Democratic co-sponsors. Senate Majority > Leader Harry Reid has been employing parliamentary legerdemain to prevent a > vote on Obama's bill. > > It's not so clear, either, that bashing millionaires and corporate jets is > going to rekindle the enthusiasm of young voters and Latinos discouraged > after months of joblessness. They may remember that spending hundreds of > billions of dollars on the 2009 stimulus package didn't do much good. > > At the moment, the only states where polls since June show Obama with job > approval as high as 50 or 51 percent are those where he got 60-plus percent > in 2008, plus New Jersey, where he got 57 percent. > > Those are enough to get him up to 200 electoral votes, 70 short of a > majority. > > But they're not enough to reassemble the 53 percent coalition that hoped he > would bring change for the better. That coalition, historically unusual, > seems now to be part of history itself. > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > <[email protected]> <[email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community < > [email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
