I have been in politics way too long to take anything for granted in this presidential race, and I am way too superstitious to assume a victory no matter what. The strongly anti-Obama vote remains at a rock solid 45 percent no matter what ridiculous things Romney says or does, and there will be a few percent undecided right to the end, which means Romney will hang relatively close through the last weeks of this race. By everything I can tell, including both public and private polls I have seen, this is a 4 point race, and that is still close. World events, a weak Obama debate performance or some other kind of mistake, or any number of other things might still put Romney even closer before it is done.
Having said all that, Romney is in a world of hurt, primarily because of the way he has defined himself philosophically and values-wise to the American people. He has lost the essential debate in this race, and the Republican base has created a locked box that imprisons him and makes his comeback very difficult. It's not just that he is down by a few points: the voting dynamics have solidified, and the chances for Romney's vote to grow are severely limited because the key groups of swing voters really don't like him. If Romney comes back and wins, it will not be because of Romney, it will be because of something big happening -- a major Obama mistake, people falling asleep in the Get-Out-The-Vote operations, a huge international or economic crisis -- that Romney has nothing to do with. Romney's chances for winning are now out of his hands, so all the stories about whether the Romney campaign will ever get its act together are irrelevant. With a big Obama campaign mistake or an earth-shaking world event, Romney could still win this election, but he and his party have lost the debate over values, policy, and the future of the country.
Given that, we Democrats and progressives should -- without losing focus for a moment on turning out the vote and finishing off the re-election job -- begin thinking about the implications of a second term for Obama, and how we can begin working now to make it successful for most of the American people. That analysis needs to be done both on the political and economic side of things.
When it comes to politics, naturally the big story is the nature of the next Congress. Because we are winning the central debate, our numbers have gone up in competitive House and Senate races throughout the country. We need to keep driving home our winning argument about community, investing in our people, and fighting for a strong middle class -- and we need to do everything possible(except in a few swing states and districts that lean Republican) to nationalize this election.
The chances for the Democrats to retake the House are now a lot better than the conventional wisdom has it, and my view is that for the sake of Obama's second term the entire party needs to re-orient itself to that possibility. The Obama campaign, big Democratic donors, and the progressive movement should be willing to take the risk of starting to redirect some resources toward winning House races, because if we can take the House back it will make a second term so much better in terms of getting things done for the American people. We also ought to be working to expand the playing field, because that is how we took the House back in 2006 when through most of the cycle very few people thought we would: the DCCC started out only targeting about 25 races, and in the end more than 60 were competitive. We ended up losing more than half of the closest races that cycle but still easily won the House back, and if we had only been playing in 25 races, Nancy Pelosi would not have been Speaker. Now is the time for the Democratic party, donors, and progressive groups to make the investments needed in enough second and third tier races to allow the possibility of riding the wave if it starts to build. Barack Obama's second term is going to look a lot better if he has a Democratic House to work with instead of the tea partiers currently in control.
The good news in terms of targeting is that many of the most competitive and potentially competitive House races in the country are concentrated in presidential swing states. The presidential target states -- NH, IA, NV, CO, IA, WI, MI, OH, PA, NH, VA, NC -- all have at least one first tier House target, most of them have multiples, and they all have 2nd tier races as well. But there are 3 more big states with large numbers of competitive races -- IL, NY, and CA -- where a lot of resources can and should be targeted as well. Fortunately, they are all big fundraising states, so when the president makes trips there to raise money, he should be spending some time campaigning for House candidates as well.
If Obama ends up winning this election by even just a couple of points, the chances for a Republican Senate takeover are slim to none, but to really give a second term the kind of energy and push it needs, Democrats and progressives should be making sure that the strong progressives running in competitive Senate races get maximum assistance and support. Sherrod Brown, the progressive populist champion of Ohio's middle class, needs to win re-election. And the party and progressives should give top priority to helping strong economic populists Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, Mazie Hirono, Chris Murphy, Heidi Heitkamp, and Martin Heinrich win seats in the Senate. With these kinds of voices for working and middle class folks in the Senate, they will push the Obama economic team to be bolder and more progressive in their economic thinking.
