Everybody Better Sober Up

Posted on November 15, 2012 by billmanzi

The Democrats have won a smashing victory this past cycle, and with that victory will come great expectations. Naturally there are a whole host of issues that many Democrats feel have been neglected for the past four years, and they will be looking for action. I have a funny feeling that there is going to be some level of disappointment with the results.

The first flash point is the most obvious one, the fiscal cliff. But the cliff is an amalgamation of a whole bunch of separate issues that have managed to converge on us at the same time. The cliff debate has been publicly focused on “revenues”, with the President laying down a marker of a ten year revenue number of $1.6 trillion, and Republicans generically appearing open to some “revenue” through loophole closings. On this matter Democrats and the President hold all the cards, as no action means the rates for everyone go up on January 1. But despite all the focus being on that issue, and only that issue, there is substantially more to be determined. The sequester cuts need to be unwound, with Republicans very concerned about the Defense cuts, but Democrats will be looking to avoid some of the non-defense cuts as well. And for those who believe that the debt ceiling is not part of this mix they better think again. It is a point of leverage for the House, as they will need to vote for any increase. The President will be looking for a larger deficit reduction deal that will have to include the debt ceiling being raised as a part of that package. I can assure you, election or not, that Speaker Boehner will not just be giving up that chip easily.

What else, besides the Bush tax cuts, are at stake? Plenty. Start with the AMT Patch. The Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) was originally designed to stop top earners from shielding most, or all, of their income with legal federal deductions. As it began to ensnare more people, including middle class taxpayers, Congress has enacted “patches” that protect these folks. What type of numbers are we talking about? Currently about 4 million taxpayers are hit with the AMT. With no “patch” for 2012 that number will climb to 30 million, and would likely hit 40 million within a year or so. Want to give away that new found Democratic majority? Ignore that at your peril.

Treatment of Capital Gains and dividend income will change dramatically. While there is a major impetus for fairer (read: higher) taxes on capital gains and dividends the simple expiration of existing law certainly is not the best way to achieve that. This is a major bargaining chip for the President, but it makes the negotiations with the Republicans a bit more complicated.

So you have major spending cuts, including defense, tax rate increases, AMT Patches, and deficit reduction, including some “entitlement reform”, along with the debt ceiling issue, all rolled into one. And you have some Democrats thinking that the President is just going to snap his fingers and get a package that is 100% satisfactory to Democrats. For people that hold that view disappointment lies right around the corner.

Beyond the fiscal cliff there are of course other priorities that have been neglected. Unions looking for card check? Don’t think you are going to be getting that through the Republican House. Tax reform that further hits business? No chance. Carbon tax? Unless it is part of the fiscal cliff deal you have zero chance of getting it through the House. And to be honest it just will not sell with Republicans, even as part of the fiscal cliff deal.

So I am the skunk at the garden party! Do I see the glass as being half full for any Democratic initiatives? I think that areas where the President can act through his executive authority will bring progress on a host of issues. Legislatively the timing has never been better for comprehensive immigration reform, which will be able to garner Republican votes in the House. Judicial nominations? A big win for Democrats, as the President will be able to nominate judges that will protect and preserve important rights, and will likely share his values over new challenges, including Republican efforts to impose new hurdles on voting rights. In the final analysis, despite the fact that the fiscal deal will ultimately contain items of distaste to Democrats, the issue of the extension of the Bush tax cuts for upper income folks is settled. In favor of the President.

I believe that in his heart of hearts the President is fed up with the constant stream of Republican attacks. As a political matter, no matter how distasteful, we can understand the campaign attacks. But to have the McCain/Graham cabal launch these continuing and bitter attacks on Ambassador Rice after the election leaves the President no alternative but to get tough. And I do not believe, despite his big victory, that he was looking to do that at this point. Bad will begets bad will, and it is a rough way to start the post election interactions between the parties. But that slight dose of bad will will make it that much harder to achieve a common sense compromise on the critical fiscal matters facing the country, and more likely that we will have to go over the cliff before we can reach agreement. I hope I am wrong, but right now it looks like more than a few people in Washington better sober up, and Democrats should be prepared to give the President the room he needs to make the best deal he can.

