THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AFTER ROMNEY.

Jay H. Ell stuck his neck out, way back, in declaring Obama the winner of the 2012 Presidential elections. However, there are other burning issues still to be resolved. These include the outcome of the Congressional and State elections and the future of the Republican Party after Romney. In retrospect Romney was the only candidate that could have run this cycle and unless the Republican Party changes, it's chances of winning the Presidency will recede with each election cycle in the future. As the USA demographics change the Grand Old Party needs to reinvent itself to survive. As matters stand, even if Romney wins, we are dealing with a party that has swung far to the right and is split down the middle. 




DEBT LEGISLATION CRISIS



All this is at a time when the country faces its most crucial financial crises. Looming over Congress and the nation is legislation that will result in a compulsory cut back of 9% on all spending that is "discriminatory". This will occur if a debt reduction deal is not reached by January 15, 2013. To avoid this Congress has to agree to a debt reduction bill for an additional $1.2 trillion by 2021. Congress has already agreed to a $900 billion cut so that will mean a cut of $2.1 trillion in the deficit.




An indiscriminate 9% expenditure cut across the Board would be devastating and it includes all Welfare Programs and defense. The Democrats want the new $1.2 trillion to include tax increases for the rich and the Republican dominated by the Tea Party don't. The Republicans don't want defense cuts at all, in fact Romney wants to spend 2 trillion more so it all looks like a recipe for disaster.



Also due for renewal are the so-called Bush tax cuts. Obama and the Democrats want to increase the marginal tax rate from 35% to 39% for those earning above $250,000, some say they will compromise to only introduce the raise for those earning a $1,000,000. The tax cuts for the "middle class" will remain. The Republicans want none of it.




An analysis below of the elections for the legislating bodies reveals a return to almost the status quo in terms of policy standpoints after this election.

CONGRESS AND STATE ELECTIONS.




The general consensus had been that whatever happened in the Presidential elections, the Senate was going to become Republican. With the anti incumbent mood and with the weird Senate election provisions, resulted in the Democrats defending far more seats than the Republicans, it was considered a certainty that the Republicans would regain the Senate. It does not appear as if that is going to happen. The Democrats will still control the Senate albeit with a smaller majority. (This partly thanks to the fact that 15 Republican Senate candidates are taking the Republican Party Platform on Women's rights seriously).


 

The House of Representatives, where the Republicans have a handy majority, is a lot more challenging to the Democrats. Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic House Leader, is not so secretly, hoping for a Republican defeat. This is unlikely to happen. More likely is a modest gain by the Democrats.


The State legislature elections will not reflect too much change from the current situation. The big Republican financiers have changed the State landscape by throwing money in the State elections some time ago.  




In short this election, as a whole, will be a setback for the Republican Party. But not nearly as much as one might have thought with a party that is leaderless and whose power base, the Tea Party, are out of touch with political reality. (They all want to slash public spending unless it relates to their own constituency needs!).


SEQUALAE




Assuming that this, or something close to this, will happen how will it effect the Republican Party in general and their Congress behavior specifically? The Republican Party can blame their woes on the move to the right as evidenced by the Tea Party takeover. They will try and blame Romney who they reluctantly nominated. But objectively he gave them their best chance by running as two separate candidates. Imagine what would have happened to a Cain, or a Bachmann or a Santorum or a Gingrich, for example. Their "better" candidates did not run for a reason. They did not think they had a ghost of a chance with the Tea Party agenda. Unlike Romney they obviously did not feel like running as two personas.




And it is only going to get worse. The Demographics point that way. If you are anti Latino immigrant and are perceived to be anti African American and anti women your potential voting pool is going to get less and less.




* The Ryan Solution.

This is basically what the Republicans are running on at the moment. While some candidates are distancing themselves from the public articulations of this "extreme" policy on abortion and contraception, this is the official Party Platform - Social and Fiscal conservatism. In fact to a lesser or greater extent the most of the Party field is disavowing themselves of the Social component. Even Ryan concedes that he has to follow the Romney ticket's policy on this. Romney of course in his "moderate" persona is against the extreme platform. However, he has great difficulty in condemning those that articulate the Party Platform that, for example, is against abortion even in rape.

With regard to fiscal conservatism do the Republicans seriously think that they have a future in privatizing Medicare and social security, taxing the wealthy less, getting rid of welfare in all it's forms, sending the Latinos home, not supporting equal pay for women, not allowing contraception to be considered a medicine while Viagra is and on and on?

Assuming that there has to be some modification of their platform what will it be? Whatever happens there is no way either plank in the Ryan solution can survive. It is just a question how and if it can be adjusted and whether those gung ho Tea Party congressional freshmen of 2010, who took over the party, will bow to political reality.

* Fiscally Conservative and Socially more "liberal" - a Goldwater solution

Barry Goldwater the father and party philosopher, who defined the Republican philosophy of fiscal conservatism that Ronald Reagan so successfully ran on, believed that social issues should play no part in a political agenda. (Incidentally Reagan would never have got the Tea Party backing).

