Posted on 01/07/2011 1:05:49 PM PST by Brices Crossroads
Barack Obama is, I believe, crafting a two-fold strategy to defeat Sarah Palin in the likely event that she secures the GOP nomination in 2012. Of course, his path to reelection would be made exponentially easier if she is not nominated, but it is becoming increasingly clear to him that she will be the nominee. Both components of his strategy hearken back to past campaigns, one rather distant and one quite recent. Both are, in my judgment, destined to fail.
The first component of this strategy is his so-called move to the center, by which he hopes to replicate Bill Clinton's victory of 1996. There are obviously many distinctions between 1996 and 2012, but both Clinton faced and Obama is facing a GOP controlled House, after an historic repudiation of his policies. However, Clinton's signature accomplishment--Hillarycare--went down in flames, so he was free to face down the GOP, which had a general notions of cutting government but no coherent plan to do so and certainly no concrete program to aim at. Obama, on the other hand, jammed through his signature accomplishment, ObamaCare, in spite of its wild unpopularity, and he and his allies in the Senate will have to oppose repeal. Indeed, in 2012, the GOP is almost certain to make even bigger gains in the Senate and to take control, which means that Obama's veto pen would be the only obstacle to repeal. Having thus succeeded with this and much of his statist agenda, Obama is not free to move to the center as Clinton did. He must stand athwart history, veto pen in hand, yelling at the GOP in Congress, "Stop!" Thus the policy atmospherics of 2012 are distinctly different than those of 1996.
And not just the policy atmospherics, but the likely political atmospherics as well. In 1996, the GOP nominated the quintessential big government, Establishment Republican, the ancient Bob Dole who even his ideological first cousin, George H.W. Bush dubbed in 1988 the "tax collector for the welfare state." The big government, lackluster Dole (aided by a capitulation to Clinton by the Gingrich-led House on spending and the government shutdown) generated a third party candidacy by Ross Perot which garnered 10% of the vote, permitting Clinton to win an easy plurality victory. If the GOP nominates one of Palin's likely three major competitors--Romney, Gingrich or Huckabee--all of whose big government bona fides are beyond cavil--Obama could well ride the 1996 model to a second term. This is the reason for the all out effort to destroy Palin and to dissuade her from running. With Palin in the race, there will be no third party, at least not of the Perot variety, which is the only kind which could significantly damage her. A third party by someone like Bloomberg would damage not Pain but its intended beneficiary, Barack Obama. Hence, you will not see one.
The second leg of Obama's anti-Palin strategy recognizes the flight of white voters away from the Democrats and seeks to staunch the bleeding. The so-called Colorado model, seeks to employ a strategy similar to that of the winning 2010 Colorado Senate race, in which the winner lost blue collar white women by double digits and blue collar white men by more than 2-1, but held his losses among college educated white men by single digits and won college educated women by more than 2-1. Ron Brownstein writes in the Natinal Journal:
"More specifically—and perhaps more revealingly—Axelrod also has his eye on the Colorado example, where the exit poll found that Bennet lost blue-collar white women by double digits and blue-collar white men by more than 2-to-1. Yet he prevailed by amassing strong support from young people, Hispanics, and other minorities; holding his deficit among college-educated white men to single digits; and routing Buck among college-educated white women. A similar formula, Axelrod suggests, could be available to Obama in 2012, especially if the Republican presidential primary process, as he expects, tugs the eventual GOP nominee toward the right. “The Bennet thing was particularly instructive,” Axelrod said. “They made a big effort there not only among Hispanics but women. The contrast he drew with Buck was very meaningful. That’s why I say the gravitational pull of those Republican primaries is going to be very significant.” "
http://nationaljournal.com/magazine/in-2012-obama-may-need-a-new-coalition-20110105?page=5 LINK
Leaving aside the obvious distinctions between Colorado and other states in which this strategy might be employed, the "Colorado model" explains a lot about Obama's obsession to demonize Palin and to do all he can to see that she is not the GOP nominee. This protracted "two minutes of hate" so reminiscent of Orwell's 1984, which has been leveled at Palin, is aimed chiefly at educated voters and, if she is the nominee, it will have to be undertaken with even more ferocity with the likely result being a backlash against Obama by the very same white women he needs to target. (Many of the educated white women in Colorado may have voted against Buck because they perceived him to be misogynistic, not because of any affinity for Bennet).
Palin's nomination will pose a very real threat to the Colorado model, however. First, her percentages with blue collar whites will be even higher against Obama than Buck's were against Bennet. More to the point, however, the attacks on her intelligence and competence may eventually wear thin with the demographic to which they are designed to appeal: educated white women, many of whom have felt the sting of misogyny up close and personal.
In 1980, the Carter-Mondale campaign launched a number of attacks on Ronald Reagan. Two of the most salient were: 1) Reagan is going to cut social security and throw grandma out into the snow; and 2) He is too old and senile to be President. These attacks, particularly the social security canard, seemed to have gained real traction against Reagan according to the polls. I remember reading about him answering a question at a gathering of senior citizens about the so-called threat he posed to social security, Reagan gave a standard policy answer and, I suppose, saw he was losing his audience. He just stopped and in his "aw shucks" manner, said, "Hey. I am one of you." In 1980, in spite of the virulent age driven attacks on Reagan, he carried voters over 60 by 54-40 (Anderson got 4%), whereas Gerald Ford had won them by only 52-47 in 1976.
When Barack Obama ramps up his "Colorado Strategy" and stands on the debate stage with Palin, an accomplished, self reliant woman who has spent her whole career deconstructing "the good old boys" network, he had better hope that his target audience---educated white women---don't turn en masse to one another and say, "She's one of us."
If (or should I say, when) that happens, it will be "Katy bar the door" for his Presidency.
