November 29, 2011

"If you are a Democrat or independent who has lost confidence in Mr. Obama, what might you like about Mr. Romney?"

"You might like that he's proved himself successful in business. You might find that especially attractive if you are someone who has lost your job or worry that you might lose your job."

William McGurn, in the WSJ, commenting on Obama's supposed abandonment of the working class.

41 comments:

Jay said...

Well, it appears a lot of people have lost confidence in Obama:

Obama's approval rating has decreased among all six partisan/ideology groups Gallup tracks on a regular basis since January, but it has dropped the most -- 10 percentage points, from 40% to 30% -- among pure independents. These are the roughly 14% of national adults who neither identify with one of the two major parties nor indicate a leaning. Obama's approval rating has declined by nearly as much -- eight points -- among moderate/liberal Republicans, from 29% to 21%.

He can like totally afford to give up on a portion of the electorate...

E.M. Davis said...

Better hair?

Robert Cook said...

Hmmm...I wonder why people who have lost jobs recently--or not so recently--might favor Romney, given that he made his fortune by buying up companies, hollowing them out, firing scads of people, then selling them off for a profit for himself.

No "jobs creator," he!

Frankly, there are no candidates for the White House that any sane American should consider with anything but scorn.

MadisonMan said...

Mitt is perfectly bland. A safe, safe alternative. Willing to do many things, say many things, to be elected.

purplepenquin said...

As an independent who never had confidence in Obama, I don't have confidence in Romney either. Both are just more of the same ol' same ol'...and our country needs some serious changes instead of more of the same.

TosaGuy said...

People with private-sector, middle-class jobs tend to not vote for liberals who want to toss money to those who won't work or to those who have cushy government jobs. Quite a few of these people will vote for democrats though....problem is that there are now more liberal politicians than democrat politicians.

save_the_rustbelt said...

The establishment wing of the GOP abandoned the white working class as long ago as Bush 41.

The Romney/Gingrich/Mcconnell/Boehner wing has worked hard to depress wages, eliminate benefits, destroy unions and has used offshoring and a hoard of illegals to make this work more quickly.

The white working class has nowhere to turn, they just hang on for the ride.

Scott M said...

Both are just more of the same ol' same ol'...and our country needs some serious changes instead of more of the same.

Assuming this is the case for debate's sake, would you want another four years of an apparently leadership-challenged second-termer dealing with, in all likelihood, a hostile Congress (both houses), or the same ol', same ol' who will, at least on paper, be on the same side of the isle as that Congress?

Jay said...

The Romney/Gingrich/Mcconnell/Boehner wing has worked hard to depress wages, eliminate benefits, destroy unions and has used offshoring and a hoard of illegals to make this work more quickly.


I'd love to see a fact-based post on how, exactly, they did this.

AllenS said...

I'll have to agree with purplepenquin here. However, obama has to go. The problem as I see it, is that our problems are so numerous and have been going on for so long, that it might be impossible for the same ol', same ol' to do anything about our situation. Think about how far in debt that we are. There are a lot of Republicans that are just as guilty. We really need a Tea Party person in there, but that isn't going to happen, unfortunately.

John Althouse Cohen said...

Romney has plenty of strengths that could appeal to independents and Democrats, but listing them doesn't make for a very good column. In the end, his main selling point is going to be that he isn't Obama. Many people have pointed out that being a bland, safe alternative to the incumbent didn't work for John Kerry in 2004. But Kerry didn't lose by much, and the economy is much worse now than it was in 2004.

edutcher said...

The fact that Milton, love him or not, has an actual record of achievement, as opposed to the promise of Hope, is going to count for a lot.

Barry is proving he really can't get anything right. Anybody will look good to him.

save_the_rustbelt said...

The establishment wing of the GOP abandoned the white working class as long ago as Bush 41.

As opposed to the Willie/Dodd/Frank/Obama/Hillary/Goldman Sachs wing of the Democrat Party?

AllenS said...

John Althouse Cohen said...
Many people have pointed out that being a bland, safe alternative to the incumbent didn't work for John Kerry in 2004.

How about him being a pompous ass? "Reporting for duty", bland?

bagoh20 said...

