As the 2012 presidential election approaches, a debate has broken out among Democratic-leaning pundits about the wisdom of President Obama’s campaign strategy. Writing in The New York Times, Matt Bai thinks Obama may have made a big mistake by listening to Bill Clinton.
Up until he won the Republican nomination, the Obama campaign appeared set to characterize Mitt Romney, in the immortal words of GOP rival Jon Huntsman, Jr., as a “well-oiled weathervane”—a political opportunist who would pretend to believe anything in order to win.
If there’s a “hot button” issue on which Romney hasn’t done a complete 180 since his days as a Massachusetts pol, it’s hard to think what it is: abortion, gay rights, immigration reform, and most of all, health care.
You name it, and Mitt’s been on both sides of it. It’s a wonder his campaign posters don’t depict him like the Roman god Janus, with two faces looking in opposite directions.
Clinton supposedly argued otherwise. Writes Bai, “The best way to go after Mr. Romney, the former president said, was to publicly grant that he was the ‘severe conservative’ he claimed to be, and then hang that unpopular ideology around his neck.” The thinking was that independent voters might forgive the candidate for sounding like a Republican during Republican debates, “but they would be far more reluctant to vote for him if they thought they were getting the third term of George W. Bush.”
Actually, I quite doubt that Bill Clinton gave such simplistic advice. Regardless, this strategy must have looked particularly wise after Romney’s selection of Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate. Polled separately, the individual elements of the so-called “Ryan budget” passed last spring by the House Republican majority are terribly unpopular: more tax cuts for the rich, converting Medicare to a voucher program, along with sharp cuts to social safety-net programs like Medicaid, food stamps, Pell grants, etc.
But, Bai continues, “in recent weeks, starting with the first debate, the challenger has made a brazen and frantic dash to the center, and Mr. Obama has often seemed off balance, as if stunned that Mr. Romney thinks he can get away with such an obvious change of course so late in the race. Which, apparently, he can.”
Indeed, polls showing Obama comfortably in the lead shifted markedly in the challenger’s favor after the first debate. Possibly the president was overconfident, disdainful of Romney’s high-pressure salesman-like approach, perhaps also disdainful of the TV game show aspect of the debates.
Whatever the reasons, Obama’s phlegmatic, disinterested performance ended up making him appear older, less energetic, and—always important in an American political context, less optimistic than Romney—who at age 65, is actually 14 years his senior.Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The National Memo