"HOW OBAMA CAN WIN BY LOSING" By: Robert K. Lifton

President Obama can win the election in 2012 by losing the fight to Republicans for  his jobs bill and related tax measures.  If the Republicans were to defeat the American Jobs Act presented by the President as a plan to save existing jobs and create new ones, then the upcoming presidential election will likely see the President identify the Republican candidate, whoever it may be, with the Republican party and run against the Republican House and Senate members led by House Speaker, John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell.  Looking at the recent polling data from the N.Y. 

Times/CBSNews poll, this can be a very effective political campaign, even though at first blush the President’s support looks like it is weakening.

Here are key elements of the polling data that suggest an effective path for the Obama campaign. The starting point is the fact that the polls showed considerable support for the jobs package including high levels of support (87%) for spending money on the nation’s infrastructure and solid support (56%) for funding state governments to curtail layoffs. While the polls show a decline in support from Obama’s Democratic base, it is clear that some part of the decline reflects the fact that the base wants him to show more “backbone” in taking on the Republicans. And while the President has failed to win the approval of independent voters that he has been seeking so assiduously, two facts are important. First, that voters’ disapproval of the Republicans in Congress is far higher than the disapproval of the President. The President’s approval rating was 40%, while the Republicans in Congress rating was 19% approval (with 28% for

Democrats.) Second, there has been no coalescing of support for any of the Republican candidates. Even many Republicans are   “not in entirely in step with any of the campaign messages of the party’s candidates.” 

The poll also shows that a large part of the nation also believes that creating jobs should be a higher priority than cutting spending and that a deficit reduction plan should include a mix of tax increases and spending cuts.  Now, the President is calling for a new minimum tax rate for individuals making more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings as middle- income taxpayers. 

The thrust of the campaign is clear to see. The President has already started the campaign by visiting various sections of the country and emphasizing the benefits of his jobs plan. In his speech before the House presenting the plan he set the stage for blaming the Republicans for political motivation in not acting on the plan, noting that there was nothing in it that had not been approved by them before and that the Republican’s aim to wait fourteen months until the election was contrary to the dire needs of the unemployed who cannot afford to wait fourteen months. 

The campaign will treat the Republican candidate as part of the Republican leadership and liable for the same blame for failing to enact legislation that is necessary to create jobs. While the Republican candidate will offer his/her recommendations for creating jobs, listening to their ideas, so far, it is not likely that any compelling program will be offered, other than the uninspiring arguments for reducing the deficit and eliminating regulations that burden business. Whether you agree with it or not, the idea that getting “government out of the way to allow business to create jobs” does not sound like a convincing enough course of action in a nation that is frightened of the future and dubious of the country’s ability to create sufficient jobs. The campaign will certainly emphasize the need to increase taxes on the wealthy to help pay for the jobs bill costs and to reduce deficits. 

To be sure, the Republican leaders are aware of this potential strategy and are trying to find a way to thwart it by showing a willingness to support certain components of the bill, while rejecting main elements. As reported in the New York Times, (Sept. 17, 2011 p. A12,)  House Republican leaders are telling their rank and file members that they would approve the  extension of the payroll tax holiday for employees and small businesses, the ability of business to expense the cost of certain properties and tax credits for business that hire veterans, as well as protection for small businesses against certain types of securities regulation.  But even if the Republican “Tea Party” members and other hard liners allow their representatives to approve these measures, which is not by any means certain, clearly the Republicans will reject the key job creating programs such as funding for state and local governments to prevent layoffs of certain groups of employees, funds for school construction, rehabilitation of homes and spending for infrastructure. 

A particular problem for the Republicans is the proposed tax increase on millionaires, named the “Buffet Rule” because it reflects the comments of Warren Buffet about the unfairness of the tax system where he and other rich people pay a smaller share of their income than middle income workers. This approach is likely to garner strong support from the electorate. Moreover, as noted in my recent article “Why America’s Rich Should (and Many Do) Support A Tax Increase,” even many wealthy people will line up behind such a tax program.  

Republican legislators and the Republican presidential candidate, however, will find themselves stuck with their “no tax increase” pledges, foreclosed from any compromise that involves tax increases, even on the wealthy and even coupled with spending reductions.  This can be a focal issue in the election. 

The Times/CBS poll showed “two-thirds of Americans from broad majorities across party lines as doubtful that Congressional Democrats and Republicans will be able to reach an agreement on a job creation package.“ When that expectation turns out to be correct, the issue will be who is to blame. If Obama can effectively place the blame on the Republicans as so committed to a highly conservative base that they are inflexible even in the face of the severe problems facing the nation, he may well be able to divert attention from the present disapproval of his efforts in handling the economy and job creation. 

He could win that contest. 

Mr. Lifton, a business man and political activist is writing a book entitled “Life’s Lessons and Stories from a Member of the “Greatest Generation.’”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

[Norbert M Salamon]

It is possible, as Mr. Linton outlined above, that President Obama could win the reelection. The politics is correct. The question is the economics:

However, the porposed cuts in the social field, from education to pensions, without MAJOR cuts in the various "security" deprtments will be a negative, especially if the banksters keep being excused at law from accountibility.