 Since Reagan the social issues have just crept in more and more, as Party Policy, over the years. The objective was to get out the party base at election time. Bush 43, under Rove's tutelage, used the social issues as an election issue again and again, and once elected was not terribly much interested in pursuing them. 

It would appear that the Party's Platform without the social issues was not just enough to gain traction with the Republican base but with them the Platform is getting more and more out of touch with the electorate. So maybe they just better sit down and see reality. They cannot rely on social issues to push them over the top any more. The fact that the Democrats, for the first time in decades are bringing up the issue of abortion rights as an electoral issue tells you where the electorate are at. To survive as a Party they had better listen to Goldwater and dump the social issues.

*Fiscal Issues

They can't sign pledges with NorQuist never to raise any taxes and at the same time sort out this country's mess. They cannot allow fiscal policies that allow outsourcing of jobs and capitol. They cannot not have regulations that allow the mortgage and banking crises to occur again. What they can do is create a policy that leans more to their free enterprise philosophy than the Democratic Party does.

The Democratic Party made this adjustment under Clinton reforming some Welfare legislation and increasing taxes with spectacular success. The Democrats moved to the middle. Obama was ready to make to make the compromise again by cutting spending together with a modest tax increase. Boehner, the Republican House Speaker reneged because of Tea Party pressure.

* Immigration

This is key. For the Republican Party to survive they have to come to terms that the Latin American voters are growing by the year. They have to get away from humiliating apartheid like legislation and apply the principles of the Constitution to them as well. Surely the Party of Lincoln who abolished slavery and who were also instrumental in helping to enact Civil Rights Legislation, when the Democratic Party in the South were voting against it, can find a solution. The odd token Latino celebrity is just not enough to convince the Latinos that there concerns are being recognized.

* Medicare, Social Security and Welfare.

Everybody knows that Medicare and Social Security cannot remain as they are at the moment. They were created for retirees who had a 4-year life expectancy not a 20-year life expectancy. Implicit in the Medicare solution is the whole issue of healthcare costs. No country can spend nearly 17% of its Gross National Product on Health Care. Implicit too in the Social Security solution is a means based test an/or possibly a later retiring age. 



SO WHAT HOPE IS THERE FOR A COMPROMISE ON DEBT REDUCTION AND OTHER LEGISLATION AFTER THE ELECTION?



Unlike the Westminister Parliamentary model, where winner takes all, the US Constitution was designed for compromise with innumerable checks and balances. If there is no compromise then nothing happens which for practical purposes has been the Republican tactic for the past three years to avoid Obama obtaining too many legislative successes.

In many ways the future of the Republican Party is predicated on whether they are flexible enough to make this compromise. On the face of it they are not. The freshmen Tea Partyers who took over the Party in 2010 support the establishment under protest and believe that any concession is a "sell out". Also Obama has to get his act together. He needs to get into the mix. He elected to run and rerun for the Presidency so he better do what he has to do to get effective and not be aloof from the process.

On its face the solution seems simple enough in broad terms. On debt resolution one could have as a basis no tax cuts for the rich in exchange for more spending cuts. On immigration a combined task force could be put into place and on and on...... 


In all likelihood, however, we are going to see the can kicked further along the road for another year as although the debt sequestration legislation comes into effect in January 2013 the cuts come into effect in January 2014. Also if one reads Robert Draper's book, "Don't Ask Us What Good We Do", on the inner dynamics, paranoia and dysfunction of the House of Representatives, there does not seem like much hope for the moment. This dysfunction will continue till the Republican Party either splits or a big enough chunk of it has the guts to compromise with the Democrats. There are plenty of precedents for two party solutions - Reagan and Tip O'Neill and Clinton and Gingrich to name but a few.



In the final analysis it is the Republicans that have everything to lose. If they don't get their act together the unthinkable will happen and they will split. One outcome is for certain are that the demographics of America will never see a Tea Party agenda become the American position of the 21st century. With non-Caucasians becoming the majority by the middle of the Century and Women unlikely to accept to return to the Middle Ages their social agenda will not fly. Their fiscal agenda cannot survive when no new income revenue is generated, money is allowed to leave the country together with jobs, two trillion is spent more on defense and the protective net is removed from the disadvantaged and the poor.

If Romney does get elected he is most likely to go with the Tea Party agenda. In the short term the need for an internal Republican upheaval is delayed but in the long term the fundamentals remain the same.




ROMNEY, BAIN, CHINA AND ROMNESIA

To date the Obama campaign has let Romney run amuck on presenting a spectrum of differing positions on almost any and every policy. It was almost as if Obama was giving him more and more rope to hang himself. (Blog: Romney AND Obama No Show At Debate). Challenges to date on Romney's innumerable positions were rare and selective. Romney was just accepted as being a "serious conservative" We saw the beginnings of the Romney chameleonic approach to policy being focused on by the Obama team in the second debate. Now we have a name for his behavior - "Romnesia".




