Sunday, January 22, 2012

South Carolina to Gingrich, and we have a whole new Republican Primary new ballgame! ?

American Politics is nothing if it's not full of hyperbole and breathless discussion of the implications of the ebb and flow of votes as our incredibly lengthy process slogs on.    With Newt Gingrich's win in South Carolina and very strong polling in Florida  (Gingrich leads there in polls), it looks like Mitt Romney was not locked in to the nomination as strongly as many had thought.

Romney is facing the wrath of the conservative wings of the Republican party combined with Gingrich's clever, effective, and well funded negative campaigning.     As Gingrich gains ground look for the battlefield to bloody with even more negativity from the Romney SuperPac, the "man behind the curtain" in terms of the negative advertising that supports the Romney campaign.  

2012 is the first presidential election to fall under new campaign financing rules that are likely to make the SuperPacs even more significant as campaign mudslingers.   (PAC = "Political Action Committee").

Negative campaigning is always decried by candidates, the press, and the public but it remains the most effective way to fight a political battle, so its foolish and ridiculous to think it won't generally play a key and often decisive role in significant elections, especially for the US Presidency.  

Friday, January 20, 2012

South Carolina Primary - Negative working like a charm

Newt Gingrich is now leading Mitt Romney in most South Carolina primary polling, certainly at least in part as a result of the massive and well funded negative TV campaign against Romney.    Of course its also true that most South Carolina Republican voters are a lot more conservative than Romney, and thus the Gingrich camp can reasonably argue that they've simply been helping South Carolinians figure out who the "more  conservative candidate" is in this campaign.

It's still difficult to see how even a narrow victory by Gingrich could derail Romney's likely victory in the Republican primary, but it'll certainly make for a more interesting horse race.


Monday, November 28, 2011

Americans Elect 2012

Here at President Picker we're big fans of the new online effort to create a candidacy freer from special interests and party politics than ever before.  This non-partisan effort is growing fast and appears to be on the verge of "breaking out" as a somewhat viable 3rd party candidate (who is yet to be determined by the membership of the group which is, as well as the candidacy, open to all Americans).    Obviously 2012 won't see a 3rd party effort that is competitive with the Democrats and Republicans, but we predict that by 2016 we'll have a viable third party in some form, perhaps this one:

PURPOSE

THE GOAL OF AMERICANS ELECT is to nominate a presidential ticket that answers directly to voters—not the political system.
American voters are tired of politics as usual. They want leaders that will put their country before their party, and American interests before special interests. Leaders who will work together to develop fresh solutions to the serious challenges facing our country. We believe a secure, online nominating process will prove that America is ready for a competitive, nonpartisan ticket.

PROCESS

  • DEFINE YOUR "TRUE COLORS"

    Define the crucial issues facing our nation—beyond just red and blue.
    RANK YOUR PRIORITIES FOR OUR NEXT PRESIDENT
    ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT DETERMINE YOUR INDIVIDUAL VIEWS
    SEE HOW YOU COMPARE TO OTHER DELEGATES AND CANDIDATES
  

PROGRESS

Americans Elect is already well on the way to putting the first directly-nominated nonpartisan ticket on the 2012 ballot in all 50 states.
2,107,742

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Romney or Bachman or ? for the Republican Nomination

As the debt ceiling / US budget theatrics continue in Washington (prediction - compromises coming in a few days to avert an S&P downgrade) , the race for the Republican presidential nomination continues in a somewhat lackluster fashion with several potential candidates on the sidelines waiting to see if they can muster enough support to throw their hat into the ring.

However Republicans must be concerned that none of the current crop appear likely to defeat Obama unless the economy suffers significantly greater setbacks in the next year. It's alarming to think that some radical Republicans may have this scenario in mind as they continue to stall on budget compromises and raising the debt ceiling, hoping to harm the economy enough to defeat Obama but not enough to send us into a tailspin. That calculation would not only be unpatriotic, it would be potentially disastrous for the country.

The current best bet appears to be that Mitt Romney will sort of plod into the Republican nomination with Michelle Bachmann pulling in the Tea Party folks, leaving moderate Republicans a choice between Rick Perry and Mitt Romney who are polling about equally in scenarios where Perry's in the ring (he has not announced yet but is very likely to do so if his numbers stay as high as now. RealClearPolitics has Romney at 18%, Perry at 17% in a race where all the strong potential candidates are placed in the ring. With only *announced* candidates, Romney's in a strong lead at 27% with Bachmann second with 18% , Ron Paul third with 11%.

