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.

Walker, Wisconsin Danger

Scott Walker

Scott Walker is a douchebag. We can all admit that, I think. He's a slimy sort of politician who uses ham-handed tactics to push an agenda his consitentuency didn't really vote for, and his reign will probably shake voters' faith in reactionary election outcomes.

The thing people seem to have a hard time agreeing on, though, is what the implications of a continuation of the Walker dictatorship may be. Whether he wins or loses the historic recall battle could very well predict, or even dictate, how Wisconsin will swing this Fall.

One argument asserts that Walker's numbers going into the recall, and that he looks likely to squeak out a victory, mean the state will be more likely to go for Romney than the President. It's hard to counter -- if Democrats lose this hard-fought battle, and one that once looked to some like an easy victory, it's hard to imagine them not being demoralized. It could depress turnout noticeably. It also leaves the levers of government in WI in the hands of the GOP, which could be a substantial boost to the Romney campaign in the state.

Right. Sure. But here's where I have a problem; it's my favorite paragraph from an article on this very subject.

"Whether Walker wins or doesn't is going to be a big indicator of how Wisconsin goes, and how the whole upper Midwest goes," said Iowa's Republican Gov. Terry Branstad.

 A few things, here. First, this guy's a Republican, so what the hell does he know? Er, I mean, y'know... he could a little biased. Is all. Second, Wisconsin is not a proxy for the Midwest. If it were, Obama would already be failing miserably there, and that probably isn't the case yet.

Scott Walker

The only real problem I have with the theory is the small matter that I disagree with it entirely. I think a Walker re-elect would actually be a good sign for Obama. This may be wishful thinking (if you can't tell, I support Obama in the upcoming elections), but it seems to me the headwinds in Walker's favor are more of a pro-incumbent attitude than we saw in 2010, and not some dramatic Republican wave just starting to crash.

Nate Silver (or Natty S, as he's known on the streets) recently broke down the Walker polls, essentially blaming the economy. Things are getting better in Wisconsin, and about the same degree that they're getting better for the nation as a whole. People just aren't as pissed off, and, as Big Nat Platinum put it...

If Mr. Walker’s approval-disapproval ratings were even, he might be a favorite to win the recall election because some voters who are on the fence might nevertheless object to the idea of removing a governor from office in midterm.

Not that Obama has a 1:1 correlation here, what with his less-than-stellar approval rating, but I think Nat-A-Tat-Tat's point can be expanded a bit. If Obama can make the argument that his administration has promises to keep, and miles to go, that may just give him the small edge he needs to tip the scales.

Now, I'm a fatalist at heart. At the first true glimmer that Obama will lose, I'll probably be the first one wringing my hands. But I don't see it yet. And if it comes to that, I'll wait until all the pieces are in play before I get truly frightened. Everything I've seen of Obama's political style is chess; he patiently positions himself on the board and corners his foe, always on the offensive but never impatient.

Scot Walkers

The Bain attacks are a good example of this methodical style, I think. They haven't proven terribly effective so far, perhaps, especially after a self-concerned mini-mutiny among some Democrats. But if you look at it as a piece of a whole, it's yet another piece in an overall strategy of denying Romney any possible qualification for office. Romney did most of the work, disavowing more or less his entire record as Governor at various points in the past few years. Obama has since added education, civil rights, women's health, and now (perhaps) Romney's record at Bain to the list of subjects perilous for Romney to discuss.

More important is that Barack now has some wiggle room when debating the economy. His campaign may not convince a lot of voters that Mitt is evil with these attacks, but they've nonetheless provided an excellent (and much-needed) rhetorical pivot point. "Oh, my job numbers, you cannibalistic vampire capitalist kitten eater? Yeah, let's discuss job numbers."

Sidenote: Most fascinating about all this is that part of the strategy seems to be trying to get Romney to defend his record as Governor, which could begin the process of tamping down enthusiasm for Romney among the GOP base, and the crucial process of more easily defending legislation like the Affordable Care Act through the lens of Mitt's record. Romney's response has been that he'd rather take the beating on Bain than so much as touch his record as leader of a liberal state.

I'm still convinced the game is Obama's, and I don't think I'll change my mind until, y'know, there's an actual reason to. Kudos to the news for fabricating this narrative, though. It's riveting.

Barack Obama Announces He Is Gay

It's a metaphor.

First off: I told you this election was going to be exciting. Secondly, I totally heard Obama's gay now. Maybe I misread the headline, ahdunno I was in a hurry, but I'm preeetty sure he wants to marry a man. Maybe Biden? (I secretly hope it's Boehner...)

Alright, that's stupid, sorry. But it's the premise that excuses these awful shoops that I giggled over for a good twenty minutes. This is how I choose to learn the basics of graphic design, folks. Sidenote: It's right around the time you reach the third page of Google Image results for "Gay Men Kissing" that you start to wonder where your life is going.

This one too, why not.

So, my favorite part about all this? (Aside from the gay jokes?) It shows the difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama as politicians. This is a total flip-flop, and while most people assumed he was pro-Gay Marriage, the announcement was not prompted by some sudden personal conviction. It was a political necessity.

But so far the response hasn't been a horrified recoil by his constituents, as Mitt Romney's recent attempts to move toward the middle have elicited, but rather jubilation. This is how you tell politicians apart. This is the line of demarcation.

Still, while I think this will turn out to be a really good decision, flipping positions like this is risky. And North Carolina is a potential battleground that just outlawed the thing Obama now supports. Why the hell would he do this now? My sense is that, like anything else in politics, you have to follow the money.

The gay money.

Chuck Todd said recently that "gay money" was the new Wall Street money.

 

To rub that point in the President's face, the creator of Will & Grace (the show that single-handedly made gay dudes people) even wrote a big fat check to the Re-Elect campaign, on Joe Biden's behalf. Bitchy or just catty, you decide, but I'm sure he feels it was effective enough. The response from fundraisers so far? Positive.

But the polling here points to a more perilous situation nationally, and a treacherous tightrope to walk. Same sex marriage may be a loser overall in swing states, and my little election map prediction relies on states where a plurality of voters are now seemingly at odds with the President.

That's the great thing about good politicians, though. I'm pretty sure this is a winner for Obama and Democrats. And I'm pretty sure, were Romney doing the same thing with a similarly perilous conservative position, it wouldn't be for him. 

Even if this blows up in Obama's face, this is great politics. And great fun. That leaves the score so far at...

Politics: 1  
Soccer: 0