My earlier post here.

http://live.wsj.com/public/page/embed-EE994540_68DA_4374_81FE_287A76422E5C.html

Posted in National News | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Republican Strategy? Help John Kerry?

Posted on November 14, 2012 by billmanzi

A shorter post today on the seemingly intractable Republican opposition to the nomination of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice as the successor to Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.

Both Ambassador Rice and Senator Kerry have been named as likely successors when Hillary Clinton leaves as Secretary of State, with Ambassador Rice seemingly having the inside track as of late. The White House actually floated the trial balloon of John Kerry as Secretary of Defense via the leak process last week. Republican opposition to Ambassador Rice has been strong, based on her initial response to the Benghazi attack, in which she stated that the incident was likely a spontaneous response to the anti-Muslim video that had received much publicity in the days before the attack.

The attacks on Rice by the Lindsay Graham/John McCain cabal, put forth strongly in the past week by both in different media, make it obvious that achieving the necessary 60 votes for her in the Senate will require some heavy lifting by the President. The obvious beneficiary of this is the long time friend of John McCain, Senator John Kerry. If the President is deterred by the angry Republican rhetoric on Rice he would likely turn to Kerry. Maybe Benghazi is not the only reason McCain/Graham oppose Ambassador Rice. Trying to help push along their long time friend and colleague John Kerry would certainly give them a bit more sway and access at State were they to be successful in derailing Ambassador Rice. Speculation? Absolutely. Evidence? None. But the United States Senate works in strange, and sometimes not so mysterious ways.

Posted in National News | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Happy 67th Birthday Neil Young

Posted on November 12, 2012 by billmanzi

Neil Young today celebrates his 67th birthday. Nothing short of a musical icon who changes musical direction like other folks change socks, Neil is back on tour with Crazy Horse. He looked like he might be hitting the road with Steve Stills in a newly reformed Buffalo Springfield, but he pulled the plug on that rather suddenly. Always unpredictable Young is still looking to grow musically. Happy Birthday Neil.

Posted in Music | Tagged | Leave a comment

Local Winners and Losers

Posted on November 12, 2012 by billmanzi

Elections always have some winners and losers that extend beyond the candidates themselves. I already posted about those bigger stage winners and losers. How about another run at it, with a more local flavor.

Winners:

Diana Fay DiZoglio. We have concentrated on more behind the scenes “winners and losers”, and we generally don’t include candidates on that basis. But DiZoglio got into the Democratic primary (14th Essex State Representative race) against long term incumbent David Torissi, and managed to run an underfunded campaign that relied heavily on door to door campaigning, and on the still golden DiZoglio name in Methuen. Geography played a big role in her victory, but she simply overwhelmed the incumbent with a street level campaign. While DiZoglio had a Republican opponent her real political challenge was in the primary. The re-districting process, which was thought to be favorable to Rep. Torissi when passed, turns out to have not been so advantageous for him.

The local Democratic Coordinated Campaign. I have already extolled the virtues of Democratic Chair John Walsh. The locals, who ran the coordinated campaign, turned out some big vote numbers, and did so in areas that have traditionally been difficult for some Democrats (Methuen, North Andover, Dracut) But they also ginned up some big numbers in Lawrence, where we have always seen a big Democratic registration edge. The elephant in this room? It is obviously the role, if any, of Lawrence Mayor William Lantigua in that City’s Democratic turnout operation. Local Republican operatives have tried for some time to taint that effort by associating it with Lantigua. The truth is that Lantigua, due to his political problems, was essentially shut out of the Democratic operation. That factoid has been assiduously avoided by Democratic operatives, who dodge the subject in the hopes of not insulting the Mayor. Obviously the Mayor still has a following, but his non-participation, to a large degree, has been a two way street. He has other matters of concern. The Rep. Marcos Devers operation, and the participation in the coordinated campaign of City Councilor Dan Rivera, were two of the factors that were of significant import in the Democratic operation in Lawrence. Both have had their issues with Mayor Lantigua.

