Posted on 10/02/2008 11:14:01 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Change is an effective mantra in elections following two consecutive terms by one party in office. That is especially the case when the current officeholder is unpopular and the economy is weak. Barack Obama has that as a tremendous advantage in this race and recent polls breaking his way show it, but there are some significant factors that could still lead to his undoing.
When you look at the unpopularity of the current administration, the financial crisis that has overshadowed all other issues, the fawning media and the promise of a charismatic young figure offering change, it would appear this race is over. In fact, it would not be surprising if that candidate were leading by twenty points by now. Prospects are certainly looking good for an Obama win at this time, but there are a few factors that can still work in John McCain’s favor. Obama’s liberal voting record, his far left associations and the fact that Democrats control the Congress could all still cause trouble for Obama.
Obama is spending significantly more in my state of North Carolina than McCain, so I see a lot of Obama ads. One I saw several times this week was incredibly reminiscent of some Bill Clinton ads from 1996. I remember the Clinton ads because even though I opposed him, I was impressed by how good and how persuasive they were. Bill Clinton sat in what looked like could be a living room, or perhaps a large homey office, with natural lighting, and talked directly to the camera. He told voters that he was for a middle class tax cut and for “ending welfare as we know it.” I couldn’t argue with either of those ideas. I knew enough about the Democratic party at the time to know it was pretty unlikely that would happen, but I had to admit it sounded good.
When Clinton promised those things, the economy had already begun, and was maintaining, a steady recovery. That didn’t stop him from referring to it as the worst economy in 50 years, though, and the nation bought it. Now we have an economic situation that both candidates agree is one of the most dire our country has faced. In spite of the fact that Democratic policies are largely to blame, the unpopular sitting Republican President and his party are going to be saddled with the majority of the blame. Those in the media will ensure they are, regardless of whether or not they are deserving of it.
In the Obama ad I have seen many times this week, he is sitting in a setting very similar to the one Bill Clinton used in 1996. Also like Clinton, he talks directly into the camera and promises tax cuts for the middle class. Will this approach be as effective for Obama as it was for Clinton?
A big difference between Bill Clinton and Barack Obama is that Clinton could credibly claim to be a moderate. He was a governor from a southern state. Southern Democrats are sometimes just as conservative as their Republican counterparts. Barack Obama is from Chicago and he has an unbelievably liberal voting record both as a state legislator and in the United States Senate. Barack Obama has voted against tax cuts or for tax increases 94 times. Obama has a liberal track record that should set off voters’ alarm bells. Why should anyone believe he would now cut taxes when he has consistently opposed them for so many years?
Bill Clinton promised tax cuts, but even in an economy that was recovering nicely, he came back to voters barely a month in office and said that in spite of working as hard as he had ever worked, he was not going to be able to deliver them. There are certainly many excuses Obama could find to back out of his tax cut promise, but even if he did come through on it, there is another problem with it. Obama’s tax plan is hard on small businesses. Even though many lower and middle income individuals would see less taxes personally, small businesses would face a bigger tax burden. Those small businesses employ lower and middle income people. If voters understand that the same tax policy that might allow them a bit more money in their refund checks could also put them in the unemployment line, they might not be so eager to vote for it. The only way they will know that though is if John McCain can successfully make that point.
The only reason Bill Clinton delivered on his “ending welfare as we know it” pledge was because after vetoing it twice, he was told that he had to pass it or he would lose his re-election. He therefore signed a welfare reform bill that a Republican majority had passed. That brings up another factor that could work in McCain’s favor. Voters favor divided power.
The Democrats currently control both the House and Senate and barring some extreme unforeseen circumstances will not only continue to hold, but most likely increase their margins of control. Barack Obama has the most liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate. Most far left liberal policies are not terribly popular with American voters, but if the Democrats control the White House and all of Congress, voters will have essentially given them a blank check to do just about anything they want. One only has to look at the extreme liberal voting record of Barack Obama, as well as the liberal agendas and records of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to see what they can expect in an Obama presidency.
It should be obvious to voters that an Obama presidency along with a Democrat-controlled Congress would result in the most liberal policies many of us have seen in our lifetimes or imagined in our wildest nightmares. Add to that the very real possibility that a President Obama would appoint two or three Supreme Court judges. There would be virtually no check on the power held by liberal Democrats and they would feel emboldened by the election to claim a mandate for anything they proposed.
