May 30, 2012
Obama Will Not Win Re-electionBy Monty Pelerin
It is time to call the 2012 election. President Obama cannot win. He will likely lose big, in a very lopsided election. Pundits will claim to be surprised when the outcome becomes apparent. They should not be, as the signs of such a result are everywhere, despite the mainstream media's attempts to suppress them.
There are numerous reasons why Obama will lose. Incompetence, likeability, and duplicity are a few. Obama has alienated too many in the electorate, including large numbers who supported him the first time. In 2012, many will vote against him or (even better) just stay home.
How Did Obama Get Elected the First Time?
Barack Hussein Obama is a self-created myth, polished further by David Axelrod and a compliant media. He is a chameleon who takes on whatever shape and form best suit his purposes and goals. There is little substance behind the façade other than an Elmer Gantry style of politics. He is completely malleable into whatever form and shape best serve his personal interests.
A few examples of this "flexibility" are the following:
Little was known about Obama when he entered the primary campaign. He became little more than a complex Rorschach blot with a sanitized past carefully scrubbed and scripted. His campaign avoided specifics; his speeches contained no substance. The imagination of observers defined him.
His greatest asset was his "unknownness." As a blank slate, voters imagined whatever they wanted in the next president. They were aided by a clever marketing campaign which emphasized his uniqueness:
As a political "newbie" and the first serious African-American candidate, he played well. He was an outsider who would clean up Washington. For many, he was the great healer who would bring unity to Republicans and Democrats, blacks and whites and America and its enemies. His Kumbayah campaign was hailed by the media, and a large, naive segment of the electorate believed it.
Why Obama Will Lose the Election
Why Obama will lose this next election is less difficult to understand than how he won the first time. Barack Obama was a fluke, an unlikely candidate with no demonstrated experience in anything other than reading a teleprompter and sounding good.
He was pushed to his party's nomination as a result of the media. His election was a quirk, rather than something earned. Any Democrat who gained the nomination was likely ensured the presidency. Bush fatigue and the hapless John McCain made that almost certain.
Obama will lose the next election because his greatest asset, his unknownness, exists no longer. Voter imagination can no longer be manipulated in the presence of facts. Quite simply, Obama will not be re-elected because too many people now know him. His biggest attribute has been taken away.
What people got was nothing like what they were promised or imagined. What was a blank slate upon which to imagine an Obama presidency now is a full-blown portrait filled with failure, warts, and scars.
Obama's track record is abysmal. Floyd and Mary Beth Brown discussed four of Obama's failures:
A great mistake was made in 2008. That mistake is now blatantly apparent to most voters and most political analysts around the world. Nothing Obama promised has been accomplished. Furthermore, much of what he did added to the country's problems.
Even the fawning media and the Democrat establishment recognize his failings, although neither is willing to publicly discuss them. Democrats should have replaced this defective candidate long ago. Now is too late. Democrat sympathizers can only hope that this election does not destroy what remains of the party. Based on the debacle that was the 2010 election, that fear is not unfounded. If anything, the mistake that was Obama is better-known now than it was two years ago.
James Taranto pointed out the despair among Democrats and their PR arm, the national press. In an editorial, he cited several examples of disillusionment. Howard Portnoy was quoted in the piece stating:
Mr. Taranto added his own thoughts to those of the generally liberal pundits:
This despair was expressed last October. Things have only worsened since then.
Obama Stumbles Out of the Gate
Several different recent weeks have been described by various pundits as "Obama's worst week yet." The rate of his decline steepens as the campaign season heats up.
Now the Obama political campaign is seen as being in disarray. Politico described the early stages of the Obama re-election campaign as follows:
Obama's campaign was run so smoothly four years ago that it likely created a false impression on political observers. The campaign cannot be run the same way again for obvious reasons. Nor can it run smoothly this time. There is nothing on which Obama can run on regarding achievements other than the overhyped bin Laden killing.
He looks silly trying to blame Bush for the last four years, although he must make voters believe that he had nothing to do with the failures. Perhaps he should blame even earlier presidents for his woes. After all, Madison and Jefferson provided the Constitution, which he considers a roadblock in his attempts to remake America.
A Bigger Democrat Problem
There is a bigger problem for Democrats than one election and a failed candidate. The strategy adopted long ago and responsible for most of their success over the last eighty years has played itself out, and they are left with nothing.
Franklin Roosevelt, during the Great Depression, saw the value of buying votes by spreading benefits around. It was successful and a strategy refined by other Democrats over the years. It was based on identity politics that focused on certain segments of the population and won them over with "gifts."
It was a strategy of winning elections rather than a strategy of governance, and it was therefore very successful in winning elections, but not so in governing. The Democrat coalition is a motley collection of interest groups with nothing in common other than "we want more." That makes it impossible to have a coherent governing strategy.
Some are amazed that Democrats have not developed a budget for almost three years. It really is impossible to do so without offending their coalition. In a time of monetary constraint, they cannot afford to show who will benefit at the expense of others. That is just an example of how governance becomes impossible with an election strategy based on Santa Claus.
Now the country is near its Thatcher point, where there is no more money to buy votes and goodies will eventually be taken away rather than increased. This condition has serious implications for both political parties, but especially for the Democrats. The Democratic Party now exists and survives for one simple reason -- making dependency more attractive. It has become the party of plunder, taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive in an attempt to buy enough votes to remain relevant.
The party approaches this election as an ogre driving an ice cream truck with no ice cream in it. Democratas will lose this election and will lose many more unless they redefine themselves in terms of something other than Santa Claus. Sadly, for Democrats (and some Republicans), Santa is dead.
My projection of Obama's defeat is based on some semblance of sanity among the electorate. H.L. Mencken might consider that a dangerous assumption, but I am still hopeful. However, if Obama wins, get the hell out of Dodge! Even if the election is close and he loses, leave if you are less than fifty years old and have any ambition and ability. If the election is even close, the country is lost!
Monty Pelerin blogs at EconomicNoise.Com.
FOLLOW US ON