Senator Elect Kathleen O’Connor Ives. I have tried to avoid discussion of this race, since I was involved as one of the unsuccessful Democratic candidates. But it is over now. Ives has some similarity to DiZoglio, in that she was considered to be a big underdog at the beginning of her run. She took the plunge anyway, and emerged victorious. But there are some notable differences as well. Ives, had she not been successful, was well positioned to be a major player in Newburyport politics, and a potential successor to Mayor Holaday. She placed herself, through clever political positioning, into a win-win situation. And she won.

Mayor James Fiorentini of Haverhill. Thrust into a difficult position in light of all of the Haverhill candidacies for State Senate the Mayor managed to balance a whole bunch of sharply divergent political interests banging on his door without appearing to alienate any. Despite some grumbling he is well positioned to win re-election next year.

Local Organized Labor. There are still some intractable financial issues, but organized labor, at the local level, is poised to do better than they have for a few years. Public sector unions will have a stronger voice in local government, and will look to make up ground lost during the worst of the downturn.

Independent Candidate for Senate Paul Magliocchetti. The Haverhill independent won the endorsement of the Boston Globe and the Eagle Tribune, and while not successful managed to get some positive attention paid to him and his campaign. Would have been a significantly stronger candidate if affiliated with the Democratic Party.

Losers:

Methuen City Councilor Jeanne Pappalardo: Pappalardo invested heavily in the Shaun Toohey campaign for State Senate, along with her husband, former Councilor Joseph Pappalardo. They brought along all the usual suspects in Methuen but got skunked pretty good.

Haverhill City Councilor Bill Ryan. Bill Ryan is Mr. Republican in Haverhill, and has shown a dynamic political resiliency, serving as Mayor and State Representative, and now Councilor. He was obviously invested heavily in son-in-law Shaun Toohey’s campaign for State Senate, and in daughter Maura Ciardello’s campaign for Governor’s Council. His influence and political acumen helped both, but both lost. Tough year to run as a Republican in Massachusetts.

Independent Candidate for State Senate Jim Kelcourse. Attorney Kelcourse is a smart and engaging City Councilor, who has a terrific resume. But he did not get any campaign traction, and underestimated what was needed to run a State Senate race. He got a good dose of reality on election day.

Ok, ok. I know I ran and lost. So finally:

Former Methuen Mayor Bill Manzi. Despite the imbecilic notion that I was the “heir apparent” in the race it was indeed winnable. When I study losing campaigns who are looking to assess blame I have always said that the candidate should always first go to a mirror. That is the case here.

And that is all (for now).

Posted in Merrimack Valley Politics, Methuen | Tagged | Leave a comment

Republican Policies? Where are They?

Posted on November 12, 2012 by billmanzi

And so the Republican hand wringing over the election continues, and you can expect some serious fighting within Republican ranks over the future of the GOP. Some great back and forth between some thoughtful Republicans, and a few of them are on to something (in my Democratic opinion). Besides numbers and polls what happened to the Romney message, or what was the Romney message?

As best I can tell Romney’s message was that President Obama had not done enough to fix the economy, and that Mitt Romney had the skills to make the changes necessary to create 12 million jobs. Leaving aside all of the political talk about Romney not being the right messenger, and all of the other political criticisms of the campaign, what about the substance of the campaign? Did Romney actually produce major policy ideas? My Republican friends seem to now realize that the campaign was bereft of anything other than we need to get rid of Barack Obama. There are so many policy areas that this applied to, but lets look at health care.

The Republican (Romney) message was that the Health Care Reform Act (Obama-Care)needed to be repealed. He said he would do so on day one of his presidency. The mantra was “repeal and replace”, but the Romney folks could never quite say what “replace” meant. As I had the arguments over Obama Care with my Republican friends I always asked a very simple question: What is the Republican policy on health care, beyond repeal? I got plenty of shrugging, but no specific answers except:

1) Tort Reform.

2) Allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines.

