Romney's Lament: He Blinded Me With Science , livre ebook

eBookIt.com - Larry Inc. Stein

Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement

Je m'inscris

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

94 pages

English

Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

A propos
Informations
Extrait

Description

Take an irreverent, chronological romp through the 2012 campaign. Laugh at the convention that ignored its candidate, but gave a standing ovation to an empty chair. Learn why PACs were more Clark Kent, than super. Enjoy the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.

Political experience, a legal background and an appetite for alliteration, propel this journey.

Sujets

Photographie

Political Science

Essays

Informations

Publié par	eBookIt.com
Date de parution	21 février 2013
Nombre de lectures	0
EAN13	9781456611491
Langue	English

Informations légales : prix de location à la page 0,0062€. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.

Extrait

Romney's Lament: He Blinded Me With Science

by
Larry Stein

Copyright 2012 Larry Stein,
All rights reserved.

Published in eBook format by eBookIt.com
http://www.eBookIt.com

ISBN-13: 978-1-4566-1149-1

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the author. The only exception is by a reviewer, who may quote short excerpts in a review.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Obama's October (and September) Surprise
Commercial airways in the 60 days preceding the Presidential Election may not be a complete no fly zone for super PACs, but at a minimum flights will be limited, expensive, and difficult to change. Conventional wisdom is wrong. Super PACs will have less impact than expected.

Under campaign finance law television stations must give each presidential campaign reasonable access, freedom from censorship, and during the 60 days preceding the election, the lowest unit rate available. Neither super PACs, nor the political parties, enjoy these advantages. In fact a television station violates the law if a super PAC is offered a reduced advertising rate (See Federal Election Commission Advisory Opinion 2006-31). It would be an illegal campaign contribution for a station, e.g. Fox News, to offer a super PAC reduced rates.

The law should favor the President. Mitt is expected to catch more super PAC money, while the President will field more small contributions directly to his campaign. In the crucial run up to the election, a dollar from the President's campaign will buy more advertising than a dollar from a Romney super PAC.

Equally important is flexibility. In the closing days of a campaign resource allocation may change rapidly, a state may come into, or go out of play. Super PACs have no preferential access to airtime. With the expected deluge of political adds in battle ground states, as well as increased commercial adds during the start of the fall season, advertising time will be limited. To get on the air super PACs may have to commit, and lock in resources, earlier than the campaigns. Money may be wasted in states that are no longer battlegrounds. (To keep up on which states are battlegrounds, and other political news, checkout http://www.politicalwire.com )

Message flexibility is as important as geography. Campaigns may need to cut an ad at the last minute to confront a new issue. Since adds from a campaign are free from censorship, stations accept content without review. Ads from super PACs must be reviewed, which can delay airing of the ads.

The President's surprise is that, while, less money may be spent by him in the final days of the election, he will have as much, or more, advertising time in battleground states as the challenger.

Thursday, June 28, 2012
Chief Justice Roberts's Upholds the Moral Authority of the Supreme Court
Upholding the Affordable Health Care Act preserved the legacy of the Robert's Court. Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe, who taught both the President and the Chief Justice, yesterday predicted that Justice Roberts would vote to uphold the law (although he expected a 6-3 decision joined by Justice Kennedy).

Court watchers focused on Justice Kennedy, as the possible swing vote, because of his occasional bouts of moderate judicial philosophy. Justice Robert's, as Professor Tribe understood, was the key because of his concern for the moral authority of the court.

The Supreme Court has at times had a liberal judicial philosophy and at times a conservative tilt. But after Bush v. Gore and Citizens United the Court teetered on the precipice of partisanship. The injudicious flirtation with the Tea Party by Justices Alioto and Scalia, exacerbated the problem. Combining dismantling of the President's health care plan with the other two decisions would have been an unholy trinity. The Supreme Court is designed to be above politics. That is the rational for lifetime tenure. Justice Robert's upholding of the individual mandate has institutional significance that equals the legal import of the decision.
Friday, June 29, 2012
Believe in America
Mitt Romney's campaign slogan is Thomas Dewey insipid, and yet, Tea Party insidious. As awful as it is, it may be the perfect prism for the campaign.

Romney is a bland candidate running as the non-Obama. His messaging is intentionally vague and empty. Even when he appears to drift into substance, such as his "First Day in Office" ads, it is an illusion. He is either, saying that he will repeal and remand acts of the president, or pointing out where the president failed. In a bad economy, trying to make the election a referendum on the incumbent is a good, but deathly boring, strategy.