That the deficit will rise, with concurrent inflation in necessary goods, that the price of oil will go up, and that the Feds will have some form of QE - indicates that the road is downhill for the economy.

No economy can survive with negative interst rates for years on end, for such destros Capital, as does inflation. The present defaltion in certain asset classes, especially financial instruments and housing is the necessary consequence of the serial bubbles of the last 30 years. increasing debts by the government is not going to balance the destruction of debt in the private sector. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the government to go on a yearly binge of multi-trillion dollars needed to counteract the derivatives and other misallocation of capital.

I am not enamored by Mr. Obama, however, some of the GOP candidates scare the daylight out of me.

[walrus]

Too late Mr. Lifton. I don't think the international financial system is going to survive long enough for either the Democrat or Republican playbooks to be relevent.

It might have worked if Obama has started in on it last year, but not now. To amplify Norberts comments, what is going to happen is that the "Super Committee" in Congress will be unable to agree on the necessary spending cuts to give some budgetary airspace. That will trigger the automatic cuts already voted and passed.

Those budget cuts will further increase unemployment which further erodes the Federal Tax base, meaning that America will hit the borrowing limit sooner than expected. That will trigger chaos in Washington as both sides look to save themselves. The country becomes ungovernable because the powers that be are in a fight to the death to maintain their privileged position. Do you really think that the Military Industrial conflict will take cuts in defense expenditure lying down?

The best example of this is the abject failure of the Obama Administration to engage in meaningful reform of the financial system, starting with Banking regulation, taking and Axe to the SEC by banning revolving door appointments and prohibiting such practices as naked short selling, by which practice the elites are betting AGAINST THEIR OWN COUNTRY.

Of course there is one way out. If America can destroy the Euro, then investors will still buy treasury bonds at ridiculously low rates of interest as a safe haven. That will prop up the Ponzi scheme economy more another few years. However if the German public grudgingly agree to the issue of Euro bonds, then that way is closed off.

If Obama thinks he can regain credibility this late in his term by being a little more "Liberal" he has another thing coming. Clinton might beat Perry but Obama never will.

The Republicans are setting up to destroy the Democrat party. The script envisages sheeting home all the blame for the economy on Obama who deserves it. Once Republicans are in office, so the script goes, unions will be crushed. Regulations removed, bureaucracies neutered, social service programs truncated and we return to the days of the robber barons.

However, if we have another crash like 2008, which I think is now highly likely (so does the IMF) then all bets are off. AMerica will be in uncharted territory, and rudderless.

[securecare]

Republicans meet Obama's trap.

ROFLMAO

[Fred]

"Republican leaders are telling....that they would approve the extension of the payroll tax holiday for employees and small businesses..."

Of course they would, this reduces funding to the Social Security trust fund, thus aiding the Republicans in their long term effort to destroy the program.

[Norbert M Salamon]

To those who could attend it would be most educational to see:
http://www.aspousa.org/conference/2011/Agenda.cfm

For the rrest without doubt all will be on the net a few days after the conference. Peak oil and its raminifications have very high correlation to what is possible in politics world wide, especially so for USA, whose appetiote for oil is the greatest due to exurbs and suburb sans public transport.

[Jose]

Mr. Lifton, respectfully, there is no way FoolBama can win either Florida or Ohio, so he is finished.

The Republicans in The House will never allow a vote on anything the Foolish one initiates, there is no "hope".

The winner of The Florida Republican Presidential Primary will, IMHO, be the next President of the United states.

Shillary 2016

[graywolf]

Keep taking those Pollyanna pills and looking for unicorns.
This ain't 1948 and that narcissistic empty suit in the White House playing at POTUS is NOT Harry Truman.
The Dems had control of the WH and the Congress from 2008 - 2010 and still control the Senate.
Whose recession?

[Jake]

My advise? Vote for anyone who is not running on either the republican or democratic tickets.... Time for term limits!

[turcopolier]

graywolf

no disagreement on the economic stuff. Truman f----d up. pl

[graywolf]

Sir:
I meant Truman in the context of the '48 election.
If you mean that he f--d up in Korea,I don't
know enough about that to have an opinion -
even an uninformed one.

[Bill H.]

I think it's pretty bizarre, or it should be, to suggest that Obama can win election by ignoring the Republican presidential candidate and running against a Congress which is only partially controlled by the other party, and is a body of which his opponent is not a member. The voting public is sufficiently irrational that it might work, but I'm not making any large bets on it.

The number one issue on voters minds is jobs, so Obama is drawing his line in the sand over taxing the rich, which is going to create how many jobs? He's not even doing it to pay for jobs creation, but to reduce the deficit. And that wins him the election because he becomes some sort of job creator?

Strange political universe we live in.

[Bill H.]

Part of the deal is that the Social Security trust fund is reimbursed from general revenue. In some ways that makes this deal even worse.

[William R. Cumming]

Virginia and N.Carolina will not be in the Obama column in 2012.
And while the focus of the post is domestic--foreign policy and foreign relations may well hold many surprises for 2012 election.