Without going into much detail tort reform would produce some minor savings (on a percentage basis) but is no “solution” to the problems in our health care system. The purchase of bare bones policies across state lines really does nothing to help, and has some major problems from a logistical point of view. Neither “solution” brings anything to the table as far as pre-existing conditions, uninsured, real cost containment, or “free riders”, and a host of other health care issues. I think it is fair to say that most real health care analysis from both left and right agree with that assessment. So, while nobody expects the man on the street to be expert in health care we do expect a Presidential campaign to be fluent in such policy. The Romney campaign fumbled this ball badly, having to walk back on at least two occasions misstatements by Mitt Romney that said his “plan” would cover pre-existing conditions. The campaign actually gave answers that were less substantive than those that I heard from Republican partisans I talked to on the street. How do you cover the uninsured? No answer! (Sending them to hospital ER’s is not a policy idea. It is rank stupidity) What should you do about “free riders” in the insurance market? No answer (except opposing the originally Republican idea of an insurance mandate).How do you contain cost? No answer. And on and on we go.

This post is not meant to persuade on the President’s health care bill. But Obama has a policy for the uninsured. He has a policy to help make the insurance market work, including for those with preexisting conditions. He has a policy. Republican columnist Ross Douthat, in the Times, bemoans the lack of policy from Republicans. From that column:

But Republicans are also losing because today’s economic landscape is very different than in the days of Ronald Reagan’s landslides. The problems that middle-class Americans faced in the late 1970s are not the problems of today. Health care now takes a bigger bite than income taxes out of many paychecks. Wage stagnation is a bigger threat to blue-collar workers than inflation. Middle-income parents worry more about the cost of college than the crime rate. Americans are more likely to fret about Washington’s coziness with big business than about big government alone.

Both shifts, demographic and economic, must be addressed if Republicans are to find a way back to the majority. But the temptation for the party’s elites will be to fasten on the demographic explanation, because playing identity politics seems far less painful than overhauling the Republican economic message.

Later in the column Douthat references James Capretta as having some real conservative ideas about health care. Lets look at a piece of a column from Capretta and Robert Moffit on replacing Obama Care, which they favor doing.

The “repeal and replace” formulation quickly caught on, but it was not without its critics. That Obamacare should be “repealed” was obvious, given how strenuously conservatives and many independents objected to the new law. But “replace”? Hammering out the details of a new health-care law might easily stir controversy and sow discord, thereby undermining the push for “repeal.”

This concern is not unfounded. But repeal will not be enough, for a simple reason: Although Obamacare would worsen many of the problems with our system of health-care financing, that system clearly does call out for serious reform. Despite the widespread public antipathy toward the new health-care law, simply reverting to the pre-Obamacare status quo would be viewed by many Americans, perhaps even most, as unacceptable. After all, a repeal-only approach would leave many of the most grievous flaws in our system of financing health care unaddressed. Chief among them would be steadily rising health-care costs, driven by the same misguided government policies that so evidently demand reform.

The Romney approach was truly repeal only. That decision by Romney was of course driven by political considerations, as even Capretta acknowledges the political problems inherent in providing details, which could sow discord, and thereby hurt any repeal effort. Sort of like Obamacare, which tried to address a glaring problem, and cost the President politically by sowing that “discord and controversy”. Want to do something besides just “be the President”. Then you need to make some policy choices that attempt to address problems, rather than simply spouting inanities about sending heart attack victims to emergency rooms. The Romney campaign was hollow to its core, and the public came to realize it. Until there are real policy proposals from the Republican Party that actually address problems facing everyday Americans they can expect more of the same. Douthat has it right. Republican subservience to their donor class, (and their entertainment complex)will doom them to further and larger electoral defeats.

The bad news is that unlike a pander on immigration, a new economic agenda probably wouldn’t be favorably received by the party’s big donors, who tend to be quite happy with the Republican Party’s current positioning.

But after spending billions of those donors’ dollars with nothing to show for it, perhaps Republicans should seek a different path: one in which they raise a little less money but win a few more votes.

Tom Coburn, on Meet the Press, talked about the lack of a positive message from Republicans. Republican Coburn said on MTP, “We didn’t say what we were for”. Health care is but one example of that.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Posted in National News | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Song of the Week- Skyfall

Posted on November 10, 2012 by billmanzi

What else would it be this week? The new Bond movie “Skyfall” has arrived, with the new theme song by Adele, and some great and dark action from Daniel Craig as James Bond. Come to Methuen and see this great new movie at the Loop. Don’t forget to make it a night and enjoy some terrific food from one of the great restaurants we have at the Loop as well. See you there.

