Posted on 10/06/2014 4:55:00 AM PDT by LeoMcNeil
President Obama recently said, in a speech to Democrats, “I’m not on the ballot this fall … but make no mistake, these policies are on the ballot — every single one of them.” This is a colossal blunder for a second term President heading into the midterm elections. Obama’s poll numbers are in the low 40’s, Obamacare continues to be opposed by nearly 60% of the country. For the President to declare his policies are on the ballot does nothing but throw Democrats under the bus. If the election is framed as a referendum on Obama, the Democrats are going to lose and probably lose big. This line wasn’t off the cuff, which means the White House must think framing the election around Obama is a good idea. One wonders why.
According to Gallup voter opposition to the sitting President is at an all time high heading into the midterm election. Essentially Gallup finds that more people plan to use their vote to send a message of opposition to the President than using their vote as a message of support. Around half of voters plan on using their vote to send a message, the other half don’t intend to send any message to the President. Not surprisingly a majority of Republicans plan on sending a message of opposition to the President. Only 38% of Democrats plan on sending a message of support for Obama with their vote.
What the Gallup poll tells us is that Republicans are motivated to vote in the election while Democrats are less motivated. It isn’t exactly surprising that Republicans are motivated to vote against Obama’s policies. Republican opposition has been clear for six years, just like it is for the the Democrats whenever a Republican is President. What’s interesting about the Gallup poll is that Democrats are increasingly less supportive of Obama. This usually translates into voters who are less likely to vote on election day. Both parties can always count on hardcore ideologues to vote. They cannot, however, count on all of their voters to show up without motivation. For the party of a sitting President, if they can’t get their voters excited to vote for him and his policies they’re in big trouble. It’s nearly impossible to gin up fear of the other party in apathetic voters who figure the President can take care of whatever the other party proposes.
With Democrats unmotivated to vote for Obama, it’s utterly foolish of him to frame the election as a referendum on himself and his policies. All Obama did was motivate Republicans, who have grabbed hold of Obama’s comments and run wild with them. Democrats have to be furious with the White House, especially Democrat Senators running for re-election in red states. Mary Landrieu and Mark Pryor have to be furious that the President is framing the election around him. If there’s one thing those two don’t want it’s to be tied to Obama during the last six weeks before the election. They’re running from the President, he’s toxic in their states. Those two, and a number of other Democrats, want this election to be strictly about local issues. Unfortunately for them, the President nationalized the election.
You have to wonder what the White House is thinking putting such a line in a speech. This isn’t as simple as blaming Obama for being a narcissist. This goes beyond Obama. That line comes from his speech writers and advisers, who apparently are completely tone deaf. All of them need to get out of the White House once in awhile. The allure of Obama is gone, people don’t like him anymore. At Michigan State’s football game last Saturday the school played a ridiculous anti-sexual assault ad on the stadium video board during a timeout. The end featured 5 seconds of Obama. He was lustily booed, the loudest boos came from the student section. Yes, this is anecdotal evidence that the country is moving hard against Obama. However one of Obama’s core constituencies is young people. If typical young people at a typical left-wing university have turned on the President, you have to wonder why the President’s advisers are nationalizing an election. He’s losing his base and no one in the White House realizes it.
This doesn’t mean that the Republicans are heading to victory next month. They have done a terrible job nationalizing this election. In fact, they’ve played right into Obama’s hand by not nationalizing the election. The GOP should consider itself very fortunate that the President was foolish enough to ruin Democrats by nationalizing the election. Republicans should have come out with a strong 5-7 point conservative plan that all Republicans running for Senate could have supported. It should have focused on all of Obama’s weak points, health care, the economy and foreign policy. The plan didn’t need to be elaborate, all it had to do was unite Republicans and offer independent voters a positive Republican vision for the future. Instead the GOP did nothing, hoping they would win because people oppose Obama. The establishment may end up winning despite themselves, Obama is making their job easier. If they win, one wonders how many more seats they would have picked up had they offered a plan for the future. If anything, this election is going to produce evidence that no one in either party should listen to their advisers.
After reading this article, I still feel Rove is in these games for the money alone, not the good of the party or the Country.
My take remains that such matters that pertain to the selection of this Nation’s leaders—ANY nation’s leaders—is and always has been the pervue of Almighty God.