If you look to the President for your job security, just quit. You're no good to anyone anyway.

Romney's electoral strength is his mediocrity, his lack of strong convictions, his reassuring ineffectiveness. That will probably get him Althouse's vote, and enough others to put him in the White House, where he will slow the damage, but do little to reverse the decline. The majority prefer the slowly warming water in the pot. It's getting pretty hot now, but you really can't feel it ... much.

Richard Dolan said...

"If you are a Democrat or independent who has lost confidence in Mr. Obama, what might you like about Mr. Romney?"

Oddly apt question chez Althouse, since it describes her completely. I think what folks fitting that description might like about Romney is exactly what they thought they liked about Obama in '08 -- he was supposedly pragmatic, sensible, reality-based, not too extreme or partisan -- before, that is, O showed his stuff in a way that evey they couldn't miss. Unlike O at this stage of the last campaign, however, Romney actually has a record of accomplishments to support his claim to
be pragmatic, sensible, reality-based, not too extreme or partisan.

bagoh20 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jimspice said...

Nope. We wouldn't go with Romney. He's a weasel. Now Huntsman? He's not afraid of the whack-job wing and states his mind. He'd peel quite a few votes off from the left-leaning center.

bagoh20 said...

Obama had a history that would inform you of what we were getting. All you had to do was accept that people mostly will continue to do what they have done. Most refused to employ that simple wisdom and instead imagined they were being "thoughtful" or neutral.

Romney has a history too. It's far superior to Obama's, but that's not a high bar. What we need is conviction with an intelligent ideology and the courage to act on it. Romney is definitely an improvement, but he is not a cure.

Too late now to prevent that. Maybe next time. Pick your congress well is all that's left to do right now.

rhhardin said...

Mark Steyn, who has a cold, says on Rush that we need an unGingrich as well as an unRomney.

mccullough said...

The best thing about Romney is that he is not really liked by Republicans or Democrats, but he is not hated by them either.

The country needs to make major changes, which will require approval by a pretty substantial majority of Congress.

So both sides are going to have to compromise. As a managerial type with a pretty even temper, Romney may just be the type. He's probably the closest thing to an independent there is in this race.

E.M. Davis said...

If you look to the President for your job security, just quit. You're no good to anyone anyway.

BANG.

bagoh20 said...

mccullough,

That's exactly how Bush was seen when he first got elected, but that usually results in more government, which is exactly what we don't need.

J said...

what might you like about Mr. Romney?

The ex-Demos should look into Romney's record and the LDS's historical views of blacks, hispanics, and ..jews (not to say non-mormons in general). You'll find plenty not to like.

Simon Kenton said...

Right, J. Care to enrich us with your thoughts on Harry Reid's Mormon faith?

mccullough said...

bagoh20,

When W. was elected, the times were pretty peaceful, the deficits were very low, and the economy was pretty good. There were no major problems to tackle and neither W. nor Gore proposed any major changes.

There has not been a conservative POTUS since Calvin Coolidge and there will never be another really small government President again. Ron Paul is the only candidate who realistically wants to roll the federal government back to 1925, and he's not getting elected.

No candidate is proposing to even repeal Medicare Part D, which isn't very old. A vast majority of Americans like their entitlements, so some people are going to have figure out how to preserve enough of the entitlements while trying to get the deficits under control.

In other words, there will need to be some structural changes and tax increases, and even then we'll still have pretty high deficits. Romney and Huntsman are probably the only candidates who can preside over these changes. And even then, it's really doubtful.

Conservative ideology these days is pretty much rhetoric. Conservatives, at most, want to roll the federal government back to 2008, except for Ron Paul and the Tea Party ain't backing him.

Seven Machos said...

The Romney/Gingrich/Mcconnell/Boehner wing

Your lack of understanding of intra-Republican factions is touchingly hilarious.

ricpic said...

Romney is the Arrow collar man and the Arrow collar man went out of style three quarters of a century ago.

Dan Quayle had the same problem: classically handsome but in a dated 1920's way.

It's a fatal problem for a politician, to look dated.

Seven Machos said...

Ric -- That wasn't Dan Quayle's problem.

michaele said...

