The 2012 US Election

[Primula Baggins]

Yes, with those close ties to Harvard. . . .

Oh, wait.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Speaking of Harvard graduates, something just occured to me. There has been a lot of talk of Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden switching places, at least in part in order to solidify the female vote (although the GOP has done a good job of doing that for the Democratics). But after watching last nights Colbert Report, it occurred to me that perhaps Barack and Michelle Obama should switch places. I think they both would do a good job in the respective roles. Don't you?

[nerdanel]

Yes, with those close ties to Harvard. . . .

Oh, wait.

Given that, regardless of the outcome of this election, HLS graduates will "control" two branches of the federal government for an additional four years (barring SCOTUS retirement) ...

(a) a HLS degree seems more pedestrian than elite at this point and

(b) people need to get over the "You're more elite than me, and elite is bad" meme that seems to pervade political campaigning. People shouldn't have to apologize or gloss over the generally-respected credentials that they have; nor should those credentials be fetishized and given undue deference or weight. I really wish that political candidates could be judged on the merit and workability of their political ideas and their overall political competence -- without viewing it as a downside if candidates have or have not come from humble roots or have or have not attended putatively "prestigious" universities. (If, as a result of a candidate's upper-class status or Ivy attendance, their ideas seem to be out-of-touch with mainstream, lower-class or middle-class realities, then by all means, that should be pointed out by their opponent(s). But if their ideas and potential to execute their ideas are sound, then their upbringings and alma maters should be fairly irrelevant.)

As for Michelle Obama, my perception of her time as First Lady is that she - like most First Ladies - has honed in on discrete issues of personal interest to her. I don't have a sense for how she would be as an "all-arounder," as the President must necessarily be. However, she is poised, articulate, and extremely intelligent, and were she to run on her own ticket, I'd definitely be very interested in hearing her platform (and would probably be more likely to get excited about her candidacy than her husband's). I would also be more excited about an Obama-Clinton ticket than an Obama-Biden ticket ... and most excited about a Clinton-Obama ticket (H. Clinton/M. Obama would be a great one, btw.)

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Obama leads Romney, helped by independents

Way to early to mean much, of course, but encouraging news for the president, nonetheless.

Meanwhile, the rightification of the GOP, particularly in the Senate, continues. Richard Lugar, a conservative but highly respected senator from Indiana considered one of the most knowledgable and influential statesmen on foreign policy issues known for his willingness to work across the aisle has been defeated by a tea party supporter candidate, state Treasurer Richard Mourdock. It was Lugar's willingness to work with Democrats that was the primary issue that Mourdock ran on.

Mourdock with now run against Democratic Rep. Joe Donnelly. Mourdock will definitely be the favorite in red-leaning Indiana, but Donnelly will have a better chance against him then he would have against Lugar. There are now at least three Republican-held seats that the Democrats might have a chance to switch. In addition to Indiana, there is also Massachussets, where moderate Scott Brown is in a tight battle with progressive favorite Elizabeth Warren, and Maine, where moderate Olympia Snowe is retiring, and the battle is likely to be between the conservative tea party favorite, Secretary of State Charles E. Summers, Jr., the likely GOP nominee, and the former Governor, Angus King, an independent who has refused to say who he would caucus with, but leans much more towards the Democratic side.

[Dave_LF]

electoral-vote is doing its thing again. The map looks pretty good for Obama right now. Even if all of the current ties and "barely Democratic" states flipped to Romney, Obama would still win. By contrast, Romney can't afford to lose any of the ties or "barely Republican" states, and he'd need to flip either Ohio or Pennsylvania too*--neither of them appears inclined to cooperate at the moment.

Obama is a known quantity this time and there's probably not much he can do on the campaign trail to improve voters' opinions of him. Since Romney is the new guy, he probably has more room to grow. But also more room to implode.

*or Wisconsin or Nevada, if he got everything else that's close. But if he's doing that, he's probably getting Ohio and Pennsylvania too.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Jon Stewart puts everything into context, using a film dear to all of our hearts:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-j ... ss-edition

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Anyone else following the Romney tax return drama? What is it that he is trying to hide? I saw a Bloomberg article that speculated that he did not pay any taxes at all in 2009. Let's see, here we go:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ax-returns

Is this going to make any difference to the election, long term? Or has it been raised too early and will fade away by the time it matters? I tend to think that it is something that has some legs, as long as Romney continues to refuse to budge (in the face of increasing calls from other Republicans to release more tax returns). I also tend to agree with George Will that there must be something in there that would be even worse for Romney, should he release them.

Then there is the Bain controversy. Does he seriously think that people are going to believe that even though abundant paperwork shows that he was still the President, CEO and sole shareholder up into 2002, that he had nothing to do with the business decisions that the company made from 1999 to 2002? And what does it say about the political significance of those business decisions that he is trying so hard to distance himself from them.

This election should be all about the economy, which would be bad news for the president. But it increasingly looks to me like the GOP might be handing President Obama his reelection on a silver platter by nominating such a flawed candidate.

[vison]

I tend to agree.

I don't know how it's done in the US, but politicians here often put their holdings into a blind trust. That forestalls any such controversy as Mr. Romney is facing.

The tax returns? I am one of millions who would like to know what's in there.

And what isn't.

