Politics

Obama is driving people away from liberalism.

"The 29 August 2012 Gallup Poll, “GOP Favorability Matches 2008 Pre-Convention Level,”shows the pre-convention favorability ratings of the two Parties going back as far as 1992; and, for the very first time, the crucial favorable/unfavorable ratios are now higher for the Republican Party than for the Democratic Party. For the first time ever, the Democratic favorability ratio, which has always been within the range of 1.20 to 1.56, is now below 1. It is, in fact, a stunningly low .83, which is a marked 31% lower than the prior Democratic Party low of 1.20, which was reached in 2004."

Here's the most interesting part.

"By contrast, the Republican ratio is now .88, which compares with the 2008 ratio of .80, which was that Party’s lowest-ever ratio, reached at the end of the Bush Presidency. Prior to 2008, this ratio was 1.16 in 2004, 1.41 in 2000, 1.16 in 1996, and 1.36 in 1992."

George Bush pushed people away from conservatism, empowering Obama. Obama is doing the same thing to liberals. This is another way Obama is like George Bush on steroids. The media and the politicians act like they never understand the people, but the message is clear: they consistently punish big-government incumbents.

Note to Mitt Romney, these five statements are not a plan. A plan must describe how you will implement them.

Paul Krugman calls out Mitt Romney as a weaponized Keynesian, and he's right.

I strongly doubt Ron Paul is will announce a third party run for president on Leno tonight. He would ruin any chance Rand Paul had of becoming the Republican nominee for president in the future.

Pat Buchanan draws an excellent analogy.

"What makes that 1980 election relevant is that it was the last national election and the only postwar election where a Democratic president widely perceived to have failed chose to run for re-election.
And what strategy did the Carter campaign adopt?
They sought to demonize Reagan as a tool of the rich, a cold-hearted wretch who would savage the safety net, a crazed anti-communist Cold Warrior whom it would be dangerous to entrust with nuclear weapons. Ronald Reagan was Barry Goldwater redux.
Yet, looking back, what else could Carter do? Looking forward, what else can Barack Obama do?"

The difference is Romney is no Ronald Reagan.

"Lest we forget, this Carter strategy was working.
Not until the late debate with Carter did the electorate take a closer look at Reagan and decide that this genial, principled conservative was no threat, but an acceptable alternative and far preferable to four more years of Carter.
After that debate, the undecideds came down hard for Reagan, millions of Democrats switched to him, and he buried Carter."

I didn't know that because I already had decided to vote for Reagan. Buchanan claims another difference.

"One difference between 2012 and 1980? President Obama retains a reservoir of goodwill President Carter never acquired. "

I don't know how that can be. What has Obama done to earn any goodwill? I don't know anybody who supports him who wouldn't also have supported Carter. The only people I see who support him are die-hard leftists who would support Charles Manson if he was the Democrat nominee. Until I see somebody stand up and say they're independent but they're voting for Obama because he seems like a nice guy, I dispute these claims. On the other hand, I do see lots of independent people who can't stand Romney, but that's a different issue.

"Obama aides and media auxiliary have already painted the Republican convention in Tampa, Fla., as permeated with lies and dog whistles to racists.
Yet, one wonders: After such a campaign, how does Obama unite and lead the country should he win?"

As a dictator. Dictators need very little public support.