DOUBLE SPEAK NOW A CAMPAIGN ISSUE

 It was on Friday that this double speak, became a central Campaign Issue. Obama did not call Romney an outright liar when Romney mislead women voters away from his official platform and previously stated positions. Rather Obama said Romney suffered from a condition called "Romnesia" - If you have forgotten what your position on legislation for Equal Pay for Equal Work for Women is and what the policies on your website are, you are probably suffering from a condition called "Romnesia". Obama then reassured Romney that he qualified for treatment for his condition as Obamacare ensured health care for existing diseases.

"BAINPORT" ILLINOIS

Friday was not going to be Romney's day. Ed Schultz of MSNBC featured a live show from Freeport, now named "Bainport", Illinois. Freeport is a small town of 27,000 inhabitants where Bain, in 2010, had bought a manufacturing plant called Sensata. Bain was now in the process of closing it down and relocating it to China. Sensata had made a profit of  $500 million last quarter but that was not enough. Now 200 families would be directly affected by Bain as it laid of all its workers.




The town was out in force for the TV production and the Mayor of "Bainport" detailed would this loss of several million dollars in revenue to the town would mean - both directly and indirectly to other services and businesses in the town. The Mayor had repeatedly invited Romney and or Bain to come and discuss the matter with the Town's representatives and had been met with rejection at every stage.

Employees were interviewed as to the impact of the closing of the factory would have on all aspects of their lives including health care, relocation and going on unemployment. (Part of the 47% moochers that Bain is helping to create). A representative of the Tire Union workers in a nearby factory contrasted this decision to one of Obama's. Obama had saved the tire industry by placing a tariff on China's tire imports and literally thousands of jobs had been saved.

Background information showed that Bain since it's inception had outsourced thousands of jobs to China.

CHINA, ROMNEY AND OBAMA

In last week's debate Romney had criticized Obama for allowing China to take unfair trade advantage of America. One of the (many) tasks Romney would undertake on his first busy day of office would be to label China a currency manipulator. (Economists and all Romney’s business buddies think this is a futile counterproductive exercise but it makes for good politics). 

Obama responded as to what he had done in relation to Chinese business practices and reminded Romney that he, Obama had rescued the tire industry. Romney's response had been to criticize Obama and to say that this interfered with free market practices. Following a testy exchange, Obama opined, that Romney was the last person to criticize the administration’s China policy bearing in mind Bain's ongoing relationship with China. He and Bain had been the pioneers of outsourcing of jobs to China.


CHINA, ROMNEY AND "ROMNESIA"



Romney's Romnesia is short term memory loss as illustrated by his "forgetfulness" of his own policy statements, website and Republican Party Platform (His long term Romnesia is well known). His Romnesia also pertains to ongoing events such as the Bainport scandal. Now Fox News has a psychiatrist that analyzes the behavior of Democratic politicians. He has said that Biden’s behavior is indicative of dementia. Maybe someone should ask him what type of dementia these consistent ongoing short-term memory lapses of Romney point to. 

One of the biggest ironies of this election is that the Republican candidate Mitt Romney's most powerful argument is that because of his "business experience", he is the man to pull America out of their current financial crisis. He will create jobs and stimulate the American economy. His argument for his business experience is based solely on his involvement in the Company, Bain.



Romney is still the largest shareholder in Bain with 51% of the shareholding  - the same Bain that is in the middle of the Freeport controversy.  It is estimated that he will make about $8,000,000 out of this deal. Sensata Technologies makes sensors and controls for aircraft and automobiles and has to have some security and technological methodology that maybe China should not be getting for nothing.

Now one could argue that Romney's financial interests are under the control of a "blind trust". However, it was Romney himself who argued in 2010, that the blind trust argument was a sham as you could instruct your trustees, in broad terms, as what to do and what not to do. So Romney himself has negated this argument with video material to prove it.

BAIN INDICATIVE OF ROMNEY'S ECONOMIC SOLUTION




The whole issue of Bain is indicative of the business model that Romney represents and that he maintains can save America by creating jobs. It is built on the premise that people like him should be taxed less, be allowed to invest oversea with jobs and capital and get tax incentives to do so. Furthermore, they can dodge even more tax by not repatriating the money. Now with all this money supposedly they can create jobs - "trickle down economics". 

Romney has not instructed his trustees, with all his money, to create jobs or invest in small businesses that create jobs. Nor has anyone else proved his model actually works. There are fond references to Reagan but to the best of Jay H. Ell's long term and short term memory, Reagan nor anyone else was outsourcing jobs, among other variables, as a model for resuscitating the economy.

Ed Schultz's hour-long piece on Bainport should be compulsory viewing for anyone who is voting for Romney for his business expertise. Or maybe Romney will have Romnesia for his whole Bain experience as well as his current majority interest and detail a real economic plan instead of talking about bipartisanship solving the economy.  The latter activity is one his partner Ryan, with the whole Republican Congress, steadfastly worked against in order to ensure that Obama did not succeed- maybe the Fox psychiatrist will tell us what type of behavior it is to for, 4 years, attempt to sink the ship, with ALL it's crew, in order to get the Captain.

China may well just come up in the debate on Foreign Policy and Jay H Ell believes that Bain will return to the poltical debate very very soon.

