Posted on 04/15/2011 9:05:35 AM PDT by Kaslin
Using his predecessor as a foil for his failures might trap the president, as polls show he is beginning to suffer by comparison.
President Obama’s much hyped budget address in front of a George Washington University audience Wednesday has been widely viewed as the first speech of the 2012 presidential election campaign. One could be forgiven for forgetting that Mr. Obama was addressing the nation as a president seeking reelection and not as a first term junior senator from Illinois, as it was the 2008 campaign that the speech recalled.
The president’s favorite bogeyman, President George W. Bush, featured prominently, just as he has for most of President Obama’s major speeches. The class warfare rhetoric was back in full force Wednesday too, as the president argued that all of the country’s financial woes would simply vanish if only those heartless Republicans would agree to rescind the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 — the same tax cuts Obama himself agreed to extend less than six months ago.
If the president and his advisors think that they can win a second term by dragging the same old tired rhetoric and petulant political attacks before the voters again like raw steaks before the pride, they may find the lions less hungry for the offering this time around. Mr. Obama’s one-two punch strategy of tax the rich and bash Bush just doesn’t stand up to the numbers.
According to the most recent IRS data from 2008, the top one percent of income earners paid roughly $390 billion in income taxes on income of approximately $1.6 trillion, for an average effective tax rate of 23%. If the Bush tax cuts were repealed today, and the top tax rate went back up to the Clinton-era 39.6%, it would be reasonable to project that the average effective tax rate for the top income filers would only go up to where it was in 2000, 28%. Under those conditions, the government could only expect an additional $58 billion in tax revenue this year. That’s hardly more than a rounding error in a budget with a deficit of $1.6 trillion.
Even if President Obama argued for a return to the pre-Reagan top tax rate of 70% — which when last seen in 1979 carried an effective tax rate of 37% according to the Tax Policy Center — the government would realize just over $200 billion in additional revenue, or a little more than a tenth of this year’s deficit. Of course, none of this takes into account the consequences of tax hikes, reduced economic activity and correspondingly shrinking incomes for those in the top one percent of tax filers. The real take from increasing taxes at the top rates is likely to be much lower. Despite the rhetoric, President Obama simply can’t balance the budget on the backs of the rich.
The other pillar in Mr. Obama’s apparent reelection strategy, bashing Bush, similarly does not survive closer scrutiny. In 2008, President Bush was a deeply — if unfairly — disliked president. With his approval ratings mired in the low thirties, Bush was shunned even by his own party’s nominating convention. Mr. Obama’s election narrative was as much a referendum on Mr. Bush as a choice between himself and Sen. McCain.
Much has changed. The former president has enjoyed a surge in his approval ratings, as most former presidents do. In Mr. Bush’s case, this has been aided both by his respectful silence on matters of national policy and his openness in interviews conducted during the launch of his highly successful memoir. A recent Gallup poll showed the former president with an approval rating of 47% at the end of last year. While that result places Bush ahead of only Richard Nixon among the former presidents the poll tested, it is a far cry from the 36% approval he held at the end of his presidency and equals Mr. Obama’s approval rating in the most recent Gallup survey.
Worse for Mr. Obama, the voting public’s perception of him when compared to Mr. Bush is not flattering. Democratic pollster Douglas Schoen recently asked likely voters whether Obama had been a better president than Bush. The results were surprising. Just 43% said Mr. Obama had been a better president while 48% favored Mr. Bush. A majority of 56% said that Mr. Obama did not deserve a second term. Mr. Bush’s increasing popularity coupled with Schoen’s results show that the voting public is much less inclined to pay attention to attacks against Mr. Bush this time around. Running another referendum on Bush could end up backfiring on President Obama.
For a man ostensibly focused on winning the future, President Obama spends a disproportionate amount of his time fighting the battles of the past. But the American public is not looking back at what prior presidents did; they are looking toward the current president for leadership and solutions on the big challenges facing the country. As a policy address, President Obama’s budget speech failed miserably to provide either. The numbers show that as a campaign speech, it wasn’t much better.
His Presidency has been one big running ‘effing nightmare!
He has one goal and one goal only - destroy America because Americans are free. We are not anybody's slaves. And even though we're under it right now, our Constitution still exists.
And it always will.
The only reason Obama even won last time was the Democrat Congress trashed the economy and the media blamed it on Bush.
Bet Jimmy Carter is glad he’s no lobger holds the #1 spot on the loser list.
I wonder when the Chinese will figure out they're not getting their money back. Even communists expect other communists to make good on their debts.
UHOH if he doesn’t have Bush to blame what message does he have? The speech the other day lead me to believe it isn’t only the so called rich he wants more taxes from.Compound more taxes with $5 a gallon gas and food prices out of control and I just can’t see hom getting a second term.
That is exactly right. Remember the economy was thriving when the Republicans were in charge, and unemployment was practically nonexistent. Things changed when the rats took over.
His speech was that of a community organizer....nothing more.
“Under those conditions, the government could only expect an additional $58 billion in tax revenue this year.”
Of course, that’s a static revenue figure that assumes that higher marginal tax rates would have zero impact on the amount of taxable income earned at the top. Dynamic scoring would produce a much lower net tax revenue figure, further invalidating Obama’s already weak argument.
Even with all the ugliness foisted on America by this boy-king; I really DO NOT see a serious pubbie contender out there to successfully challenge obama in 2012. Romney...Huckabee......Pawlenty.......PUHLEEZZZZ!!!! If we really want to win back The Peoples’ House, we better find a much better candidate than the current batch of warmed-over deadbeats who’re forming exploratory committees.
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.