But the slogan is also seeking to align with Birther Babylon, without having to actually enter the city. The innuendo is that the sitting president is not one of us. He is the other. We believe in America, he does not. Hopefully, this part of the message will fall as flat as Romney's rendition of "America the Beautiful".

Saturday, June 30, 2012
Can Romney win a fair fight?
In his two electoral successes, beating Shannon O'Brien for governor and winning the Republican nomination, Romney has had the same ring strategy. He uses superior resources to out punch his opponent, with most of the blows at, or below, the belt. He out spent O'Brien by 50%. His advantage in the Republican primaries was far greater.

Obama is a prodigious fundraiser. His campaign will probably raise more money than Mitt's. Including super PACs, and other third parties, Romney will have the cash advantage. But campaign finance rules will negate part of this advantage (see my earlier post "Obama's October (and September) Surprise"). Obama also has the advantage of incumbency. No campaign resources are used when he flies into the swing state of Colorado, to survey the fire damage and, to offer federal assistance.

Can Romney win a fair fight? Looking at his protruding chin, I suspect he has a glass jaw.

Saturday, June 30, 2012
Egyptian Children

Children’s smiles can light up the world. At its best, politics is about them. Taken in Egypt last fall. 2011© Larry Stein

Tuesday, July 3, 2012
I Still Have a Chance of Salvation
Before blogging on the swiftboating of Romney, I have a personal note.

I started to make a right hand turn because the only oncoming car was entering the left turn lane. I stopped in time as the car proceeded straight through the intersection. Fortunately, I saw the driver and passenger before I expressed my appreciation for the driving style. Even a member of the tribe famed for a streamlined protrusion, knows it is not circumspect to flip off a pair of nuns.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Swiftboating Romney
The subject of the negative advertising against Senator Kerry was more important than failure to fact check. Attacking an opponent's weakness wounds, undercutting his strength kills.

Romney could not win the Republican nomination running on his record as governor. Instead he proclaimed, that as a businessman he understands the economy and knows how to create jobs. As an aside, a Romney victory might not only be depressing for me, but also for the country as a whole. The last businessman/president was Herbert Hoover.

The Bain Capital ads may have generated some angst in D.C. and New York, but they have lubricated the rust belt. Polls now show. that a majority in the battleground states, regard Romney's business tenure as a negative. The ads peel away voters from Romney's core constituency, non-college educated white males. The ads have the added benefit of attacking Romney's weakness. He is not likeable. Even if he drank, you would rather have a beer with Barack, than a margarita with Mitt.

The most devastating ad is: "Stage" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLo0Jwj03JU&feature=youtube . A fired worker recalls building the stage used as a platform by Bain executives to announce the closing of the plant. He says, "It was like building my own coffin". Priorities USA seeks to nail the coffin shut on the Romney candidacy.

Friday, July 6, 2012
The Uncertainty Myth
Republicans have long shouted from the rooftops that businesses have failed to increase their workforces because the President has created uncertainty with through his legislation, proposals and regulations. Fortunately most of us Democrats do not live on rooftops. We are more grounded in the truth.

Today I will only focus on the respective tax proposals. Obama was clear that he wanted to increase the top bracket for income in excess of $250,000 from 35% to 39.6%. This is hardly a job killer. Large corporations will not stop hiring because the tax rate for some executives will increase. Small businesses taxed on the individual rate, that are making net profit in excess of 250,000, are unlikely to pass up a good business opportunity because of 4.6% increase in taxes over that amount. At most it might be a slight consideration on the margins.

In contrast if business leaders believe the Ryan/Romney budget has a chance of passage there would be total paralysis. The plan cuts taxes, primarily on upper bracket taxpayers, by 5 trillion over the next 10 years. Defense spending is to increase by 2 trillion. Not only is the budget supposed to cover this loss of revenue, but the deficit is to be reduced. This is to be achieved by cutting spending, a threadbare safety net, and removing unspecified deductions. Spending creates demand. Businesses will be reluctant to expand until the impact can be quantified.

Much business planning is designed to maximize deductions. Moreover, some deductions are industry specific. Without knowing whose ox will be gored, businesses will be on an economic diet, leading to an anorexic economy.

Monday, July 9, 2012
Boycott!
Prior to th