Which leads me to economic policy. In a second term, the Obama economic team will need to think big and bold to get us out of the fundamental economic problems that have been 30 plus years in the making. There's a brilliant new long term economic plan written by Jacob Hacker and Nate Loewentheil that lays out in detail how the Obama economic team should be thinking about economic policy for the next four years. We need to rebuild and revitalize the great American middle class, and allow low income people and young people starting out to climb their way into it; we need to invest in our people, our infrastructure, and our R&D; we need to revitalize the small business sector by giving them access to credit and leveling the playing field in terms of competing with big business; we need to raise wages, strengthen the pension system, and build on the reforms in Obamacare; we need to break up the Too Big To Fail banks and take on the power of Wall Street.
If Romney is elected, none of this will happen, and his and Ryan's terrible budget policies will sink us back into a depression. But even if Obama is elected, progressives will need to push like crazy (both in the administration and in Congress) to get these kinds of policies that would lift the economy for the long term enacted.
This election is far from over, but Democrats have won the essential philosophical debate, and now have a real opportunity for a wave election. Let's hope they take advantage of the moment to win the election, and then take advantage of winning to rebuild the American economy.
Follow Mike Lux on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ProgressiveLux
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
As for Mr. Romney’s party taking over the Senate, following on their candidate’s heels to hell, according to Wainwright Economics’ Senate and Presidential Update, from even-steven chances for control September 17, four days later, the probability for Dems retaining Senate control shot to 65%, and finally to 66% by month’s end.
What could have happened to the GOP? Although neither suggested nor included in the apolitical, non-partisan Wainwright technical research reports, possibly it’s the stupidity stupid? Could be. Mr. Obama hasn’t moved a muscle in his message, or his awe inspiring shoulders.
Luis de Agustin
Dems have controlled the house for 65 of the last 91 years. They ran deficits in 59 of those 65 years. We need a lot fewer dems in congress, not more.
Any other questions class? Dismissed.....
EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED…
Teddy Roosevelt 3
Others to FDR NONE
FDR 11 in 16 years
Truman 5 in 7 years
Ike 2 in 8 years
Kennedy 4 in 3 years
LBJ 4 in 5 years
Nixon 1 in 6 years
Ford 3 in 2 years
Carter 3 in 4 years
Reagan 5 in 8 years
Bush 3 in 4 years
Clinton 15 in 8 years
George W. Bush 62 in 8 years
Obama 923 in 3 1/2 years!
Assuming he maintains this pace...1846 Executive orders in 8 yrs...Vote Romney.
Most voters appreciate Obamacare...Not Vouchercare.
More Tax Cuts for the Rich? The Rich already pay less than 60-years ago!
When we could afford new highways, bridges and schools:
http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t106/OnlyObvious/Tax_Rates/TopTaxBracket_TaxRate.jpg
Republicans want to take American Woman back to the 1950's! Such lack of respect!
Vote All The Republican's OUT! Give Obama a Congress he can work with...
And America will soar once again!
I hope the Dems take back the House, but that is wishful thinking.
The Dems will keep the Senate, but unless they can get rid of the filibuster during the opening session, it won't matter if Dems have the House or not because nothing will ever get through.
We shouldn't have to wait till 2014 for something to get done; they should be doing it NOW!
What was the unemployment rate at the beginning of the first term, and what is it now?
What was the national debt at the beginning of the first term, and what is it now?
How many were on food stamps at the beginning of the first term, and how many are on them now?
How many Iranian centrifuges were refining uranium at the beginning of the first term, and how many are there now?
If somebody said the same thing using the word black you would get kicked from this site.
And yes you are angry......
OBAMA/BIDEN/DEMOCRATS 2012
Obama/Reid/Pelosi 2012!
However, if (1) Obama is reelected, (2) the Republicans in the House continue to stymie all efforts by Obama to address this country's short-term and long-term problems, and (3) Obama does a good job of convincing the American people that our problems are going to continue to worsen as long as the House is obstructionist, the Democrats should have a good chance to retake the House in 2014. I'm pretty confident that (1) and (2) will occur, but Obama's performance to date makes me think that (3) is in doubt.