Posted in Methuen, Song of the Week | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Big State Grant for Methuen's Arlington Neighborhood

Posted on November 10, 2012 by billmanzi

Congratulations, and thank you, to Mayor Steve Zanni, Economic Development Director Bill Buckley, Under-Secretary of DHCD Aaron Gorstein, and of course Governor Deval Patrick for their support of and delivery of a grant to Methuen’s Arlington Neighborhood which will allow the much utilized Tenney Street Park to be refurbished. From the Eagle Tribune:

The city has been awarded a $188,000 state grant to upgrade the Tenney Street playground.

The money is from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The award was announced this week by Mayor Stephen Zanni and Aaron Gornstein, Undersecretary of the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development.

The grant will pay for a renovation that will upgrade the widely-used playground and make it handicap accessible.

“I’m grateful for the opportunity to make this important investment in the Arlington Neighborhood,” Zanni said. “This grant gives Methuen the tools to make dramatic enhancements to this neighborhood for the benefit of residents both young and old.”

The full Tribune article is here. Many thanks, on behalf of the kids, for this truly wonderful grant.

Posted in Methuen | Tagged | Leave a comment

Surfing Sandy in Aruba

Posted on November 10, 2012 by billmanzi

Here is some great video of a group of maniacs surfing the hurricane tide in Aruba. Don’t try this at home.

The Vimeo page of Oli Berlic is here.

Posted in International, National News | Leave a comment

Winners and Losers

Posted on November 8, 2012 by billmanzi

So who really won, and who really lost, in the last election cycle? Here is my take, with no locals (for now).

Winners:

Massachusetts Democratic Party Chair John Walsh. Republicans bemoan a statistical disadvantage in Massachusetts, but that has not stopped them from winning major elections in the past in the Bay State. John Walsh has brought a tremendous ability to mobilize and turnout Democrats to the benefit of ALL candidates running under the Democratic banner in this state. He deserves great credit for out-organizing, out-working, and out-smarting his counterpart at the Massachusetts Republican Party.

Organized Labor. From the depths of Wisconsin organized labor has fought back, and has to be considered a major reason for Democratic victories, in Massachusetts and nationally. Their agenda will be near the top of the list. Look for more and larger public projects to be done on a PLA basis.

Doug Rubin. The consultant architect of the Elizabeth Warren victory, as well as of the Governor Patrick victory, Rubin continues to sit in the cat bird’s seat in Boston. Look for him to just keep making money.

Governor Deval Patrick.With the problems of the past few months some have speculated that the Governor may have become tarnished. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Governor was a top surrogate for his friend, President Barack Obama, and may be the leading candidate for Attorney General of the United States if and when Eric Holder leaves.

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Chair Patty Murray. Barack Obama was not the only winner on Tuesday. Democrats held and widened their Senate majority despite starting this season as the Party with more seats to defend, and after a rough 2010 mid-term. Patty Murray was the QB of the effort, and will have plenty of grateful Senators, including more women, that will be in her debt.

David Axelrod and David Plouffe. They have been listening to folks denigrate their voter modeling for months. Who is laughing now? They deployed 21st Century tactics to turn back a 20th century campaign. Mitt Romney is the management consultant, but he did not have the best management team in the field. Barack Obama did. These guys are the gold standard in political modeling. Axelrod just took Joe Scarborough over the hurdles with his mustache bet, as Scarborough bit for the “fools gold” of MI and PA.

Mayor Tom Menino. My last entry. Menino held his endorsement back, and unleashed it at the right time, providing his turnout machine to the Warren campaign, helping to bring a big victory in Boston for Elizabeth Warren. Mayor Menino still means a lot in Massachusetts politics, and he proved it yet again. Mayor for Life if he chooses to be.

Losers.

Former Boston Mayor Ray Flynn. Raybo was on the wrong side of the Brown-Warren fight, and delivered nothing in Boston. His endorsement of Brown may have galvanized a hesitant Tom Menino into the Warren endorsement. Ray was at the end of the road anyway, but his brand is effectively shot.

Republican Senate Campaign Chair John Cornyn. Went into the cycle with a big edge, and managed to squander opportunity. Republican primary voters bear plenty of responsibility, and have given away five Senate seats in the last two cycles, but Cornyn is at the top and must take the hit. Not getting nut job Tod Akin out of the race in Missouri, and effectively allowing Claire McCaskill to pick her own opponent in that state showed that Cornyn was badly out-maneuvered.

