Thursday, October 25, 2012

Don't be Fooled by Affable Romney

By Tom Kando

We have had  four debates, including the vice-presidential one.  The Republican candidates acquitted themselves quite well. Although President Obama did extremely well in two out of his three debates, the end result of the four debates  is a Republican victory because of  the following reason:

 Before the debates, the media had succeeded in convincing a slight majority of the electorate that the Republican ticket was dangerously radical.  Repeated  faux-pas by Romney such as “the 47%”  were  a godsend for the Obama campaign. The widespread  perception was that Romney  was (1) a buffoon, (2) incompetent and (3) “severely” conservative. The latter perception was justified, as he had expressed many severely conservative views as long as he was courting the Republican base during the primaries.

However, what the debates accomplished was to present to the electorate a totally different Romney, suggesting that the earlier presentation had been a caricature, not reality. Surprise! In all three debates, Romney came across as (1) neither a buffoon, (2) nor incompetent, (3) nor severely conservative.

I say “came across,” because I believe that we are being duped, when it comes to what Romney plans to do as President.

The last debate, the one about foreign policy, was remarkable. Romney appeared to agree with a majority of Obama’s stances. On several issues he out-pacified Obama!  He said that “the US can’t  kill its way out of extremist threats.” We must rely on foreign aid and economic development instead, he said. This is positively McGovernlike!

What’s bad is that millions of people, especially the crucial undecided group, have now seen a man who appears to be reasonable, intelligent, a centrist, a moderate  and a   plausible commander-in-chief, not  the earlier caricature. No wonder that the gender gap among  the electorate has practically vanished.

But when we go to the voting booth in a few days, here is what we should remember: We are not  voting for an image, or just for one individual. We are voting for a team, an administration, a guiding ideology, the next batch of Supreme Court nominees, economic policy for  years to come.

The Republican agenda, which Romney and Ryan and a largely Republican Congress will surely implement, is a catastrophe. From repealing Obamacare to  reducing Medicare to a voucher system, from defunding Planned Parenthood and moving towards the elimination of abortion as well as birth control, from further reducing the taxes of the rich to  increasing those of the middle class (for example by eliminating the mortgage interest deduction), from further undermining trade unions to  continuing cuts in every possible public service, a Republican victory will exacerbate all the reactionary trends already underway. Don’t be fooled by this affable man.
leave comment here

6 comments:

Madeleine said...

Tom: I live in Massachusetts, which might be one of the reasons that I am more positive about the outcome of the elections.

Do I hide my head in the sand? Maybe, but even the early voting polls show that Obama is leading. The Republicans say that the polls are incorrect and biased. Why they would be biased towards Democrats is not clear to me.

It IS a close race, and for a true Democrat like myself, that is what is most incomprehensible to me: that Obama and Romney have almost equal appeal to the American people. I guess the 47% is more diverse than we thought..

Anonymous said...

All is lost! All is lost! RUN! RUN! The boogeyman is coming!! Hide the children!

Anonymous said...

I agree with your analysis. I would just add that great sums of money have gone into this compaign, especially huge amounts by wealthy donners with extreme agendas routing for Romney. They will expect influence if Romney is elected.

drtaxsacto said...

The most interesting exchange I've seen in the last week came from the Des Moines Register (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20121024/NEWS09/121024003/President-releases-transcript-of-Register-interview?Frontpage&nclick_check=1) which includes an editorial board meeting with Obama (transcript) and then a video of the meeting with Romney. The President seems odd. He ignores any of the problems of his term. At the same time he seems to promise that he will move aggressively to the center if he is re-elected. Romney on the other had spends the the entire discussion presenting detail on his proposals and answering questions in detail. I realize that Tom and Madeline will not be convinced but one candidate (Romney) looks presidential - the other (Obama) looks dissembled.

Madeleine said...

Jonathan: I have read and watched the information. Romney's tax plan may be detailed but it still doesn't add up. He says he doesn't want to cut taxes on the rich, just on the middle class.

But even after you take away all the deductions on the rich, they still get a tax break. It is the middle class that will have to make up for the difference.

A progressive tax policy, like the one Obama proposes, is simply more fair and more practical.

Income tax take is at its lowest since 1950! Does that make sense while we are fighting two wars? No wonder the budget deficit is so high. It doesn't make sense to fight wars on borrowed money. We can thank our lucky stars that our credit worthiness is so good, or we would be paying a lot more for those wars.

Romney may sound presidential, but it is a presidential image, a bubble full of hot air.

Tom Kando said...

And another thing:

On October 26, the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson makes a good point again in his syndicated column (Sacramento Bee, Oct. 26, 2012): he reminds us of Auguste Comte’s words - demography is destiny.

Although the gender gap is said to have diminished, a majority of women still favor Obama, while (white) MEN FAVOR ROMNEY OVER OBAMA BY A STAGGERING 2:1 MAJORITY!

Also, everyone knows of course that people of color are more supportive of Obama than white folks are.

And then, add to this the generation gap: Obama’s support is strongest among the young.

So the “take back our country” slogan is transparent. It is no mystery as to who must take the country back: Old white men (and their acolytes).

This Republican campaign is the last gasp of a country formerly ruled by aging white men, but transitioning to a society that is diverse and enjoys ethnic and gender equality.

Could it be any clearer that Obama’s most obstinate opponents are those who had a monopoly of power in the past?
Of course you could claim that old white men have a better understanding of the economy than anyone else. Then again, someone might suggest that old white men’s brains shrink more rapidly than anyone else’s (As an old white man myself, I am allowed this levity).

Post a Comment

Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!