This is a scenario that should frighten all but those in the most extreme left wing of the Democrat Party, but I don’t think it is a scenario that most voters have really considered. Those in the media are not going to write or talk about Obama’s extreme liberal voting record, just as they have not, and will not, investigate his associations with the likes of domestic terrorists, slumlords, and fat cats that fleeced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is up to the McCain campaign to draw that picture for the voters.
Those on the left will say it is fear mongering, even though for years they have warned of the extreme right wing and the fascist dictator state that America would become under Republican governance. They can’t do that with John McCain, who has so often been in opposition to conservatives. Since he would almost certainly have a Congress controlled by Democrats, any attempt to scare Americans with a rightwing fascist state is absurd.
Those on the left can neither credibly argue that a far left agenda would not prevail in an Obama administration. Barack Obama’s voting record is Exhibit One that is exactly what voters should expect. The case against Obama and complete Democrat control of government is bolstered by crooked associates of Obama such as William Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Rev. JeremiahWright. Additional clues to the leftist paradise that might exist under Obama can be seen in the thuggish attempts to silence his critics, whether it be his goons trying to shut down talk radio interviews or his operatives in state offices who are threatening to sue anyone who makes claims about Obama they deem false.
It would be no mystery to voters that an Obama presidency would be dominated by a far left liberal agenda if they were looking at the track records and associates of the candidates. Instead they are largely being shown an illusion of a modern day Messiah who is ready to unite the country and solve all its problems. They are being shown images of adorable children singing songs of worship and praise to Obama who is going to “rearrange” things to make them right. They are being given fluffy, puffy stories about the candidate by those who profess to be news reporters. The veil is so thin, really, if you know what stands behind it. Whether or not the McCain campaign can lift that veil in the final month of this campaign will determine the course of the country in ways we can only now imagine.
There are a new generation of voters who think that Clinton was responsible for the tech boom and that Bush was the worst president ever (they never lived through carter). Even though economy lags presidencies by several years, that is the conventional wisdom and it is probably why Obama will win.
This close to elections, everythign is about perception. Whatever issues the voters favor foremost in their mind, the party that is more favored in dealing with those issues win.
The issue spectrum right now is like 70% economy, 20% national security and 10% other. Even though Obama has absolutely no experience with the economy, he gets the typical Democratic bump from it and that will be the story on November 5th this year.
Obama will lose because he is undoubtedly, unequivocally the biggest liar in modern history. So much so that the 14 lies of Biden will seem like nuggets of truth. There is no Obama — it’s all a lie.
Obama has structural problems:
1. He is relying on the Youth Vote, the generally don’t turn out in accordance with their registraton numbers.
2. The states he needs to win are long shotish, FL, OH, NC, VA.
3. The most reliable voting block, Senior Citizens trend to McCain.
Im in NC and have seen a few Obama ads, not the fireplace one but a sort of dopey one with 60’s school film feel to it about healthcare.
He does have structural problems but he doesn’t need any one of those advantages to win. If turnout is the same across demographics as it was during 2004 and party identification was the same, Kerry probably would’ve won with the issue profile we have today.
On election day, both the fact that Obama bin Laden released a tape and Kerry attacked Bush only on defense issues in the last few days raised national security and Iraq within the issue profile, both issues which favored Bush.
Today, the economy is by far the number 1 issue.
1) He doesn’t need the Youth Vote, enough people have abandoned the republican party and the exurbs have turned democratic.
2) He can win without these states. In fact if he wins every state Kerry did (not all too unlikely) + Iowa (pretty much guanrateed to win due to McCain’s opposal of ethanol) he is only a few votes away.
Obama only needs to flip 2 states from 2004. He’s already flipped one. Colorado is the most likely flip along with New hampshire.
3) Yeah, seniors will vote for McCain which is why he will probably win Florida and Ohio, but its not enough.
McCain is in a tough race and is making all the wrong moves. He has to define Obama as unsafe, and narrow down Obama’s advantage on the economy. He’s done very little of both of that recently.
“Obama will lose because he is undoubtedly, unequivocally the biggest liar in modern history.”
Unfortunately that had no effect on B. Clinton.
Well first of all, Bush lost NH in 2004.
NM was a bush “win” but that was way after the fact.
And in states with heavy senior citizen populations that are predominatly white, Obama will have a similar problem.
In MD, the Wilder Effect was worth about 3% vs the final polling numbers.