Mary Ellen Manning. The soon to be ex Governor’s Councilor not only came out for the Republican candidate in the race to succeed her, but endorsed the entire Republican ticket after running as a Democrat in the primary to replace Senator Fred Berry. Her endorsements included Richard Tisei. They all lost.

Eric Fehrnstrom. Fehrnstrom had a large hand in both the Scott Brown campaign, and the Mitt Romney campaign. Neither ended well. Major Romney contributors are up in arms over the private “briefings” that the campaign arranged that showed Romney as on his way to victory. Some pretty important and powerful people are pretty pissed off right now. Fehrnstrom is at the bottom of that hill.

Karl Rove. Rove had a bad night, and his on air meltdown on Fox after Ohio was called for the President certainly did nothing to improve the tarnish of his incorrect voter modeling, and his incorrect predictions of Romney victory based on his faulty models. You could add Dick Morris here, but he is too insignificant to warrant anything but honorable mention. Rove has lost a lot off his fastball, and may begin to lose the confidence of some of the Republican donor class as a result. His wasting millions of their dollars in Maine against Angus King is but one example of Rove squandering resources in a way that cannot make those donors happy.

Independent Candidates for Office. I agree that all have a right to run for office, and choice is a good thing for voters. But the delusional idea that in major races independents have any shot at actually winning has always been ridiculous. Before you begin pointing to successful independent candidacies please spare me. Most, if not all, were tactical decisions that were based on PARTY considerations. When Joe Moakley ran as an independent everyone knew he was a Democrat trying to get around a party problem. Yes Angus King won as a true independent in Maine, but the Democrats, in a tactical decision, laid down their arms for a FORMER GOVERNOR. Independent candidacies, if the goal is spoiling, sure do meet that criteria. If it is a desire to win then you have to question their sanity.

A Merrimack Valley winners and losers list? Yup, that is coming soon.

Posted in National News | Tagged | Leave a comment

What Happened (Obama Bomaye)

Posted on November 7, 2012 by billmanzi

The President dealt a stinging blow to the Republican Party and Mitt Romney last night, winning decisively across the country, accumulating over 300 electoral votes and likely causing Republicans some serious introspection. What happened?

1) The Perfect Storm. Leaving aside economics for the moment I refer you to Republican strategist Mike Murphy, who said in today’s New York Times:

“There will be some kind of war,” predicted Mike Murphy, a longtime Republican Party consultant, suggesting it would pit “mathematicians” like him, who argue that the party cannot keep surrendering the votes of Hispanics, blacks, younger voters and college-educated women, against the party purists, or “priests,” as he puts it, who believe that basic conservative principles can ultimately triumph without much deviation.

“We are in a situation where the Democrats are getting a massive amount of votes for free,” Mr. Murphy said.

I think Murphy has it right. Democrats are getting plenty of free votes, and that comes from Republicans essentially killing themselves with gays, women, and Hispanics. My Republican friends who were really pulling for Romney just could not understand that the country has moved beyond the type of rhetoric that has so alienated those groups. I do not mean to be overly harsh, but candidates like Mourdock in Indiana, and Akin in Missouri, really injured the Republican Party with their stupidity. Not only did they lose two Senate seats that they should have won, but they caused problems for Republican candidates throughout the nation. Marriage equality is winning on the ballot, with Republicans so far behind the country on that issue. Romney’s primary rhetoric on immigration was so offensive that President Obama got more than 70% of the Hispanic vote. But to be brutally honest Romney helped himself with Republican primary voters by talking that way, and the ideological warriors in the Republican Party will be resistant to real immigration policy changes. Beyond rhetoric the actions of the Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, and near imbeciles like Sheriff Joe Arpaio, have shown Hispanics what life would be like under total Republican rule. They don’t seem to like what they see, and voted that way. Who would have believed that the right prescription in this area, for Republicans, was held by George W. Bush, who warned Republicans of the danger of alienating this growing voting bloc.