Look for Palin to stay out of the race and hope for a VP spot on the likely Romney or Perry ticket. Look for Bachmann to *get* the VP spot on the Romney or Perry ticket, giving the Republicans a similar strategy to McCain / Palin but with much stronger candidates on the ticket.

In our view Obama's still in the driver's seat with respect to the 2012 election. Barring a serious economic setback, Americans are unlikely to want yet another major "change" in the White House so soon. Obama's kept his core constituency happy with only modest levels of alienation of those on the far left who naively felt Obama as President would act very consistently with Obama as young Chicago organizer. We're likely to see more liberal "progressive" politics from Obama in a second term, but it's clear that President Obama will continue to keep moderate democrats fairly happy while he continues to alienate the far left and right. It's a great political strategy and it won't change for the 2012 election.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

History of the Democratic Party and the Birth Certificate


Over at Travel and History I've written a short "History of the Democratic Party", focusing mostly on presidents and briefly tracing the history of the democratic party from inception in the late 1700s to modern times with the election of our latest Democratic President, Barack Obama, who coincidentally just released a better copy of his birth certificate ... today.

Although the "birther"arguments have always been pretty dumb, it was also been odd that the Obama camp worked so hard to avoid releasing the "vault copy" or original certificate. My working hypothesis about that was that the original birth certificate probably was lost or defaced or contained something compromising which might have made greater trouble than simply stonewalling, but the release of this latest long form birth certificate official copy from Hawaii suggests that was wrong and there was nothing at all to hide. One would think the Obama election team would have waited until closer to the election to let the frothy nonsense continue, so perhaps they have decided this was eating into his popularity enough that waiting any longer was unwise.

In any case, it looks like the 2012 Presidential Election will now be pretty much in full swing, though as David Brooks suggested recently it's very hard to imagine anybody in the current field of candidates giving Obama much of a run. I think Romney is the most likely nominee and arguably has a shot, but a lot can happen in the coming months as Republicans work the dreary Iowa farms and fields to line up early support, effectively copying the brilliant strategy of the Obama 2008 early campaign juggernaut.




Sunday, April 17, 2011

Obama v. Romney in 2012 ?

As the Republican presidential primary contenders start to shake out from the field of many to a few, two names seem to stand out conspicuously: Donald Trump and Mitt Romney. Readers of President Picker will note that we thought Romney would win last election's Republican Primary, and we'll stick with that prediction for this one. McCain's nomination and predictably weak candidacy was a surprise to us though the outcome was not. Romney is a far more formidable opponent to Obama, and we'll see a close 2012 race if he's the nominee, a race that will reflect the increasing level of political polarization in the USA.

The other conspicuous Republican is Donald Trump, the bombastic star of real estate and TV. It's remarkable to see how well Trump's doing right now in polling, though most likely this simply reflects the growing frustration with America's arguably obsolete two party focus - a system that largely requires a tribal approach to thinking and politics rather than the flexible and compromising strategies that would serve us better.

Monday, January 03, 2011

The new political landscape. Stay Tuned.

As the Republicans take control of congress and the Tea Party starts to weild real power, the American Political landscape will again change. Too many analysts seem confused by what is wrongly perceived as a shift in the way people view big government. Obama's election was not an endorsement of big government - rather it reflected the powerful desire on the part of the public for new people and new approaches. In some ways the electorate is "experimenting" with politicians - bringing in new ones until they find something they like. Dissatisfaction with GW Bush and the feeling that neither Hilary Clinton nor John McCain would bring new and inspired innovation and leadership largely account for Obama's win. Those factors were probably more important than his own policies.

In many ways the "seesaw" Democracy we have is inefficient, but it does serve to change the game. Unfortunately we don't see this in the congress and Senate. Founders such as Franklin and Jefferson generally advised in favor of term limits but these rules were only constitutionalized for the office of the Presidency.

What's in store? If events immediately preceding the elections are any indication, Obama may continue to find ways to cooperate and compromise to avoid the gridlock many are predicting. Was Obama to some extent handicapped by Democrats control of the congress which forced him to support fiscally questionable policy making? Now in power, will Tea Party folks continue to fight for the strident conservative spending principles of their campaign?

Stay ... Tuned ... America

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Dumbing Down the Democracy Dialog

As the election season heats up the Tea Party has now cleverly taken a page from the online media playbook of MoveOn.org and started their own propaganda garbage "network". Called "TeaPartyHD", it's filled with the same kind of stuff we see from MoveOn - irrational pieces designed to sway the gullible and ignorant (that would be ... many of us) using scare tactics and distortions rather than reasoned discourse.