I doubt that the ARAB SPRING is one but most Americans just don't understand that the ISLAMIC world is important beyond its natural resources.

More likely the EU collapse that I am now willing to predict will make cleared the power relationships in that geographical area. Deutschland Uber Alles vis a vis the HAN Chinese for the next 300 years will be the Eurasian story since endemic corruption in India will destroy the English speaking advantage of that country assuming it does not become something other than the world's larges "democracy"!

No the 2012 election may well prove the axion that the world's oldest and richest democracy was incapable of governing itself.

Look to a possible throw to the House of Representatives for determining the possible outcome in 2012. And that House will be dominated even more by Republicans.

[William R. Cumming]

While the Republican nominees look weak the stable of potential Republican VP nominees looks outstanding. Starting with Rubio, Portman, Kasich and Daniels. All seasoned or perfect for other reasons.

Biden on the ticket will lose votes for the DEMS.

And this from me the fuzzy headed liberal who voted for Biden and Obama.

Obama and Biden have failed completely as mentors for the DEMS. Tragic really. Too much looking in the mirror and finding perfection maybe.

[HankP]

I like political hypotheses as much as the next guy, but the 2012 election is really simple. If the economy gets better, Obama wins. If it gets worse, he loses. If it stays the same, it's a toss-up. Everything else is a late night BS session.

[J]

Colonel,

Speaking........did you see the latest regarding Obama and Tricare? He wants to establish an annual fee for military retirees. You know he did not come up with this one on his own, it was 'recommended' to him by the head of Tricare, who I am told was put there specifically to find ways to shift more of the 'burden' onto military retirees.

[turcopolier]

graywolf

Truman should have taken Marshall's advice in the matter of Israel. pl

[William R. Cumming]

Probably redundant but layoffs announced and anticipated by Too-Big-To-Fail Banks, other large-cap corporations and STATE and their local governments already full offset Obama jobs effort even if enacted and working today. It will not of course.

Also looking like 100K + layoffs from USPS!

[Matthew]

All: We have an endemic problem of pouring new wine into old wine skins. Buffett said years ago that the financial services industry is about one-third too big for our underlying economy. So law-offs on Wall Street are a practical necesssity.

We have too many finance people, too many real estate sales-men(and -women), and too many lawyers. (Like me, egads!)

Our national conversation is dominated by supposed fiscal solutions, not structural reform, like promoting America-based manufacturing or increasing the number of American-born engineers.

[Fred]

Graywolf, 'whose recession'? America's. That empty suit in the WH, like the last occupant, is not a dictator and can't enact legislation. Control of the Senate? That's funny since they've not shown themselves to be 'Dems' at all going all the way back to the 2000 election - back when those Dems had a budget surplus.

[walrus]

Hank, the economy is not going to get better. What the Republicans are doing is not a simple "election strategy trick". All will not be made right at the flick of a switch after the elections.

The Republicans seek nothing less than the disenfranchisement of the poor and middle class, the rolling back of The New Deal and the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a very few.

This is not an election stunt. You are losing your Republic. Wall Street is winning, and Israel controls Wall Street. That is why Perry and Obama say what they say about the Palestinians.

[VietnamVet]

Corporate Media overwhelming ignores the fact that the Western World is right in the middle of a Depression Era economics and politics. But, then, articles like “Doom!” tell it like it is:

http://www.tnr.com/article/economy/magazine/94963/economic-doom?passthru=ZTQ0NjYwNGNiYzc5MzhjYjUwN2ZlNTA0ZGNkNmIxNTQ

The fading Stimulus Program, Social Security payments and Unemployment benefit extensions partially mitigated the downturn. But, the coming austerity spending cuts will insure that the economy resumes its contraction.

My parents and grandparents talked about the Depression. It wasn’t that long ago.

The Large Corporations are currently hording money. There is no demand for their goods, and they need a firewall for when the banks eventually crash due to the debt crisis in Europe and America. The Elites controlling Western Governments are unwilling to take the haircut to wipe out all the bad debt from a run amok financial industry and raise taxes to get people back to work and spending money. The governments in the USA, Ireland or the UK, simply do not give a damn for workers or small businesses. This will give rise to radical political movements, i.e. the American Tea Partiers. Neo-liberal democracies are guaranteed to be a casualty.

There are only two outcomes: 1) Put Americans back to work or 2) Beef up the military and the police until there is to one Enforcer per 40 citizens to keep the population pacified and the gated communities and private airports safe.

[steve]

While this article is informative and accurate as to the possible political strategies of the two parties, it is in the same mode as most article written during the campaign season.

In other words, little is written about the efficacy of the policy or what laws should be passed ot what are the root causes of the great recession and how politicians should address those.

The focus is only on those laws as strategy. In fairness of course, the pols proposing those laws are focused on the same thing.

[graywolf]

Fred:
You're right.
America's recession.
Obama won 52% of the popular vote.
People get the government they deserve.
Obama doesn't scare me;the people who voted for him terrify me.