Martin Frost’s advice to President Obama in 2012 is that he court senior and blue collar voters:
Dealing with seniors is not that complicated. Obama must flatly reject any suggestions by the various deficit reduction panels to privatize Social Security and Medicare. At the same time, he needs to embrace some reforms that help put the programs on better financial footing — like gradually raising the retirement age over an extended period and reworking cost-of-living formulas.
Let Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) run with the privatization concept. That dog won’t hunt any better in 2012 than it did in 2006.
Solving blue-collar-job woes is not as easy. First, Obama must embrace the success of his efforts to save General Motors and Chrysler. Second, he must recommend putting real money into green jobs programs — for example, electric car-battery technology and increased reliance on natural gas.
He should also consider a second stimulus package focusing only on infrastructure jobs — highways, mass transit, bridges and ports. This should be paid for by increasing the gasoline tax, so it doesn’t add to the deficit. Let the Republicans vote against creating real jobs without increasing the deficit.
If by “blue collar” Mr. Frost means unionized voters, President Obama already seems to be doing the opposite of which Mr. Frost advises. Contra Mr. Frost most union workers these days aren’t in the construction trades or even in manufacturing. They’re government workers and by supporting a pay freeze for federal workers he will almost certainly at least at the margins reduce his strength among that bloc of voters.
If he actually means construction and manufacturing workers, Republicans won’t need to vote against an infrastructure bill. It won’t get out of committee in the new Republican-dominated House. But, heck, they could vote for it and it wouldn’t help the president much. The way infrastructure projects are handled these days the next president will be in office before such a plan, however large, could have an appreciable effect on unemployment among construction and manufacturing workers. Unemployed construction and manufacturing workers aren’t particularly likely to support President Obama this time around. It also seems to me that “Obama’s gas tax” would provide a tempting target for an opponent.
If in 2012 the unemployment rate (U3) is at or near 10% and if the president faces a primary challenge, barring some cataclysm (e.g. nuclear war in the Middle East) he won’t be re-elected regardless of how he runs. However, barring those circumstances I think that President Obama is quite likely to be elected to a second term. If the Republicans run Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee, I’ll all but certainly vote for him again. I don’t think he’s been an awful president but I do think he’s been a mediocre one, especially when compared with the advance billing. Historically, the candidate who is better able to present a bright picture of America and its future has been elected. I strongly suspect that, recent performance notwithstanding, President Obama will be better at that than his opponent.
Given that 38% of union members voted Republican last election, one wonders if the Democrats lost the non-public sector union members. I think Obama probably smartly sees a wedge being aimed at his base. The local tea party candidate that won in a Democratic district repeatedly argued that the stimulus money went to help government, not the people.
I’d also say that any day that the top stories are gays, legalization of undocumented workers, and deficit commissions is not a good day for rallying the working class.
Okay, if that’s the case then Huckabee or Palin could easily defeat Obama in 2012. They can both present positive visions of the future based on their beliefs. Obama’s promise of a brigther future in 2008, though, was premised on the fact that HE was different and wodernful. We’ve seen that future, however, and it sucks. He’s won’t be able to use that premise again in 2012 unless the GDP starts growing at 8 or 10 percent between now and then, and that ain’t happening.
Note that this isn’t an endorsement of either Palin or Huckabee.
I’d also say that any day that the top stories are gays, legalization of undocumented workers, and deficit commissions is not a good day for rallying the working class.
I agree about the last two, but not on the first one. DADT is in the news again, but with the current economy such issues just don’t matter as much. Gay marriage would resonate more, but more as part of a back drop to other issues.
Frankly if ‘gay’ issues are dominating the news that is probably an excellnt sign for the Administration – it means everything else is being ignored or has been successfully resolved.
(Not that the news orgs won’t ignore information they don’t like anyway. I watched CNBC for an hour and a half this morning. Amidst all the RAH-RAH THE ECONOMY IS GREAT stories they rather studiously ignored the weekly new unemployment claims report. In recent weeks they couldn’t STOP talking about it because the news was “good”, so I knew it wasn’t good. So I flip over to FOX Business, and the new unemployment claims spike was in the crawl on the bottom of the screen.)
“I strongly suspect that, recent performance notwithstanding, President Obama will be better at that than his opponent.”
I was surprised, and a bit taken aback by this observation.
I’d say Obama is much more in the dour, and find a scapegoat, class.
An optimistic leader, inspiring confidence, he has not been, nor do I think he can be re-cast. A smug, “its all someone elses fault” does not play well with the American people. And I suspect we will just have to disagree on this: as opposed to just “mediocre,” I’d say he has been exposed as the inexperienced empty suit that I suspected all along. I think the public has awakened from their stupor as well.
Its no secret Romney is my choice. I think the primary issues of the times – economic – and his skill set and track record suggest he’s the right guy. He’s not prone to lightweight “we are the one’s we have been waiting for” crappola. And he actually understands business and finance. Obama needs to go build houses with Jimmy Carter………..and proclaim himself the greatest man on earth while more competant executives actually deal with the real world.
The “gay” issue might be more prominent here today because Illinois is passing civil union legislation. (The headline in the city paper though is that the federal “high speed” rail proposal will cost the city 540 jobs)
Its no secret Romney is my choice. I think the primary issues of the times – economic – and his skill set and track record suggest he’s the right guy.
To pick a nit, Romney’s skill set and track records, as I see them, show his strength to be how to operate effectively in the world of big business. In a choice between capitalism and big business, I think that Romney favors the realm of big business and he’d be all to willing to allow rentseeking in the big business sector to continue to grow. I acknowledge that the rentseeking mode is pretty much a standard way that business is currently conducted in many sectors, it’s just that I think this is one of the fundamental issues which is leading us down a suboptimal path.
I wonder how we’d all answer this either-or:
Do the top 100 US companies have too much power in government and the economy, or do the top 100 companies have not enough power?
Do the top 100 US companies have too much power in government and the economy, or do the top 100 companies have not enough power?
Count me in the “too much power” camp.
And I suspect we will just have to disagree on this: as opposed to just “mediocre,†I’d say he has been exposed as the inexperienced empty suit that I suspected all along. I think the public has awakened from their stupor as well.
Drew, I’m becoming concerned with how much I agree with you lately. It’s a bit disconcerting.
@Drew
“Its no secret Romney is my choice.”
Multiple-Choice Mitt?