iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Abby Huntsman

GET UPDATES FROM Abby Huntsman
 

Third Time's a Charm for Obama

Posted: 06/17/2012 10:14 pm

For weeks the Obama campaign (and the always-relevant Super PACs) has hammered Romney for being a "job destroyer" and "Wall St. Guy" with little focus on anything else. It seemed you couldn't turn the TV on without seeing another shuttered factory, purportedly at the expense of Romney and his investors. Quickly, however, the campaign figured out that this "one-trick pony" approach wasn't really resonating. And more importantly, that this was not their message to win over the American people in November. They briefly pivoted to a focus on Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts, before realizing that an election focusing on economic records isn't a winning formula either.

So, maybe the familiar adage that "third time's a charm" applies in this case as well. Finally, this week in Cleveland, President Obama began drawing the parallels between Romney and his fellow Republicans. In reference to President Bush's term from 2000-2008, Obama remarked:

Long before the economic crisis of 2008 the basic bargain at the heart of this country has begun to erode.

For more than a decade, it had become harder to find a job that paid the bills, harder to save, harder to retire, harder to keep up with rising costs of gas and health care and college tuitions.

And then shortly thereafter, drew the linkage to Romney:

Governor Romney and his allies in Congress believe deeply in the theory we tried during the last decade...

If I were Team Romney, I'd be worried that Team Obama has finally begun to focus on this message -- linking Romney to the Bush days. While it's easy for Romney to point to the difficulties of the last few years, it's just as easy for Obama to remind Americans how they felt at the end of the Bush presidency when Bush's approval rating stood at only 34 percent. In fact, in a Gallup poll released this week, 68 percent of Americans (and 67 percent of independent voters, the key voting block) blame Bush for the current state of the U.S. economy. Listening to the numbers, Obama should continue offering Americans a choice between "two fundamentally different views" on how to move our country forward. If he's able to convince (or even scare) Americans that a vote for Romney is a vote for "what got us into this mess," it might be a tipping point in swinging support to his corner.

While they're at it, Team Obama also would be well served to link Romney's foreign policy ideals to that employed over the last decade with costly implications for America both in blood and treasure. By and large, Americans believe the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to be mistakes (recent polls show this number to be approximately 60 percent). And it seems Romney will be working within the same neoconservative school of thought. For instance, just a couple weeks ago on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Colin Powell commented that "[he's] seen some of the names [on Romney's foreign policy team] and some of them are quite far to the right." A polite way of saying that this ideological mindset got us into the hole we're in today. Not exactly a reassuring statement from a well-respected former Republican Secretary of State.

Let's not forget, it's still early. There are almost five months to go, with millions to spend on campaign ads, unplanned gaffes, the much-anticipated debates, and of course the all-important third quarter economic data. So while momentum shifts daily between the two campaigns, and unplanned events in Europe continue to impact our economy and the world markets, Team Obama and democrats should at least be sanguine that they can find their narrative. A campaign based on the future that also reminds voters of recent Republican economic and foreign policy failures is one Obama can win. Although a campaign strategy that is devoid of visionary ideas will fail. And a campaign based on records (no matter how Team Obama tries to spin it) is likely a losing strategy as well. Only time will tell, so in the meantime let's take Mark Halperin's timely advice and "take a collective deep breath."

 

Follow Abby Huntsman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/huntsmanabby

FOLLOW POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 421
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
03:38 PM on 06/19/2012
Ms. Huntsman, your father was the best opportunity that the USA ever turned down. In a time of partisanship, he worked with Dems. Today he is a RINO to the GOP, but in the time of Reagan and HW Bush, they crossed the aisle, and we call those the last responsible Republicans.

A President Huntsman would have brought the USA back to the adult table in world politics.
03:23 AM on 06/19/2012
Good article, thank you.
photo
mannapat
Truthiness shines a light.
01:25 AM on 06/19/2012
I think that's right...Republicans do love the bankers quite a bit more than the Democrats. Well, why shouldn't they? After all, they get more campaign money from Wall St. than the Dems do. It should ALL be stopped. I think the scarier thing about voting for Mitt Romney is the very real prospect of more wars, and without a war tax to pay for them. Imagine this: Santorum for Attorney General, John Bolton for Secretary of State, and Newt Gingrich as Ambassador to the UN! Be afraid...be very afraid!
12:43 AM on 06/19/2012
Mitt Romney is no George W and he will punch back at the lies President Obama throws at him. The election will be on Obama’s record as President. In most of the Bush years unemployment was below 5% most of the time. During his tenure as President, the unemployment rate has been averaging over 8%, so much for hope & change. He came in to fix the recession as many other Presidents have; he has failed with his policies and all he can do is blame the previous guy. HOPE and CHANGE has now become HYPE and BLAME.
Morrisfactor
Just a little bent
03:23 AM on 06/19/2012
I'm no fan of Obama, but seriously, by the time George Bush drove the country off a cliff, NO president was going to fix everything in three years. Bush was a disaster as president.

