Today Jack Kelly wants to tell us "Obama's Real Record". Kelly hits the standard points, how Obama had a huge majority in Congress, yet has been unable to reduce unemployment. What Obama did manage to shove do our throats, Obamacare, was promised to reduce premiums, yet it is raising them and increasing the deficit. There's slow growth in the economy, the national debt and Obama's foreign policy, including a war in Afghanistan that is almost lost.
I could respond to all of these points with complicated, detailed answers that take a lot of the blame off the President, but we all know them (we know, just to mention one, that Republicans in Congress have resisted Obama literally every step of the way). But I will concede there is a grain of truth in each of these charges, and we all know that as well. Democrats may be inclined to give Obama the benefit of the doubt (even as Republican opposition has hardened), but what about independents? Since those are the voters, especially in swing states, that both campaigns are concentrating on, both campaigns will make the race about their opponents. Both candidates are vulnerable in this area, and the race will be about who makes the most mistakes, and how serious the mistakes are. All for what it is worth.
Which one, Obama or Romney, would make the better President for the next four years? That is actually a reasonable but complicated question. I personally think it comes down to some issues on the periphery. I mean, I think Obama is trying to help the economy recover, but I think he is trying to keep Wall Street, the banks and the wealthy from suffering much at all. I believe Glenn Greenwald (now at the Guardian.UK) when he accuses Obama of all sorts of unconstitutional and unethical behavior (he has no kind words for Mitt Romney though either).
The thing is, as bad (in many ways) Obama is now, would Romney be an improvement? Romney might be no more successful than Obama in moving legislation through Congress, but his executive orders and directives to agencies would likely damage our recovery (in my opinion, backed by my study of economics). I see no reason to believe Romney would be more favorably inclined to whistle blowers either, for example.
So for me it comes down to Supreme Court nominees, as well as Federal judicial nominees. That and the possibility of persuading Obama to reverse himself on the Constitutional issues. Maybe those are weak reasons to vote for a candidate, but we live in the real world, where the necessities of politics make all candidates less than desirable.
Which reminds me, I need to say something about Bill Peduto versus Luke Ravenstahl soon.
4 comments:
May a Romney win would give a psychic boost to the wealthy. He won't be able to enact a new tax code on his own, but he could get pretty far towards it.
But experience suggests otherwise. A Romney win won't do anything about consumer demand (nor will an Obama win, although some legislation might eventually help, if Congress can get around to passing any). Actually, since Romney has refused to offer any details about his budget, it is just as reasonable (maybe more) to think a Romney win would cause the economy to nose dive.
As for the rest of what you say, you are entitled to your opinion. Which is all it is, and for which there is no evidence and in fact considerable evidence that pretty much the opposite is true.
Post a Comment