ROMNEY'S CHANCES - MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING

Prior to the second debate, Jay H. Ell had already written Romney off as toast, notwithstanding the fact that the media had maintained that Obama was in "deep trouble" as a result of one sub par debate performance. The media now had a horse race so the political parties and PACS doubled up on media advertising, which is very very costly at this stage of the campaign. So it is fair to say that there is a media self interest to keep this as a horse race.




"MAKE OR BREAK FOR OBAMA"




The second debate was make or break for Obama or so they said. All this when it was all but impossible for Romney to win. The Huffington Post electoral map had Obama with a winning 271 electoral votes, either definite or strongly leaning to Obama, even after his "calamitous" debate performance. This number of electoral delegates excluded the "toss up" states, Nevada, Colorado, Virginia, Florida, New Hampshire and North Carolina. Put another way even if Romney won all the latter he would still lose.

The newly more conservative CNN had a lead story on their website, "Can Obama stop a Romney win?" However their electoral map similarly rated Romney chanceless. They gave Obama 237 electoral votes adding Iowa, Wisconsin and Ohio as "toss up" states. This was very charitable indeed as those 34 electoral votes are sown up by Obama but CNN's assessment certainly adds to the interest and certainly just might just increase their advertising revenue.

Ohio has been hyped to kingdom come.  Ohio that has been in Obama's column for months. His ground game is eons ahead of Romneys with more than double the field offices. The Republican State's legislature last ditch attempt to limit Democratic voting failed court challenges. So Romney would have to be the first Republican to win the Presidency without Ohio.

So as Shakespeare might have said if he had had a tweet account, this is all"Much Ado About Nothing". So like everything else around here elections have become a spectator sport. 

"MODERATE MITT" AND THE FIRST DEBATE




It was totally forgotten that it was a new "etch a sketch" Romney that "won" the first debate. As Bill Clinton said that "Moderate Mitt" had not been around for a long time. Romney abandoned his Tea Party positions and went back to his moderate Massachusetts positions.  The only question Clinton could not answer was why Obama let Romney go unchallenged in that first debate. Neither could Jay H Ell understand the Obama tactics. (Blog: Obama AND Romney No Show at the Debate).


Romney had abandoned his position that "it was fair" that he paid less tax than middle class citizens that earned $50,000 and all in all he was unrecognizable as the Romney that had won the Republican nomination. He could not explain how the math worked for his tax plan. The time had come for all good conservatives to rally round the party!




POLLS AND POLLS




Opinion polls that showed Obama ahead on every conceivable parameter such as likeability and to fix the economy for example, inexplicably found Romney to be equal or even ahead in the popular vote, following the debate. Now opinion polls in the USA can unashamedly have bias. There are Republican pollsters and Democratic pollsters. There are samples that contain more voters of one party or another. There are questions that are more likely to get a partisan response than another. So you have to be selective as to which polls you take notice of.  




BIDEN VERSUS RYAN




Biden massacred Ryan. It was not only a victory for Biden but it was an answer to the "malarkey" of Romney on taxes and the like.  Biden laid the ground for Obama to come back on all the issues that he ostensibly "gave" to Romney in the first debate. Biden was authoritative, knowledgeable and fiesty firing up the base allowing Obama to gain the ascendency in the media battle. The CBS network poll made Biden a winner by 20 points and the other immediate "scientific" poll, CNN's gave it to Ryan by 4 points!




THE SECOND TOWN HALL DEBATE




So the stage was set for a"new" Obama or a return of the "old" Obama or whatever. Obama was aggressive, positive and not giving an inch. From taxes to immigration to women's rights to job creation to foreign policy, Obama took Romney to the cleaners. 

Romney was backtracking on everything from birth control availability to everything else.




Romney was not really happy with the way the debate went. We saw a side of him that was hidden in the first debate. He was testy, irritable and in your face. He is not to used to not getting things his own way apparently. 

There is no doubt that there will be criticism of the moderator Candy Crowley who had the audacity to fact check Romney on what Obama said immediately after the Libyan Embassy Attack.  This attack is Romney's big foreign policy issue. He forgets that he got it all wrong in the beginning, Biden pointed out to Ryan that it was his budget cuts that decreased the security money to the embassies in the first place and that Hillary Clinton took full responsibility for the whole incident the day before.




The immediate CBS and even the CNN poll gave Obama a clear victory. This with the fact that Obama was winning anyway should allow us to move on and look on to the other congressional races and the future of America generally. However, this did not stop the CNN poll from interpreting some aspects of the debate in favor of Romney even though CNN conceded that their responders were far more Republican than usual. (Maybe between this disconnect and the massive Biden - Ryan disconnect CNN should check the methodology of the "scientific" pollsters).




So the media will continue to stoke this up as a horse race. Obama has got his mojo back and there is one more debate. But remember regardless of the hype Romney has to win all those states to win. His performance in the second debate did not improve his chances. Things can only get worse for him. On the newsfront is the fact that a company called Sensata in Freeport Illinois is a company that Bain is moving to China with a loss of a 170 jobs. 