Political experts such as Rove, who make their livelihood from such political machinations, surely know that what they’re doing is ultimately ineffective countering what God intends to do. He chooses our leaders for His purposes.
...purvue...
I think, in part, Obama’s fall among Dem voters is created by blacks and low information types. Blacks are wondering what Obama has done for them and thus aren’t interested in voting for Democrats because of Obama. Ultimately that will depress black turnout, especially in southern states like Louisiana, North Carolina and Arkansas which have sizable black populations.
You think Obama and his hoard of speech writers and advisers are going to come up with the idea of a strategic retreat in order to screw Republicans for the next two years and thus usher in Hillary as President? Obama already blames Republicans for everything. Furthermore, the Obama people hate the Hillary people. I don’t see team Obama doing anything that doesn’t suit their purposes for the next two years. They are completely uninterested in what they leave behind for Hillary.
The left doesn’t have a problem of taking 1 step back if they can take 2 steps forward.
You might want to look up the Clintons “20 year plan”, it didn’t work but we know they had the plan.
B Clinton president for 8 years, 4 years for another president, then Hillary would be president for 8 years.
The Clintons had to make sure Gore didn’t get elected, which is the step back, then come up with a plan to make the repub a 1 term president replaced by Hillary, which is the 2 steps forward.
As far a Obama hating the Clintons.
Leftist hate everyone, they simply tolerate people as long as they are useful.
Help get Hillary elected and she will have to cover up for what Obama’s been up to just to save herself.
There’s a reason why the Clinton’s allowed 4 years for “someone else” in their 20 year plan. It’s because this country generally doesn’t stick with one party in the White House for more than two terms. By the time such a party hits the second midterm, as we are this year, the country is moving against the President and his party. That doesn’t bode well for Hillary in 2016. Frankly, what she should have done was take on Obama in the 2012 primary. She could have won the Dem nomination and could have beaten the unlikable Mitt Romney. Instead, she focused on 2016 which I think will prove to be her downfall or at least one of them.
Hillary did have a plan to take out Obama in 2012 then she would run against Romney in 2016.
Maybe you’ve heard about Benghazi.
Benghazi was Hillary’s version of the “spontaneous” lie, Obama’s version of the “spontaneous” lie was the airline plot several months before.
Hillary had her minions at AP leak info and derail Obama’s version of the spontaneous lie because with his version of the spontaneous lie, Obama had left an opening for his reelection.
In Hillary’s version of the spontaneous lie with Benghazi, Obama wasn’t supposed to be reelected until the screw up made it necessary for Obama to get reelected to do the cover up.
If you want to know why the “spontaneous lie”, which means no preparations, was concocted get yourself a copy of an al Qaeda doc recovered in Afghanistan, it’s a letter from Osama bin Laden to Mullah Omar listed as doc# AFGP-2002-600321 in what was the CTC at West Point’s Harmony database.
That doc is as close to the terrorist playbook as you will ever get your fingers on.
Let Osama bin Laden tell you where to look for the preparations for the terrorist attacks.
Let Osama bin Laden give you the good news why the spontaneous lie was concocted.
There was no way Hillary could take out Obama in 2012 and win the election. No black vote=no win.
Hillary had to take out Obama and blame the republicans with stealing the election.
With Benghazi, Hillary was planned to be another “October Surprise”. Hillary could then blame the republicans with collaborating with the terrorist to make Obama look like Peanuts Carter and stealing the election.
Hillary could also blame the republicans with allowing the terrorist to get the weapons that were being “rounded up” at Benghazi.
Had Benghazi worked as Hillary planned it would have been 4 years nonstop Romney stole the election and Romney was collaborating with terrorist.
Sound familiar, same thing Hillary did with Bush, what was supposed to be her “20 year plan”. Make sure Gore didn’t get elected then bring down the president after 4 years.
I I I, me me, Mine!
Kansas, Louisiana, Georgia, Iowa, Colorado, New Hampshire, Alaska, Arkansas, Kentucky and North Carolina are the ten toss up states in this election.
13 states leaning republican and 9 states leaning democrat.
Based on this map: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/2014_elections_senate_map.html
I’m looking at that map and I’m seeing the Republicans picking up 8 seats and losing one to a supposed independent. The Democrats pick up nothing and probably won’t even get the independent to caucus with them so long as they don’t have a Senate majority.
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.