Bush will go down in history as one of our top two or three worst presidents, (but Obama may join that select group too).
08:46 PM on 06/19/2012
The problems were created in 1996 when NAFTA was passed. I believe that the President at that time was Bill Clinton. He also caused the housing bubble and force banks to loan to minorities with the enforcement of the Community Reinvestment Act. With Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and Franklin Raines in charge of Fannie Mae, is it any wonder it collapsed. You are so quick to criticized, but you forgot to look at the causes of the problems.
02:45 PM on 06/19/2012
Nick,
You can't douse a house with gasoline, light it on fire, run away, and say "When I left it was only 5% burnt down.". Mr. Bush started a fire that took a long time to put out.
08:51 PM on 06/19/2012
If you check the record, President Clinton started it with the signing of NAFTA, repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, and reinforcing the Community Reinvestment Act.
12:19 AM on 06/19/2012
Good article. ...blaming "recent" Republican foreign policy failures when Obama has been in the White House for almost four years assumes American are really stupid. Bush had a better relationship with foreign leaders (Pakistan,Russia,etc.) than Obama. The day to day progress Iran has made in the nuclear bomb field for the last three and one-half years, Biden blamed Bush for. It's as though no one in the current White House is responsible for anything because the adults left in 2008 and the kids have had to fend for themselves.
11:56 PM on 06/18/2012
The lack of leadership displayed by Willard must be considered. He is afraid to stand up to Donald, Grover, and any person (s) who slanders the President. This is a major flaw. BO fights congress everyday. Why must we be separated by childish clicks? The goal is to do what is best for the American ppl. Any elected official which works against this policy cannot receive my vote.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MassWG
11:29 PM on 06/18/2012
"what got us into this mess"

... started nearly 60 years ago, because after the flawed Bretton Woods agreement triggered trade imbalances we failed to make any serious effort to correct those flaws, even as they became abundantly apparent in the early 60s, instead letting inflationary "guns and butter" spending policies force the dollar off its link from gold, resulting in the financialization of the economy and the associated credit bubbles that occur with the reckless credit expansion that the Fed continued to encourage in spite of warnings of impending doom from many economists.

But it's a heckuva lot easier to just blame Bush.
RealistBC
Micro-bios must pass muster.
10:24 PM on 06/18/2012
I don't know that I agree with Abby, but it's nice to hear an opposing view which presents a reasoned and rational position. Way to go, Abby! I'd fan you if that were possible.
photo
PC Contrarian
Political Correctnes­s is the opiate of the left.
09:44 PM on 06/18/2012
"If he's able to convince (or even scare) Americans that a vote for Romney is a vote for "what got us into this mess," it might be a tipping point in swinging support to his corner."