There's nothing really new in that approach to politics, but I'm quickly coming to the conclusion that the internet has diminished rather than enhanced the political dialog. The medium isn't really to blame here - if we were an enlighted bunch we could have spirited discussions with candidates going on 24/7, with transcripts and summaries and a huge level of interaction with real people.

But, alas, we're not that kind of creature. So the most effective use of media dollars is to create online networks to spread negativity and distortions about your opponents, yet keep an arms length from the candidates so they can deny involvement in the junk.

Free speech is a wonderful benefit but by paying attention to the garbage we really diminish ourselves and the process. I don't expect that to change, but if you pay attention to this nonsense OR help spread it, you should at least recognize that we are degrading our democracy with this approach. Strategically it works, so I can't suggest either side would be wise not to continue the distortions and negative campaigning, but there may be compromises where we can start to address real issues somewhere in the mix.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Palin 2012 Presidential Bid is a big Win for Obama

As Sarah Palin Bid for the presidency becomes more and more certain, the Obama camp should be happy to see Republicans reeling under the pressures that will come from splitting a ticket between more mainstream candidates and Palin, the darling of the "Tea Party" conservatives who have injected a lot of passion but not a not of reason into the upcoming debates over the future of US policy.

Early prediction: Look for Palin to narrowly loose to the mainstream candidate - our early money is on Romney, and look for that fight to take the wind out of the Republican sails, leading to a fairly easy Obama win in 2012.

UK Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/12/sarah-palin-election-war-chest

Saturday, March 06, 2010

Obama's Irony

As President Obama's focus moves from his first year to attempted completion of his major campaign initiatives even a casual observer of the American political landscape should notice something important about the USA:

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Although the ideological zealots on both sides of Obama would not agree, it's pretty clear to an objective observer that Obama's policies are very much an extension of the past - with some notable but not overwhelming changes. We have the same secretary of defense and the same or similar generals in charge of the two major wars we are prosecuting against the bad guys. We have continued (and increased) massive government spending in almost all sectors, most notably the ones that are unsustainable at current spending levels - Defense and Entitlements, neither of which calls for anything like we currently spend.

Although it's too complex to analyze yet, I think much of the bailout and "return to prosperity" has been purchased with the dollars of our children and future generations of Americans and to a lesser extent our global neighbors who continue to lend us money even as our spending becomes unsustainable. Much like the conditions that led to the 2008 global financial crisis, we have a situation where everybody is counting on unreasonable projections of future prosperity and spending accordingly. Forget Wall Street CEOs, whose total take was the tiniest fraction of the total losses. The problem was largely ..... please raise your hand if you live in the developing world .... our own. Many spent like drunken sailors with home equity and mortgage borrowings that evaporated along with the values of the securities that backed them. I think many still completely fail to understand that the total values that have since diminished are measured in tens of trillions. Greedy CEOs played a significant role, but I'd guess far less than that played by greedy ... middle class folks who borrowed beyond their means and could not repay when their $300,000 house value became $150,000.

It is likely to become increasingly clear to the big lender (China) that the big spender (if you live in America, raise your hand please) are going to be printing money to repay this debt. Given than the RMB is already undervalued with respect to the dollar, there is a potentially serious imbalance even now between the China / USA currency situation.

As Joseph Stiglitz the Nobel laureate Economist noted recently on Charlie Rose (I paraphrase) we are not yet out of the economic woodshed by any means and we could see another recession.

I don't sound like a fan of Obama but in fact I like him a lot - he inherited these problems and has made a modest level of progress in reaching better outcomes from horrible situations. I also think he understands the problems with ongoing massive spending and will be able to work with the more balanced and anti-spending congress that we'll see after the 2010 elections, which are likely to be something of a bloodbath for the Democrats who in their infinite enthusiasm for Government forgot that most people wanted a change in Government, not MORE of it.

When the lackluster-but-super-expensive health care plan finally passes I think it'll be another nail in the coffin of the notion that government tends to solve more problems than it creates. Unfortunately we have no viable third party in the wings here in the USA that would uphold what in fact many Americans believe - we need an innovative, efficient, smaller, more compassionate government that jumps in, solves problems, and goes away.

I'm not holding my breath, but I will hope that Obama - one of the sharpest folks ever in the office - can learn from the Democrat's mistakes that there is still time for him to adopt an innovative, conservative fiscal policy that really could usher in a new era of American prosperity.