Romney if elected will be as fiscally conservative as his hopefully GOP majority House and Senate forces him to be.
I hope the Tea Party has a lot of influence in getting fiscal warriors elected to the Senate. It really is going to take a lot of courage to do the right thing in getting our spending under control.

mccullough said...

michaele,

What do the majority of Tea Partiers want to cut and what is the plan to rein in growing spending on Medicare as baby boomers blow it open?

We could balance the budget within 10 years if we phased out over the next decade Social Security (New Deal Program), Medicaid (Great Society Program), and Medicare (Great Societ and W. program). No one, other than Ron Paul, is proposing that these be eliminated and no one has a credible plan to rein them in to make them solvent.

The Tea Party needs to get behind Ron Paul. Not that he will be elected, but maybe he can be the nominee. He is a conservative and his ideas would balance the budget in no time.

The eventual GOP nominee will be less conservative than McCain was. McCain voted against Medicare Part D.

Seven Machos said...

McCullough -- The central flaw in your argument is that a huge percentage of people involved in the Tea Party collects...Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and other government subsidies. So back to the drawing board.

Do you really believe that there is some clamor in this country to get rid of the welfare safety net? That's hard to believe. We do need to make massive changes to those programs. Most people have some inkling of that. But only a tiny fraction of people actually wants to get rid of them.

mccullough said...

7M,

I agree completely with you. My only point is that if the Tea Party wants smaller, limited government, they should be backing Ron Paul. I don't support him, but if I believed in a small federal government, he would be my guy.

That Ron Paul is not the Tea Party's major candidate says that the Tea Party is a fad. They don't like Obamacare (who does?), and have no idea what it will actually take to balance the budget and have an economy that has a chance at some growth.

The Tea Party, as a whole, is ignorant. That some of them back Bachman, Cain, or Gingrich is a joke. These three might try to roll back Obamacare, but that's about it. Perry's swipes at Social Security didn't seem to ingratiate him too much with the Tea Party.

Seven Machos said...

I have said for a long time that the Tea Party is the Ross Perot phenomenon redux.

I have great sympathy for the Tea Party. I do agree that their platform, such as it is, is sort of inchoate and poorly reasoned. But that describes most everyone in the world. Except us, of course.

damikesc said...

Now Huntsman? He's not afraid of the whack-job wing and states his mind. He'd peel quite a few votes off from the left-leaning center.

Nah. Democrats will always vote for Democrats over Republicans. For the GOP to vet their nominee by whom Dems think is a good candidate is folly.

...yet they did it in 2008, so go figure...

The ex-Demos should look into Romney's record and the LDS's historical views of blacks, hispanics, and ..jews (not to say non-mormons in general). You'll find plenty not to like.

...should they ALSO examine Obama's religious history? Or is that, specifically, off-limits?

mccullough said...

Damiksec,

I agree that Democrats will vote for Democrats. But Independents will vote for either Democrats or Republicans. These are where elections are won. Out of the Republican field, which candidate do you think would do best among independents?

nevadabob said...

"... supposed abandonment of the middle class."

Obama is like the girl you just broke up with telling her friends what an asshole you are.

Obama's White House = Junior High School

Tim said...

Richard Dolan said...

"If you are a Democrat or independent who has lost confidence in Mr. Obama, what might you like about Mr. Romney?"

Oddly apt question chez Althouse, since it describes her completely."


Does anyone actually, factually know if Althouse has lost confidence in Mr. Obama?

That's not the way I'd bet.

sorepaw said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
E.M. Davis said...

I agree completely with you. My only point is that if the Tea Party wants smaller, limited government, they should be backing Ron Paul. I don't support him, but if I believed in a small federal government, he would be my guy.

I must have missed the press release where the Tea Party endorsed someone.

Tera Online Gold said...

wow,these photos are so wonderful,i love this kind of..hehe I actually enjoyed examining your weblogs.



WOW Gold Eu

Cheapest WOW Gold

james conrad said...

The problem with Obama is, hes stuck in a 60's time warp and refuses to see the writing on the wall..... The entitlement state MUST be reformed, everyone in DC knows this, the problem is no one has the political courage to do what they know must be done. Can Romney get a start on this process? I dont know however, its very clear Obama will not, hes gotta gooooooooooooo