Considering that Mr. Obama was badgered into producing his birth certificate, surely Mr. Romney can see that this is "only fair".

As for the nonsense over Mr. Obama's comments about how no one succeeds on their own? Nitpicking, nitpicking. The dictionary won't win the election for Mr. Romney, but he seems to think it will.

[River]

I don't think anyone who is honest with themself would ever claim they succeeded on their own. At some point, someone opened a door or showed you an open door.

As for Romney's troubles with Bain and his taxes, I've been following them. They are...puzzling. I have the feeling that if he were just straight-forward about it the whole thing could have blown over by now. The more he waffles and evades the worse it looks and even if it turns out there really is no there there the damage is probably done. I find the whining from Romney and his proxies a little amusing. It's a dirty filthy game but Romney wanted to play it. If you choose to play dirty and filthy games, you've got no cause to whine when the dirt and filth land all over you.

I doubt the Obama campaign is bringing out its biggest guns now. Frightening thought, no?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

vison, Romney's money is in a "blind trust". However, there is a great clip dug out by (who else?) Jon Stewart that shows Romney taking back in the 1990's about how blind trusts are bogus and don't actually hide the investments from the trustee.

[Frelga]

This election should be all about the economy, which would be bad news for the president. But it increasingly looks to me like the GOP might be handing President Obama his reelection on a silver platter by nominating such a flawed candidate.

Romney may be flawed, but consider who their other contenders were.

Romney's problem is, as someone on the Net pointed out, that he is forced to deny his own accomplishments. To speak against Obamacare, he must denounce Romneycare. He might try to play up his business experience, but Obama countered that by portraying him as a heartless profiteer who made millions by destroying jobs and was prepared to let Detroit sink on general principles.

I do agree that the worst thing he can do is appear to be hiding something and then whine how it's unfair. Which, inexplicably, is what he appears to be doing.

[River]

Maybe he thinks the SuperPACs can save him.

[vison]

Good for John McCain, pointing out that Ms. Michelle Bachman has lowered the tone of the Congress and demeaned honourable citizens!

The guy has guts.

[axordil]

Good for John McCain, pointing out that Ms. Michelle Bachman has lowered the tone of the Congress and demeaned honourable citizens!

The guy has guts.

I would describe it more as still having some sense of institutional decorum, but still, yes, good for Sen. McCain.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

I do agree that the worst thing he can do is appear to be hiding something and then whine how it's unfair. Which, inexplicably, is what he appears to be doing.

It can get worse. He can finally submit to pressure and release them which will show him to be hiding something, sounding like a whiner AND looking weak and ineffective. Quite apart from any damage that the returns themselves could create.

[River]

So Romney's in London making public appearances as the presumptive (I guess we can't call him official until the RNC) challenger to Obama and he's made quite the...splash. As far as US voters go, I'm not sure anyone will care. I'm not sure if we ever have cared what the rest of the world thinks of our candidates. But this whole thing leaves me wondering why presidential candidates take their campaigns abroad at all. I didn't get it when Obama did it either. It's not the world that elects these characters. And I'm a little nervous about what might happen if Israel finds Romney as offensive as the Brits apparently did.

[Primula Baggins]

The trip abroad seemed to do Obama some good. But he never put his foot in his mouth. Romney has laid himself open for questions such as, "If he can't be diplomatic with the British, how will he handle Pakistan?"

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The trip abroad did Obama good, because one of his perceived weaknesses was a lack of experience with foreign affairs. He came across as being capable. Romney has not.

[vison]

In that sense, Mr. Romney reminds me of Mr. Bush.

However, I don't think it will hurt him in the US. I don't think many Americans care what other people think of their president - indeed, I often get the feeling they are rather proud that an American president is unpopular abroad, proving that he puts America first rather than "catering" to foreigners.

I wish I thought it did matter in the US. Anything that makes him look incompetent is good to me.

[Túrin Turambar]

So Romney's in London making public appearances as the presumptive (I guess we can't call him official until the RNC) challenger to Obama and he's made quite the...splash. As far as US voters go, I'm not sure anyone will care. I'm not sure if we ever have cared what the rest of the world thinks of our candidates. But this whole thing leaves me wondering why presidential candidates take their campaigns abroad at all. I didn't get it when Obama did it either. It's not the world that elects these characters. And I'm a little nervous about what might happen if Israel finds Romney as offensive as the Brits apparently did.

I get the impression that these trips are something of a test run where a candidate gets to show their foriegn policy credentials and their ability to represent the country overseas. Our own Opposition Leader has been in China earlier this month - obviously the Chinese don't get to vote for him but Australians who recognise the importance of the Australia-China relationship do.

Of course, for the good impression he made as a candidate Obama has had some unfortunate moments in the U.K. as President. Returning the bust of Winston Churchill (an act I still don't understand), presenting the Queen with a gift of DVDs that don't even work in the U.K.'s region, messing up the toast (which seems to be another case of him simply being ill-advised) and getting his armoured limo stuck on a gutter. Romney's 'Mr. Leader' gaffe seems to be in the same class as the Obama toast - he simply assumed that, like American politicians, British ones are addressed by 'Mr/Madam' followed by their title. Honestly, following the Bush Administration I suspect the British are used to this sort of thing by now.