Except that's disinformation.
It implies that Dems had no role in "what got us into this mess,";
which is absolutely false.
10:08 PM on 06/18/2012
Delusion- that's what your party has been running on for 30 years. It's absolutely correct and this last time, Bush, created 50% loss of personal value to a majority of Americans directly by his financial crisis. trillions are permanently lost and the American people didn't get bailed out the banks were- and they created this mess- UNDER BUSH!
Get a life id iot.
01:19 AM on 06/19/2012
30 years, 50% loss, majority of Americans, trillions... it all sounds like a bunch of glorified generalities. I'm sure these are all facts that you believe to be true. Truth is, I didn't loose a thing as a result of Bush, and I know a lot of others that didn't either. I'm actually better off today than four years ago, and I wasn't doing to poorly then. But it's not because of obama, it's because I've taken responsibility for myself and my finances. Don't forget that obama has had his share of bailouts and failed government investments with our tax dollars. He's also had the last three and half years and how many failed attempts to be successful at anything? Enough of the "your party" crap, take responsibility for yourself and quit whining... There's plenty of blame to go around.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mikechuk21
10:38 AM on 07/25/2012
Democrats are guilty of bending to the prevailing political wind in this country at the time and going along with what the Republicans wanted. But make no mistake, bank deregulation was a Republican idea.
photo
PC Contrarian
Political Correctnes­s is the opiate of the left.
03:20 PM on 07/25/2012
What role did sub-prime mortgages play in the 2007 financial crisis; and who instituted sub-prime mortgages for people with poor credit?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
daveythegimp
08:11 PM on 06/18/2012
It'll fail. Romney is no W. He'll do the US right
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kamact
Market Observer
12:00 AM on 06/19/2012
You're kidding...right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gabrielle Rossi
Jesus Christ is my lord and saviour
08:08 PM on 06/18/2012
I'm still waiting for all the hope and change Obama talked about in 2008. A lot of people are worse off than when Bush was in office. All Obama wants to do is pander to the next group of voters. He's already thrown a bone to the gays and latinos. He needs to show leadership regarding the economy instead of appealing to the next group of voters because it is an election year.
01:16 AM on 06/19/2012
Rest assured. As long as the Republicans continue to hold at least 40 vote in the Senate, there will be no hope and change in America.
photo
mannapat
Truthiness shines a light.
01:31 AM on 06/19/2012
It doesn't matter what Obama proposes, even when he proposes Republican ideas. They have stopped every one of his attempts to help the economy. Haven't you wondered why they are doing that? Think for a minute: The economy goes down = Obama goes down. Mitt gets in, and we become a country completely controlled by corporations. That is fascism. No one will like it but the 1%. Not even you.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bacaja
07:49 PM on 06/18/2012
Well, yeah, but this is the guy who wants to look forward, not back.
07:12 PM on 06/18/2012
Instead of "what got us into this mess I'll opt for " who or what will get us out of this mess." So far, the only answer that I suggest is to fire all of Congress and start over, that includes the President.
Whining about the previous administration is merely "sour grapes at this point. We have had poor administrations before and got over it, i.e. Carter/Reagen,time to move on. Obama is the best thing to happen for Carter. PEACE
10:08 PM on 06/18/2012
later pu tz.
01:34 AM on 06/19/2012
Not really sour grapes. Or, at least, it doesn't have to be. You can't fix a problem until you have a good understanding of the problem, and that starts with examining the policies and mistakes of the previous administration. Of course, the problems didn't start with the previous administration so you have to look at the administrations before the last. Legacies of Carter and Reagan (especially Reagan, but Carter, too, with his emphasis on deregulation) are still with us and will need to be dealt with moving forward. Our biggest problem right now is that the Republicans are refusing to acknowledge the problems America faces, and in the process are refusing to let us have the kinds of conversations we need to fix the problems. We need Republican candidates who are willing to say, "We have major problems with our economy (and other matters) and the solutions we've proposed over the past 30 years haven't worked well for the majority. How can we rectify this situation?" Instead, they've sold their souls to Grover Norquist (sic) and his hysteria about taxes.
06:05 PM on 06/18/2012
.....

love it - Bush policies ushered in years of record-setting +4% low unemployment, strong GDP growth and a strong stock market performance - and President Obama calls that hard times.

If those are hard times, what are we living in now.

.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bacaja
08:03 PM on 06/18/2012
The Bush legacy.
06:19 AM on 06/21/2012
Now it is the Obama legacy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DEMONDRICK
Obamas' perfect*imperfection)
08:42 PM on 06/18/2012
Are you really gonna lead with that????...low unemployment, and strong were held in check by wallstreet bubbles. Stock,after the dust settled were not worth the paper they were printed on......And before Bush put on his fuzzy slippers...BOOM!!!......Are you better off now than, 4 yrs. ago????
05:45 PM on 06/18/2012
If Romney is elected president you will see him transformed. Historians of the future will speak in awe of Willard the Great, persecutor of the poor, scourge of the indigent and protector of the rich. I'm sure it will all end as a national calamity, but at least it'll make for great television. We haven't had any good calamity television since George the Lesser left the nation in shambles.
12:24 AM on 06/19/2012
This is a guy, of course, that gives 40% of his income to charity and originated the first (and only) workable government sponsored health care program. He saved 7 out of 8 doomed steel mills when that industry left the country but Obama only speaks of the one he couldn't save and forgets he pumped hundreds of millions into keeping it going for eight more years. There are 20 million unemployed who would love a job for eight years.

Do you give 40% of your income to charity?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnCocktosten
getmoneyout.com
04:17 AM on 06/19/2012
The Mormon Church isn't a charity. All those proselytizing missions to foreign lands, like the one Romney took while the rest of his generation was fighting in Vietnam, cost a lot of money.
01:57 AM on 06/19/2012
Yeah, too bad we probably won't be around to see it because we will probably be dead by the time there is sufficient recovery to make the movie.