2) The Buffoon Factor. Republicans have, through the primary process, damaged their brand badly. But to add buffoons like Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump into the mix really does add fuel to that fire. Voters look at some of the things those two have said (among a whole group of buffoons) and quite clearly see that Republicans were not willing to renounce them, and that just does not help.

3) A great early move by the Obama campaign team. The Obama team took advantage of an early money edge, and managed to paint Romney in a very unfavorable light with an early advertising barrage. Until the first debate and the Romney pivot to moderation most felt that the election was safely Democratic based on this great strategic move. The first debate placed that in doubt, but Romney never really managed to change the image given to him by the Obama campaign team. Four stars to Plouffe and Axelrod.

4) The auto bailout. My Republican friends just hem and haw when this issue comes up, but Romney saw the freight train coming at him, and tried to take what remedial steps he could. Unfortunately those steps were so fundamentally dishonest that they just did not help. Romney’s attempt to establish his free market bona-fides with that New York Times op-ed cost him dearly. Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan warned Republicans way back when about the opposition to helping GM and Chrysler, saying that Republicans would write off the industrial heartland for a generation. Don’t know about a whole generation, but certainly for 2012.

5) My own gut tells me that the Obama hurricane response, and his partnership with Republican Chris Christie, was so very helpful. People want to see effective government, and effective bi-partisan government is such a big plus with the public. A big positive for the President.

The prior mentioned Republican Mike Murphy wrote a column for Time back in 2009 that today looks a bit prophetic today. Read it to understand what a smart Republican was saying after the last Obama win. Just a piece of it here.

Young voters need to see a GOP that is more socially libertarian, particularly toward gay rights. With changing demographics come changing attitudes, and aping the grim town elders from Footloose is not the path back to a Republican White House. The pro-life movement can still be a central part of the GOP — it has support among all ages (and a slim majority of Latino voters) — but the overall GOP view on abortion must aggressively embrace the big tent.

Latinos need to see a quick end to the Republican congressional jihad on immigration. That shouldn’t be a hard lesson for the GOP to learn; every 2008 presidential-primary candidate who went for the cheap applause of the anti-immigration right couldn’t win even the Iowa caucus, let alone the nomination. Instead, the GOP should support practical immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship. Republicans should differentiate themselves from the left by heating up the lukewarm American melting pot with a firm insistence on learning English and a rejection of the silly excesses of identity politics. A smart GOP would be deeply in the microloan and free-English-lessons business in immigrant communities. Illegal immigrants can’t vote. Their children will.

Much of this is still heresy to the party as it stands now. Many will support an alternative strategy: stand pat, fight it out on fiscal issues on which the GOP has strong support and exploit liberal-Democrat excess. In the short term, that could work, but eventually the demographics will win out. Saving the GOP is not about diluting conservatism but about modernizing it to reflect the country it inhabits instead of an America that no longer exists.

Murphy describes himself as a “partially defrocked” Republican consultant. That defrocking should explain part of the Republican Party problems last night. He should have been running the Romney campaign.

6) And finally the ground game. Much misunderstanding about money, and of the comment that the Republicans tried to “win it with money”. That comment is reflective not of a Republican fundraising advantage, or of a Democratic view that our fundraising was more “pure”. No, it is reflective of how the money was spent. I referenced the Obama early spending, which was of a more traditional nature. But the Obama team spent heavily for technology that sharpened their ability to both identify and get voters to the polls. The difference on the ground was quite clear. My Republican friends mocked the idea of a superior Obama ground game. They are not mocking it today. That heavy financial investment paid big dividends for the Obama campaign. Romney spent, but I believe he did so in more traditional ways.

Some boxing history to close a post that is far too long. George Foreman won the heavyweight championship by knocking Joe Frazier down six times (down goes Frazier). He faced Muhammad Ali in the “Rumble in the Jungle” as the feared and undefeated heavyweight champion. The Kenyan crowd chanted “Ali Bomaye” (kill him Ali), and Ali showed his greatness by knocking Foreman out in the eighth round. Please excuse my inclusion of this clip, but “Obama Bomaye” just keeps popping into my mind. Maybe Donald Trump will point to that as proof of Obama’s Kenyan citizenship. (Ok, ok maybe a little too much gloating.)

Posted in Electoral Map, National News | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment