It’s the Economy (Again) Stupid

For people who are worried about whether defaulting on their mortgage or getting laid off, it must be infuriating when the political debate is focused on whose supporter made what controversial statement or what politician is cheating on his wife.

Barack Obama needs to start playing offense again in this campaign and stop the recent cycle where he has been relegated to responding to the controversy of the day that are of endless interest to the commentariat (myself included) but not the issues that will directly address the concerns of voters.

Every day brings a new revelation about the serious nature of economic problems in the U.S. economy. Costs for health care, college tuition, and energy are rising and threaten to trigger an increase in overall inflation. At the same time, wages have been at best stagnant for many working people.

Obama might benefit from borrowing part of John Edwards’s strategy. Edwards made more money as a lawyer than most sane people could spend in a single life time. Yet his genuine personal story of growing up in poverty, how it shaped his world view and political priorities forged a connection with voters who often feel people asking for their vote only see the real world problems of people struggling economically as an abstract policy debate.

Obama’s made some money, but like Edwards, he earned it. No one handed him his own major league baseball team, which is how George W. Bush made most of his personal fortune. Hillary Clinton wasn't born with a silver spoon in her mouth, but her father was a successful businessman and her path through life was, at least to the casual observer, probably a lot easier than Obama's. Obama could get some mileage out of drawing the contrast and using it to help showcase his economic plans.

In the meantime, John McCain has the luxury of talking about real issues, although they tend to focus on national security so he’s still missing the mark on dealing with front-burner issues for voters.

The next contest is in Pennsylvania, which shares some of the same economic challenges as Ohio and Michigan.

In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, Obama is losing 49 to 37 percent among voters who makes less than $50,000 a year, which is most people.

It’s a long slog between now and April 22, when Pennsylvania voters go to the polls.

Hillary Clinton has started to empathize with the plight of struggling people in rust belt states, making the case that she would be able to deliver meaningful change that would help improve the financial outlook for people who aren’t rich. Obama needs to offer a convincing case why he can do the same.

Not So Fast Hillary

They’re still counting Texas caucus results and it looks like when the dust settles, it appears as if Obama will walk away with three more delegates than Hillary Clinton. Delegates are what you need to win the nomination, but it’ hard to beat that TV image of a picture of Hillary’s smiling face with a bigger number of votes a checkmark and the word “winner” next to it.

They’ve stopped counting after about 40 % . Under the bizarre rules established by the Democratic party, it won’t be until late March when we know for sure, sort of , because then the delegates go to the state convention and can apparently change their minds. At that point, when we combine the primary votes and the caucus votes, Obama will probably be the winner.

How much you want to bet he would gladly trade those three delegates for the headlines of being a winner on primary night few weeks earlier?

Democrats' Strategy: Make McCain W’s Siamese Twin

After some Republican activists started making an issue of using Barack Obama’s middle name Hussein, Democrats came up with signature middle initial for John McCain.

Could it be…. W?

Expect the democrats to beat this to death: the Bush/McCain War, the Bush/McCain recession, Bush/McCain airline flight delays, Bush/McCain traffic jam, Bush/McCain burned your dinner and so on. Every time you hear McCain, they’ll remind you he was also W’s yes-man.

After capturing the needed delegates for the Republican nomination by making a clean sweep of Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont, John McCain launched his general election campaign with a lofty promise.

“Our campaign must be and will be more than another tired debate of false promises, empty sound bites or useless arguments from the past that address not a single of America’s concerns for their family’s security”

Let’s hold him to that. Hopefully it will mean no more fanning the flames on fringe wedge issues. Sorry, I know it gins up righteous rage among some of my fellow Americans, but I think establishing universal health care, ending the colossal strategic blunder of the Iraq war and balancing the federal budget trumps whether a couple of guys burn a flag at their wedding.

McCain should be applauded for staking claim to an elevated level of debate. We’ll see if that extends to resorting to George W. Bush’s lexicon to defend the war. Next time you see him teeing off on the democrats on Iraq, ask yourself what defines “victory” and how many times President Bush has moved the goal posts on what our objectives are in this war that seems to have no end.

McCain dared the democrats to spell out how they will end the war without the withdrawal of American troops triggering an escalation of sectarian violence. On that front, he’s probably right. I suspect whoever the next president is, he or she will face limited options when it comes to President Bush’s war. We’ve now seen McCain back away from his statement that he’s fine with American troops staying for 100 years, so perhaps the democrats may have an impact even if they lose the election.

Will The Democrats Self Destruct Again?

This is why Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean dreams of a convincing Obama sweep in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania.

Former Virginia Governor Doug Wilder today warned there will be riots in the streets if the candidate with the most delegates coming into the democratic convention in Denver were to lose the nomination because the party’s super delegates, made up of members of congress, governors and party leaders, were to award the nomination to the other candidate. The most likely scenario being Hillary Clinton snatching victory from Barack Obama.

“If the super delegates intervene and get in the way of it and say “Oh, no we’re going to determine what’s best, there will be chaos at the convention. If you think 1968 was bad, you watch 2008, it will be worse.”

In 1968, Vietnam war protesters gathered in Chicago and send a message to candidate Hubert Humphrey and the Democratic party. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley sent 12,000 police officers on the streets, and called in the Illinois National Guard. As the nation watched on TV, a bloody riot erupted. Police arrested over 500 people. Hundreds of police and demonstrators were injured.

If Hillary Clinton arrives at the convention with fewer states, fewer votes and fewer delegates, it would be very surprising if the she walks out as the nominee. If the picture is less clear, especially pending how the delegates votes in Michigan and Florida are distributed, the deciding vote of the super delegates would be more complicated.

The deck is stacked against Hillary right now. Since convention delegates are doled out on a proportional basis, even if she wins in big states like Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, it will be difficult to look like a clear front runner again because Obama will continue to amass delegates. If Obama has more votes, more states and is close in terms of earned delegates and then he is not he nominee, his supporters are going to feel like this year is an echo of 2000 when democrats felt like George W. Bush stole the lection from Al Gore.

Even if there aren’t any riots, the level of enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton in the general election would likely be very tepid in comparison to what Obama is generating right now.
That’s one reason why you’ve heard John McCain launching assaults at Obama. Hillary as his opponent is better than an endorsement by Rush Limbaugh.

If there were ever an election teed up for the democrats to win, this is it. Then again, so was 2004. An unpopular president who began an unpopular war with nothing but fear going for him and he won in part because the democrats over thought the race and ran someone competent on paper but not very likeable and definitely not inspiring in person.

Any of that seem familiar this time around?

“Democrats. We never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”