And IMO, that is why McCain is messing around in PA, the demographics there are heavily Senior Citizen and mostly white, ditto Maine.
I think, and hope, it is going to be a Shock and Awe campaign in the next couple of weeks.
His not-Bush image will be shattered by CRA, ACORN, Pritzer/Raines/Johnson, Franks and Dodds relevations.
His Presidency will be symbolic issue “should” be shattered by Black Liberation Theology relevations.
On top of that you have corrupt slumlord Rezko with 11 foreclosed housing projects in Obama’s district and radical education/weak on crime ally Ayers.
His not funding troops and air-raiding villages and killing civilians doesnt help him either.
If the polls were going our way we wouldn't be talking theory and yeah-but and what-if.
I've encountered too many Obama voters who simply are incapable of logic OR base all their life decisions on emotion.
We are heading towards some kind of collapse, and the mob will be made up not of people who will want to get to work and rebuild, but of people who will demand someone else rescue them.
I recently heard on the radio some folks in Texas whose community was hit very hard by the recent storms, but you sure don't hear about them on the MSM--and THEY haven't heard from New Orleans, even though they took in Katrina victims. And Ray Nagin ran to DC ahead of the Texas folks to make sure he got first in line for aid.
We are waiting for a sleeping giant to awaken, but in fact he may be dead.
Very rational and logical article.
However, the hatred for GW Bush is just about as “in your face” as anything I can recall. Even when I was much younger, very much against the VietNam war and Nixon and Cambodia, and marching in protests...the current mood of anger at “the way things are going” is really palpable.
And the incessant throbbing of the current financial crisis is being played up like we are really about to go over some figurative cliff. The explanation of causes is not penetrating past the current revulsion with the administration. The idea that this is happening on Bush’s watch is such an easy leap for the thin-of-mind to blame on Bush and “party of big business”. Never mind that the approval rating of Congress is at all-time lows. It just isn’t getting past the pure hatred and resentment.
What the author talks about is fine and dandy; and I surely hope that the electorate will have some kind of revelation when they are actually standing in a voting booth....but right now, this seems like a seriously uphill struggle.
I am NOT encouraged by the rah-rah Sarah reaction to the debate tonight. We all hear what we want to hear. I don’t think anyone’s mind was changed, and (donning flame suit) I actually think Biden did better. Palin did very well, and yes, Biden bulled her mostly with BS and lies, but IMHO, Biden won.
Come on, have faith?
I think we can agree that many polls are over weighting dems, plus the Bradley effect is going to be happening again to some degree.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-morrison2-2008oct02,0,5653453.column
“I called up Charles Henry, who teaches African American studies at UC Berkeley. In 1983, he was the first to measure the Bradley effect. Yes, perceptions of race are changing, but still, for Obama now, as for Tom Bradley then, Henry calculates that it will take “a double-digit lead to feel confident come election day.”
It grieves me to say so, but he may be right. Good polls don’t change bad attitudes. If America 2008 hasn’t changed much from California 1982, by next year pundits will be calling it the “Obama effect.”
Now the only “bad attitude” is lying to pollsters.
That does not make someone racist, simply embarrassed to admit they are not voting for the black man. Racism may or may not be why. Probably just PC guilt.
It doesn’t matter if he is the biggest liar of all-time. The MSM make him look like the second coming of Christ.
Hussein’s not even an American!
McCain treats him like the boy he is in the next debates.
The Dems are apparently having "youth," such as college students, vote absentee on the same day they register them, thus making sure that they vote.
We now live in an Oprah/Springer nation. Emotion and self-indulgence rather than reason, truth and principle. Masses are not interested in rational argument. They are driven by ugly emotions. Envy, jealousy, covetousness, hatred and bitterness.
Thanks for the rat talking points.
On election day the legions of young seig heil liberal voters who will be expected to ride to the rescue of the fascist nobama will be busy election day sleeping off hang-overs, digging through the ashtray searching for roaches and cruising bikini.com.
How do we know this? Ask Presidents Dukakis, Mondale and McGovern. All were elected by the “youth” vote, right?
Your young liberal buddies will be crying in your stale beer cups. Nice try, though.
No the story will be whether the “Bradley Effect” is still in play?
The economy was terrific in 2000, and Gore lost. The economy was good in 2004 and Bush barely won.
There is a month to go with two debates left .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.