More Action, More Jobs

Dearest Mr. Obama,

Barry, your economic message sucks. I think you've done a fine job, considering the "headwinds" and all, but you don't seem to be making that case very effectively to anyone but people who already support you. Everything you've offered so far is easily countered by your opposition and thus drowns in the din of the media. You need to simplify.

Do you remember Herman Cain, B.O.? I'm sure do. If you think hard enough you'll even recall he was once the frontrunner to the GOP nomination. Was it because he had good ideas? No, he was batshit crazy. Was it because he ran an effective campaign? Holy Christ no. It was because no matter what you had to say about him, he had an economic message everyone could understand and articulate. 

Even when the logical flaws inherent in his plan were pointed out, his numbers held and his message stayed just as effective as it had been. The Cain Train was unstoppable. I regret only that he was unable to quell the vicious, scurrilous rumors of personal mistakes...

In short, Bizzay B., I suggest you adopt and repeat the following phrase, as Latinos say, ad nauseam:

"More Action, More Jobs."

Just try it out. Read the following out loud: "Help me get Congress to stop fighting progress - we need More Action. Help me pass the American Jobs Bill - we need More Jobs. Stop the partisan gridlock; We need More Action. Stop the European austerity; We need More Jobs. Barack Obama: More Action, More Jobs. Re-elect me, muthafuckas!"

How good did that feel? You got to artfully suggest Congress is responsible for this mess while trumpeting your key economic initiative. You even got to tie Republicans to the shambles that is the European Union and maybe remind voters of how bad things could have been for us. 

And, if I were asked what your core economic message was, as a supporter, I would no longer have to ramble on about headwinds and cars in ditches and skipped tabs; I could simply say, "Barack Obama stands for more action and more jobs."

(It could also explain away some of your executive overreach, Mr. Constitutional Scholar. Congress wants less action - and therefore fewer jobs, as per our new message - so you, the man of action, have had to circumvent them for the good of your country and the jobs therein. More Action, More Jobs.)

You don't have to take my genius slogan word-for-word. Play with it, make it your own. But you do need   a simple argument that can cut through the clutter. And as of now you don't have one.

With Love,
-JD

Preparing for Panic Mode

Alright. I admit I'm a little worried. I'm not panicked - there are bright spots yet, the math is still in my candidate's favor - but I'm getting more concerned.

The media coverage of Obama has been decidedly negative. I don't say that in a whiny woe-is-me sort of way (I'm no conservative); the media is just seeking controversy. Presidential elections are their Black Friday - they'll coast on the investments and payouts of this cycle's coverage for the next four years. They need a close race. You can't blame a guy for feeding his kids.

In his effort to flip the evolving script, the President gave a big speech that was more picked apart and fretted over than discussed seriously on merit. So Obama pulled out the big guns and gave them lazy Mexicans all of our jobs.

This new immigration policy (or anti-policy) is foremost the prudent move for our country. It saves resources, saves money, and encourages good citizenship. And nobody cares. Screw that wishy-washy Hopey Changey crap, the fun part is in sussing out the politics.

In light of this announcement, for example, one has to wonder what the advantage would be of a Rubio Vice Presidency. And what issue do Republicans have to court Latino voters with now? It gives those of Latin persuasion magis causum (as their people say) to show up at the polls, an inevitable issue for the Democrat's Western strategy. And it forces Mitt Romney to either commit the cardinal sin of agreeing with the President, or essentially reverse course on yet another major issue and further alienate a crucial voting bloc...

What's Romney's response, you ask? So far he's punting, using Rubio as human shield, and no doubt there is some serious focus-grouping being conducted by his campaign. He's wisely fighting to stay on his only truly effective election message: The Economy Sucks and It's Obama's Fault.

The question remains, though. Romney's been hammering this singular point, excepting times when he swiped at the President for straying from that message, and Obama has been unable to articulate an effective counter-point. Is he capable of unveiling an economic policy or message that can cut through the clutter and reassure skittish undecideds he can steer the economy back on track?

That, uh... that's the part where I'm worried.