The straight scoop about political news and events without the varnished partisan diatribes.
Subscribe to the feed Feed
Comments feed Comments feed

The Two P’s – Keys to the Race for the White House

September 9, 2012 in 2012 Obama-Romney Race

As the final stretch in the presidential election gets underway, the key to analyzing the race comes down to the two P’s – who has the best plan to get our economy moving again, and who can convince voters that he can produce the results! Here’s how each candidate shapes up so far:

President Barack Obama – Obama and the Democrats have proffered a plan of middle class tax breaks, higher taxes for the wealthy, maintaining the social safety net, and implementing the new universal health care law. On balance, most polls show that his plan is viewed as fairer and more equitable by most Americans than the Republican plan pegged to continuing to protect the wealthy from sharing more of the federal tax burden. As an aside, Obama also scores higher than Mitt Romney on the scale of “he understands people like me” in most polls. And, Obama still enjoys favorable personal popularity. Further, his latest post-DNC Convention bump from the Gallup daily tracking poll conducted Sept. 4 to 6 shows his favorable job performance rating at 52% – a 7% increase from the prior 45% and his highest rating since May 2011 after the demise of Osama bin Laden (when a candidate gets over 50% they are seen as politically invulnerable barring unforeseen circumstances). In any event, Obama gets a B+ on his economic plan.

President Obama’s achilles heel is his seeming inability over the last four years to produce, or deliver, on his economic plan – to exercise the strong leadership needed to get the job done in Washington. He failed to get Congress to adopt most of the Simpson Bowles Commission economic and budget reforms. Even Democrats in Congress will privately say that Obama has failed to spend the chits necessary to schmooze them and get their support, as Bill Clinton did with the Hill during his terms in the White House. Without a strong allegiance in his own party and Obama’s seeming lack of interest in getting into the hard knocks of behind the scenes negotiating with Congress, Obama shows that he is more comfortable serving as Cheerleader #1 in speeches around the country, rather than as CEO #1 in Washington. So, he gets a C- on his ability to deliver during the next 4 years based on his track record. Can he convince voters now that he has the leadership skills to produce on his economic plan and get the American economy moving during a second term?

Governor Mitt Romney  – Romney comes out of the Republican Convention with a boost in the public’s awareness of his exemplary personal attributes and a reputation for strong business leadership. But, given his private sector business deals, some voters are concerned that he might thrash government programs without any sensitivity to human needs, especially those of middle class voters, if he wins the White House. So, on the “produce,” or leadership, scale – he gets an “A.” But, given the Paul Ryan, now Mitt Romney, budget plan which includes controversial changes to Medicare and social security, and the Republican penchant to protect wealthy voters over middle class wage earners, Romney would earn a “C” for the substance of his economic plan. Voters are not sure how much to trust Romney and what he might do if he gets to Washington. And, single women voters who often need the social net of government programs the most, seem to question Romney’s sensitivity to their economic struggles. Recent polls reveal that President Obama enjoys a 29% advantage among single women voters over Romney.

So, the two P’s come to the fore. Can Romney convince the public that he will implement a balanced and fair economic plan as president? And, can President Obama, convince the voters that preventing a more severe recession after inheriting an economic mess from President Bush was enough to warrant re-election? Or, alternatively, can he convince voters that he has learned from his first four years in office and is prepared to exert more persuasive leadership to reinvigorate the U.S. economy in a second term? Whichever candidate is better able to fulfill BOTH P’s in the minds of voters, will have the edge in this November’s election.


3 Responses to “The Two P’s – Keys to the Race for the White House”

  1. carl feen Says:

    chris you are right on the dime. your insights to both candidates and parties are well thought out. have to give you a straight a+. keep up youre analysis. look forward to reading and hearing future thoughts.

  2. Bruce Carter Says:

    Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are in a tough position when it comes to implementing a fair and balanced economic plan. If the spending is not brought in to balance with revenues quickly, the fiat currency we operate with may not be backed up by bond sales as foreigners balk at loaning us more money. A fair and balanced plan should not include the risk of a dollar collapse and a resulting depression to follow. If they tell the truth, that important support programs must be cut, they might not get elected.
    The “Burden Barometer” is now at $70,000,000,000,000.00 and climbing at $187,000 a second. If the world decides we cannot pay the tab, or at least not pay the carrying costs, what happens?
    Also, there is an immutable law about politics: Words are words. Explanations are explanations. Promises are promises. The only reality is performance. In the performance department, you gave President Obama a C- and Mitt Romney an A. If Romney can improve the perception of his plan, he wins…

  3. Sandy McDonnell Says:

    Chris, I’m depending on you to continue to clarify and outline for me how each of the candidates plans to get us through the next four years! Excellent commentary as usual and, as usual, your intelligent summary of Pres Obama’s plan and of what will matter on election day is enlightening. I think it’s coming out more and more that the seeds for long-term economic growth have been planted under this administration’s direction and in spite of the tremendous obstacles that have been thrown in his path from the outset, we are starting to see progress. We seem to be learning that Pres Obama moves ahead only when he believes a significant percentage of the population will benefit from a plan. This is a huge comparison point between the two men: President Obama will press something into action only when convinced this action will benefit a significant number of people, whereas candidate Romney, it appears, will press for action when he believes it will benefit himself and perhaps his fellow board members/ shareholders. I would love to see an analysis and history of Romney’s business “successes” in terms of the people who benefited from his actions and to what extent they benefitted and the people who lost out based on his actions and how much they lost. I really believe you’ll be able to raise Pres Obama’s grade on producing the results to A if he gets a second term. I look forward to your comments on “cowboy diplomacy” as exhibited by Mitt! Thanks again, Chris!

Trackbacks



Leave a Reply