What scares the dumbocrats is she can get many of the democrat wimmen also.. even a few black ones.. There are a few intelligent black wimmen..
The TpCaucus is growing strongly in many places and more slowly but persistently in other places.. even in San Fransicko, Chicago and New York City..
Ahh, I see, business as usual again. Nothing changes. The "inside-the-beltway" crowd continues to rule the roost. I hope people aren't that stupid. *sigh*
Since 1988, that experiment with "white males" has been a disappointing slide and plunge into economic hell for the USA, followed by this doubling down with the Kenyan.
Regardless of color or gender, the USA needs commonsense Constitutional conservative leadership, and it ain't coming from any of the "white men" (or any other men) thus far.
If Sarah Palin runs, she will get the nomination, and she will win the presidency. Otherwise the media and the establishment commie RINOs would be ignoring her.
Excellent, BC, excellent.
obamacare, unlike the failed hillarycare, is the anchor around obama’s neck that he can’t get rid of and repeal of obamacare will be a huge issue in 2012!
What’s he going to say, after 2 years of refusing to sign repeals of boamacare? LOL. “Oh, yeah, reelect me and I will repeal it now?”
What's changed in 2 years? You underestimate the gullibility of the American electorate.
I stopped reading here. SP will not receive the nomination.
she saw Gore as a condescending jerk with his eye rolling\sighs\talking down....
Time machine? crystal ball? how do you know?
ahh, the gnashing of teeth continues with no substance, just dire predictions.
How do I know???? Just like the writer knew she will ‘likely’ get the nomination. SP, like Ross Perot, has a solid base of people, but no where close to enough to even gain the nomination.
Once again I say: “To God’s ears!”
He doesn’t need a strategy. The play is the same year after year no matter the candidate.
The communications arm of the Democratic Party (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) paints the candidate as stupid, ruthless and uncaring. To prove their point they find serious, serious soundbites that demonstrate how seriously serious this issue is for the country.
At the same time the entertainment arm of the Democratic Party (Letterman, SNL, Oprah, Stewart et al) paints the candidate as so stupid, ruthless and uncaring that it’s a joke to even consider such a stupid, ruthless and uncaring candidate.
Regan was an amiable dunce, Bush was just a dunce, Dole was just so old that his stupidity was to be expected and McCain was brilliant until he was the actual candidate, then he was the worst of Regan and Dole...an old dunce without the amiable. (Most of us felt about the same on that one however.)
If it doesn’t play out that way in two years no matter who the Republican candidate is I’ll eat my tie or drink a MiTai.
“The establishment GOP hopes you’re right.”
Funny, he is the establishment GOP.
Sarah Palin isn't Ronald Reagan but, like Reagan, she has challenges to overcome, including winning over white women and blowing away the Democrat's carefully structured characterization of her as 'unqualified' at best and 'an idiot' at worst. Some people buy this tripe, including some 'conservatives' and of course, the elitist, Karl Rove, good-old-boy contingent of the Republican party. That is a problem for Palin but her Fox News appearances, her TV Alaska travelogue and her books and speeches are all bearing fruit as Sarah Palin is being seen for the very capable, intelligent, decent and courageous leader she is, despite the left's attempts to portray her as exactly the opposite.
Oh, the MSM, the Hollywood crowd and leftist academicians won't giver her a break and they do have influence but the same people were dead set against Ronald Reagan and even George W. Bush but both men were elected president. The MSM have lost much of their influence and Sarah Palin is on the real powerhouse TV news network - Fox News. Newspapers and news magazines, 98% leftist, are dying and have little influence anymore. Our universities are hotbeds of far-left thinking and do influence our young but while they may post anti-Palin messages on the internet, they often fail to go to the polls. Hollywood airheads ranting about 'dumb', 'dangerous' Sarah Palin, a former state governor, small town mayor, wife and mother and a dynamic personality espousing 'common sense' political positions won't gain that many voters sympathies unless they are already hard-core liberals that think hating Sarah Palin is a form of political sophistication.
Sarah Palin would be a formidable Republican candidate against the deeply disappointing (to many voters) Barack Hussein Obama. Obama knows it, the Democrats know it and so do their allies in the media, academia and show business. Many FReepers know it, too, although we are certainly not unanimous on the issue. That's what debate - and Republican primaries - are for.
“Sarah Palin is not going to get the nomination if she runs for it. The experiment with something besides a white male is over and the voters will return to that comfort zone in 2012.”
I’ll take bigotry for 500 Alex!,,, DO you have any idea how ignorant that sounded? And people wonder why non-whites and women flock to the democrats. If we are the party of white men only, they would need their head examined if they voted for us.
If Sarah’s supporters work hard she can win. And I plan to work very hard
What has changed?
The introduction of the Tea Party Movement.
It is truly grass-roots (not like Pelosi says—”astroturf”).
I know young people now (20 to 50 age group) who never paid attention to the political climate before. Now they are AWAKE, ENRAGED, and READY TO ACT.
Don’t see how ‘Bammy loses in 2012.
He has been the best thing for DC since the New Deal. More power has accrued to DC in 2 years of ‘Bammy...than in the previous 234 years put together. Consequently the RinoCrat Oligarchy will be behind him 100%.
He has ‘gifted” away more of our treasure to his henchmen and supporters than all other presidents in history put together. That represents a reservoir of “goodwill” that will find absolutely NO major players in US or International powers on the other side of him in 2012.
Unless there is an absolutely unprecedented grass roots, highly motivated groundswell in Flyover Country that generates hereto for unseen numbers of voters AND the institutional corruption of the vote that characterizes many Red States suffering Blue representation is dealt with ahead of time, he will be insurmountable.
100 bucks says you’re wrong!
It’s time for a female President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.