BAIN AND JOB CREATION IN USA

The employees of the Sensata Company are more than aware of their political clout in their life or death issue. They initially appealed to Romney to help them and this was ignored. Now they are going viral. By the end of the week they are going to be the centerpiece of MSNBC'S  Ed Schultz show. 

The whole issue of Bain is indicative of the business model that Romney represents that is only interested in profit and is outsourcing a viable company to China and losing a 170 American jobs. And Romney, who still owns 51% of Bain, is arguing that his business experience can save America by creating jobs.

One just wonders how all this will play in Ohio and how the media will keep the pot boiling for yet another 3 weeks.

OBAMA - THE ENIGMA

There has to be something pretty unique about Barack Obama that,  in this post debate environment, he still is odds favorite to win the Presidential race. If one lists his handicaps he should have been a lock to join Ford, Carter and Bush 41 as one termers. The latter had their problems but surely nothing of the magnitude that Obama is facing when entering this 2012 race. The list of his problems is exhaustive but let us cover just a few.

The total dissaray of the Republican Party and consequently their inability to find a really credible candidate has helped but ultimately it has to be the Obama persona that has triumphed against all odds. 

OBAMA'S HANDICAPS

* The economy

This was the deepest recession since World War 11 and Obama,  amidst critiscism, used stimulus after stimulus to get it going. He told detractors if his stimuluses don't work, don't re-elect me. He has now to live with the reality that the economy is still in the doldrums. Even with the new job figures he faces an uphill task against the businessman Romney. There are still tens of millions out of work.

* Lack of Congress Co-operation and it's Sequalae

Unskilled as a Washington politican and with the Republican Congress hell bent on obstruction - rather killing the Captain than saving the ship - he got very little done after 2012. As he pathetically tried to court the Republicans like a love struck suitor, he was rejected time and again. The Republican Congress was reminiscent of the Russians at UNO in the Cold War period and "nyet" was the response to every bipartisan initiative.

All this added to his woes as he was made to look impotent. More significantly it angered his base who believed he was "selling out" and ignoring his promised agenda in favor of "bipartisanship". Even Michael Moore mocked his efforts and was reluctant to support him "fully" for this campaign. His "Yes We Can" constituency was frankly disillusioned at the fact that that Obama's activism could not be translated into political reality. (Blog From Yes We Can to Yes We Cave).

Not only was he not connecting with Republicans his modus operandi did not allow him to fraternize with his own Democrats on a day to day basis. It was just not his style to be smoozing with the movers and shakers.

So all in all he appeared to be in a big mess.

* Obamacare and Medicare Scare

Obama's monumental legislative centerpiece success, Obamacare, ironically, was ill understood and like any change created fear among the electorate. This uncertainty was exploited by the Republicans to the full and was largely responsible for the Republican 2012 electoral gains. "Obamarecare would threaten Medicare, as it existed", was the Republican winning mantra. While this is losing traction, as the benefits of Obamacare are slowly manifested, Obama still hasn't regained the support of senior citizens fully.

*  The Republican Principle Objective for 2014 - Deny Obama a Second Term

There was only one objective that united the disparate groups that are under the aegis of the Republican banner. The objective, as unashamedly ennunciated by the Senate Republican leader Mitch McConell, was to deny Obama a second term. This objective was manifested in many ways. Some mounted their opposition on Obama's  policies per se, but most, to a lesser or greater extent, attacked Obama as being a "Non American". ( See Blog OSAMA OBAMA - REALLY AN AMERICAN?).

This really appeared to be a winning strategy. Obama, who objectively is a poster child for what America is really all about, was framed as an outsider, a socialist, a European, an Asian, an African, a Muslim and someone who was not born in America and therefore a type of Manchurian candidate who has been programed to sell America to Muslims/Europeans/Asians/Africans/Socialists or whoever down the river. This was a serious effort and not a peripheral issue or a joke. There is still to this day Republican luminaries, like Donald Trump, that argue that Obama's American citizenship is still an issue.  The blogosphere is awash with "facts" that Obama is a closet Muslim, with Arabic on his ring, about to sell out Israel any moment and working full out to create America into a Muslim state.

If you are African American and going against the trend of the Country Club Republicans, it's moneyed PAC's and it's intelligentsia this is a big big  smear. The money factor was considered so big that Adrianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and Michael Moore thought that this alone would defeat him. He was also up against the powerful Fox/Wall Street media machine and it's surrogates such as Rush Limbaugh who day in and day out are bashing him as a sell out and an anti - Ameican - "Only the stupid, the dumb and anti - American could vote for Obama".

So Obama, with a crippled American economy on his back, had, in addition, to defend his credentials as a bona fide American.

Thus the Republicans had Obama by the "short and curlies". The economy was down the tubes, he had not reversed the mess as promised and because he was out there to sabotage America as a secret agent of whoever. No need to explain how "we" would get you out of this mess, rather, "Trust me I am an American, (Republican), we will sort it out. Just let us get rid of this interloper" 

So how has Obama countered this all?

OBAMA'S PLUSES.

* Intellect and grasp of issues.

Notwithstanding all the Limbaugh smears ,that without affirmative action Obama would have got nowhere, he has a giant intellect. He has absorbed all the viewpoints on all the issues and has clearly defined objectives in all arenas. This includes the economy, health, education, foreign policy and defence and the military to name but a few. 

* Political, organizational skills and oratory.

For all his style and philosophy he is not without political skills. The very fact that, as a junior first term Senator, he navigated the murky underworld of politics, especially in Chicago, to emerge as a viable Presidential candidate in the first place, speaks volumes. He is tough as nails and a competitor in this arena. His oratory, not necessarily his debating skills, is up there with the best of them and it was his speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention that meteorically propelled him into the national limelight. He did not rely on personal skills alone and it was hard hard work on the ground. It was innovative exploitation of the internet as a political medium and grassroots support, that is still the hallmark of his campaigning to this day, that was the basis of his success.

* I am who I am in the world that I live in.

To a large extent Obama has argued that he is doing what he promised.  He has not deviated from his principles and in the cirumstances he believes he has done the best he could. Obama's behavior as an American has been impecable - his support of the troops, his foreign policies and his success in killing Bin Laden and the neutralization of Al Quaeda have been his priorities. The latter has dampened down, to a certain extent, the questioning of his bona fides.

All this on it's own would not be enough to get him reelected.

* Reframed the question.

He has successfully reframed the question to, "How would you like to see America respond to the crisis?". Rather than defend what he has done and why it has "failed", he has posed, "What is the direction you would like America to take?". The two alternatives, he would claim, is favor the rich in the belief that they would create jobs or build the economy by supporting the middle class or make the rich pay there fair share in taxes and lessen the tax burden on the middle class so that they can build the economy upwards. 

Romney has helped him in framing this as the narrative. ( See blog - The Unraveling of a Romney). 

So Obama would argue that we are not dealing with a question of a failure of a policy per se. We are rather dealing with choices of how to respond to a crises.

* Bill Clinton's Role.

Bill Clinton together with Hillary have the highest political approval ratings in the country by far. Clinton after all is the President associated with the greatest prosperity in memory and for turning an economy around.  

It is instructive to observe Obama's approach to Bill Clinton. Al Gore literally rather lost the election rather than have Bill Clinton's support. Gore was his own man. Kerry almost forgot that Clinton existed. Both wanted, it appeared, to be their own persona and ignored the massive positivity Bill Clinton generated. Obama seems to have no problem with the Clinton charisma. Obama is not out to prove some personal point he is out to win a second term. Obama has had Clinton answering questions at his, Obama's own Press Conference, campaigning and generally taking plenty of the limelight.

Cinton's position has included the following statements and actions:

• “But the president’s economic plan is better in the short run, better in the long run. And the vision that we’re all in this together is a heck of a lot better than you are on your  own." 
• Clinton has told friends he will do as much to support as his schedule allows to support the president’s re-election.
• In addition to New Hampshire and his lauded speech at  the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, he has stumped on Obama’s behalf in Florida.
• In the run-up to the November 6 vote, Clinton is expected to attend other grassroots and fund-raising events, but Obama campaign aides did not give specifics. Some close to the former president think his economic message is especially helpful for Obama in such battlegrounds as Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada and New Hampshire.
• 
  
• * Cabinet Selection.

Obama inspanned some of his opponents in the Presidential election thereby healing the wounds of a blistering Primary. Biden became Vice President and Hillary Clinton Secretary of State. He was looking for top talent and not out to settle old scores. By so doing he risked opposition within the inner manouverings of internal politics but did not seem to care. His policy has paid off.

 * Small ego.

Ego in Presidential candidates has to be measured differently from the rest of the world. There is no doubt that really no-one, who did not at least have a massive amount of self confidence,  would aspire to this position. Notwithstanding that, from every point of view Obama's behavior in his new world makes one believe that he has a value system that contradicts being a megalomaniac.  He would just rather be one of the guys.

There have been several biographies some positive others negative on Obama. However, there has been nothing more instructive than Michael Lewis's piece in Vanity Fair and his subsequent interviews on the subject. Lewis tailed him in all his presidential activities for 6 months watching and questioning. From Lewis we learn that Obama takes responsibility for his decisions but seeks opinions from the highest to the lowest member of his administration. The very fact that Obama was undefended enough to allow anyone to tail him and question him for six months puts him in another category.

He has kept all his previous friends and they are with him in his down time. He values most contacts with those where there is not anything to gain but a true exchange of ideas or friendship.


FAMILY MAN

He has, at the expense of smoozing congress, maintained family time. This is not a fake or a photo op but for real. So much is his "strong marriage" an issue that some insiders have maintained that this contributes to his "dysfunctional" Presidency.

He hankers for the life he had before he was President. He told Lewis that he needed to renew his Illinois driving license. He was blissfully unaware, as Lewis pointed out, that even as an ex- President, with their heavy secret service detail, he was extremely unlikely to be driving his own car again.

Jay H. Ell saw a program on Chicago Public Televsion entitled "Check Please". This program features "ordinary people" and their choices of restaurant. Obama had featured in the program when he was a little known State Senator. That particular program had been thought to be so mundane that it was not aired. It was only featured when Obama had become President and it was instructive to learn what Obama's favorite restaurant was. It was a local eatery on the South Side of Chicago where he went regularly with the whole family. No pretensions and with a homely environment.

* Introvert.

He has no desire to be there with the movers and shakers of America and the world. The recent UNO opening is a case in point. Every American President, including Bush 43, had meetings with world leaders when they come to NY for this event. He scheduled none. He does not have ongoing receptions with leading industrialists, scientists, businessmen or even Congressmen. It is just not his chop. 

 His Nobel Prize embarrassed him. He does not need this type of recognition.

* Empathy and "Likeability" with the electorate.

Obama thus has successfully shown that he is "one of them" and one can see why. In addition, according to Biden he reads 10 letters every night that have been written to the White House. He identifies with the man/woman in the street and all this has been registered by the parameter "likeability"

LIKEABILITY.

Obama, is way ahead in the likeability parameter. Implicit in this likeabilty index is trust.  As illustrated above this recognition is not in a vaccuum. The majority of the electorate believe he is for real and they trust him. So even if the majority feel that the economy is going in the wrong direction they still favor Obama to rectify it!

In addition to all of the personal attributes above, he has supported the underdog in Society more than his opponents. This includes women, the uninsured, the Latinos, the Veterans, the Seniors, the gays..... This he has done consistently and by deed as much as by word. 

THE ENIGMA 

At the end of the day there are a multitude of factors that have allowed Obama to be on the cusp of a second term as President. 

The biggest enigma of all in Jay H Ell's mind is why this personality profile wants to be the President in the first place. There are those that argue that he does not want to be President anymore and this explains his first poor debate performance. (See Michael Tomasky's review on these nay sayers and Jay H Ell's blog, "Romney AND Obama No Shows at Debate) . 

Jay H. Ell has to believe he was originally persuaded,  by influential party members, the Chicago Democratic Illinois establishment and moneyed supporters of the Democratic philosophy to run. There is no way that this political neophyte, with his personality, could just have had the blind chutzpah to go ahead on his own. 

The Hillary Clinton's and the John McCain's are far more suited for the job specifications needed to effect legislation. Obama's very strengths among the electorate are his weaknesses in Washington. You have to be full time, all the time, manouvering, bargaining, offering, trading, smoozing... to be successful in effecting legislative change. Obama seems to the exception to the rule thus far. 

However, his greatest challenge, if his likely second term materializes, will be to effect compromise on spending and taxation and produce legislation to right this country's economy. No - one has any doubt as to his social or international agenda. The latter is to focus on Al Quaeda, act militarily only with international consensus and to support Israel in denying Iran nuclear weaponry. 

The central issue is still domestic and economic and he better learn fast to get into the hurly burly of Washington politics.


Jay H Ell is not into predictions per se but after Tuesday night's debate, he believes, there will be much more certainty of an Obama victory.

Romney AND Obama NO SHOWS AT DEBATE?

The first Presidential debate, watched by 70 million viewers has been hailed as a game changer. The general consensus has been that a dynamic "new" Romney aced the contest. There is also  even more consensus that the President put on a lack luster performance, not taking any advantage of Romney's changing positions and major gaffes on the campaign trail. 




DEBATE.




Now Obama was poor, really poor, both in substance and style. He was just too bad to be true. His substance was a repetition of his well-known positions. He did not challenge Romney on his flip-flopping, gaffes or on his indefensible positions that he has articulated, in a campaign that Republican commentator, Peggy Noonan, had characterized as, "A Galloping Catastrophe".  Obama's style was amateurish. He also appeared to miss the opportunities Romney was giving him with his radically changed positions then and there. He looked down throughout at his podium making notes. There was very little eye contact with anyone. 

This was an Obama that no one could remember, not even from the day before. This was the Obama who had out debated and out organized the Clintons. He had out debated the credible and respected Mc Cain and here this non credible candidate, who had been nominated so reluctantly by the Republicans, had made him seem like an inexperienced hack. It was inexplicable.




Romney was animated, used his hands to make a point and was self assured and confident. The style was a vast improvement on the past. There was no aggression towards the moderator, no covert impatience with his opponent, rather there were personal anecdotes from on the trail and frequent references to his family. The substance was exiting. He had moved to the middle. He was no longer for a 5 trillion tax cut as he said again and again. He proudly owned his Romneycare. He claimed credit for educational achievements in Massachusetts. He was not going to make the rich pay less. Medicare was what he cared about. He now cared about everyone and everything.

This was the "new" Romney.  As predicted by his Campaign Manager, they would "etch a sketch" of a new Romney after the Primaries.




THE POST DEBATE SPIN ROOM. 




The Republican pressroom was a cock a hoop. They had just won the Super Bowl, The Ryder Cup and The World Soccer Championship all in one. Governor Chris Christie's prediction that the world would be a different place after Romney's debate performance had come true. The faithful were bubbling at the immediate responses, twitters, facebook entries, instant polls, focus groups and pundits that, in one way or another, were all declaring Romney the hands down winner.




The Democratic pressroom was subdued. Their terse cryptic response was that one had to see the campaign as a strategy with long term objectives. A response that was, mistakenly, glossed over by all as pretty weak spin. The Democratic following stared despairingly in a state of shock at what appeared to be an aberration. Obama had been at best, "cautious". 

A day later historian Simon Schama said Obama had thrown it all away.




The media, generally, were pleased as now they had a horse race- against all odds Romney had not only survived but also triumphed.




AFTERMATH




Obama, the very next morning, back to his traditional stumping form, said "I debated a man last night who said he was Mitt Romney". "He couldn't have been Romney as Romney has had totally different positions for the past 18 months". The style had suddenly returned and he appeared to relish his pitch that had now gained more material. 




He also made fun of a Romney gaffe where Romney had said he would do a way with Public Television that screens Sesame Street, claiming that, "Romney wanted to deregulate Wall Street but regulate Sesame Street".

Attack ads were simultaneously out, suspiciously soon, slamming Romney on yet more flip flopping at the previous night's debate and his denial of obvious truths, particularly his 5 trillion tax cut.




Romney, of course, was doing victory laps. He had to, however,  get out his scripted answer on a crucial question that Obama, "inexplicably", hadn't asked him the night before thereby depriving him of an audience of 70 million viewers. To the isolated Fox News faithful he admitted that had been totally wrong in writing off 47% of the electorate as moochers and beyond redemption. He had made a mistake and was for a 100% of the Americans. (This was yet another change to his explanation of that meeting with his donors in May 2012.  On September 19, 2012 he merely said that he inelegantly stated his position).

FACT CHECKERS




Bad news was to come for Romney as his claims in his "game changing" performance were analyzed. Besides being charitably defined as the "new Romney" he was being called an outright liar. His talk was being fact checked and lie after lie was being exposed. One Democratic radio commentator claimed that there were 47 lies in 38 minutes! Obama did not come out unscathed but only one of his assumptions was seriously challenged. It was also alleged by the influential Democratic leaning Daily Beast that Romney had cheated by bringing notes into the debate room.

JOBS REPORT

Then came the positive job report that not only showed that in September, businesses had added a 114, 000 new jobs but also job figures from the previous 2 months had been adjusted higher. This brought down the unemployment rate to below 8%. This meant that nearly a million more people had jobs compared with a month previously. Below eight percent unemployment was the figure that Obama had promised he would reach by the end of his first term. The cynics maintained that Obama had to have known about the jobs report, as preliminary figures are available prior to the Friday announcement, and this had led to his complacency the night before. 

Romney damned the job news with faint praise and argued that the decrease in the unemployment percentage was as a result of disheartened job seekers pulling themselves out of the job market. The latter statement, at least, was a half-truth.

Jack Welch, that doyen of capitalism, who saved General Electric by firing thousands and thousands of workers only to receive tens and tens of millions in salary and retirement pay off for his troubles, in frustration, maintained that Obama had "manipulated" the job report because his debate performance was awful. How the jobs figure is derived is transparent and non-partisan and Welch's wild claim has been dismissed by all and sundry.

Worse to come, for the Republican "sinkers of the ship", is that consumer confidence has risen so that there will be more spending and therefore more job creation. Also the holiday season is upon us and there are will be a seasonal jump in employment.

EXPLANATION AND CONSEQUENCES




Romney, in what Jay H. Ell considers another Romney Hail Mary, has really just added to what he has to defend in the weeks to come. Romney has reinforced his well-earned reputation of being a total opportunist trying to be all things to all people. He also, by moving back again to the middle of the political spectrum, must have his right wing supporters pulling their hair out. As his new and surely his now final position emerges, he must loose some of the conservative base who never have been entirely covinced anyway.  His disconnect with Ryan becomes even more pronounced. He has made Ryan's position untenable as he faces a merciless Joe Biden in the Vice Presidential debate next week. And in the Town Hall format of the next Presidential Debate the way is open for the voters to hammer Romney on his inconsistencies.




Obama's tactics had allowed Romney free reign to reframe himself.  The undecided voter cannot be swayed by a candidate who appears even more undecided than him or her, Obama must have reckoned. 

So Jay H Ell believes the real Obama consciusly did not show up either. It was not only the real Romney who was a no - show. In so doing Obama took an unnecessary risk. It is surely better to get your message out to 70,000,000 viewers and not rely on Romney screwing up as he did. (A fact that will only be fully appreciated if the "Galloping Catastrophe" rolls on). Also who knows if the debate audiences will remain at the same viewership. Also how many were hearing Obama and Romney for the first time in this election cycle and  MAY well have believed that both the real Romney and Obama did, in fact, show up! Obama, by his performance deflated his own supporters and rejuvenated Romney's. All this entirely unnessarily as the outcome of the election is all but certain.

Whatever the pundits may say Jay H Ell believes this debate will have little, if any, impact on the race. The Republican Party has the most to loose if Romney gets defeated, as he surely will. They then cannot delay any further to not face up to the facts of the new emerging American population demographic, that women will no longer tolerate men making decisions about their bodies or health or anything else and that the reality is that their form of capitalism has gone off the rails.