What if President Romney had this record?***
–unemployment from 11% to 5.9%; 11+ million new jobs; how many consecutive months of job growth? (50+)
–stock market from 7,000 to 17,300
–50+ consecutive months of economic expansion?
–stimulus bill that saved the country from depression (yes, it worked, it just should have been bigger)
–saved the auto industry (saving millions of jobs)
–saved much of the banking system (saving millions of jobs)
–largely out of Iraq
–largely out of Afghanistan
–15 million (?) previously uninsured Americans with health insurance (and counting)(yes, Romney likes people to have insurance)
–CFPB
–Dodd Frank
–annual deficit from $1.4 trillion to $450 billion
–ordered the risky raid that resulted in UBL taking one right between the eyes
–Sandy relief
–assistance for 9/11 first responders
–led government efforts to keep people in their homes who had predatory mortgages
–kept US safe at home
–increased energy independence
–increased use and development of alternative energy
–expanded the college tax credit
–lowest federal tax burden on middle-class families since the 1950s
–two women on US Supreme Court (“binders full of women”)
–first female Fed Chair (“binders full of women”)
***If I’m wrong on any of this correct me but this is off the top of my head; not researched, not fact checked.
Would Republican candidates around the country run on this record, or cower in fear?
I just got to thinking, as we lose ground in the House and [perhaps] lose the Senate, how did we get here? Do we as a country want to go back to Bush-era policies? I don’t get it.
Despite having it pointed out over and over again, the Democrats are just plain lousy at PR and messaging. It is like having a decent engineering department that creates a good product and the rest of the company can’t manage to sell it.
If Coakley loses, as expected, and Quinn wins, as expected, it will largely be because Coakley, by some polling the most popular statewide official, failed to paint socially liberal, Hooverite outsourcing businessman Baker as a warrior waging war on women; while Quinn, by any polling the least popular statewide official, successfully painted socially liberal, Hooverite outsourcing businessman Rauner as the second coming of Mitt Romney. That is how you win.
Quinn is beating Rauner downstate, which is supposed to be his base, precisely since Rauner alienated social conservative moving to the left while Quinn, just as socially liberal, appealed to their pocketbooks. When social issues are negated and economics are the focus Democrats can win and compete anywhere in America.
Even in last place economies like Illinois or cultural battlegrounds like Kansas.
Our candidates can’t just expect to win their primary and then rely on GOTV to win the vote which is what just happened. Let’s look at the typical GOTV “boots on the ground” volunteer. We’re not independents and we’re more progressive than moderate (exceptions noted) so if your message is “vote for me, I am a moderate Democrat who is seeking independents”, you can’t rely on us to give up nights, weekends, and shoe leather with enthusiasm.
More than the “usual suspects” are necessary for an effective GOTV. In the previous four cycles (starting with Obama ’08) I’d seen a lot of new volunteer faces canvassing and making phone calls. Not so much this time. It was basically the core people and not many more.
When the whistle blows to go over the top and charge, they either cower or retreat. I don’t agree with the Republicans about pretty much anything, but I envy their fight.
Dems should have been lauding all the things you listed and bragging they did it with barely a single Republican lifting a finger to help.
Typo. 17,380!
Ask any Republican voter why they voted Republican. They did it to get the lazy bums off of welfare. Mostly the non-white ones. Welfare remains a huge go-to issue for Republicans because people hate to be scammed – it is nonpartisan in nature – and it is very easy to portray someone who is on welfare as a scammer, and very hard to prove that they are not.
Yet, some Democrats overcome it and some don’t.
It probably depends on the economy. When the economy is bad, MA voters can see that they themselves are being painted as welfare scammers by Republicans. When the economy improves, the welfare scammers are “them” rather than “my brother who just lost his job”. The attack is more effective.
…is that if you really want to purge the welfare rolls you do it by electing a party proven to actually have more jobs created on their watch thus reducing the need for welfare.
Not to mention that welfare roles are overwhelmingly dominated by WHITE recipients. Even worse, a much larger share of eligible whites receive welfare than eligible blacks.
The welfare system is, in fact, already tilted to favor whites.
As I was watching the twitter feeds, the comment I saw most often celebrating Baker’s lead (then victory) was “maybe now I will be able to stop paying for the people living off the system”, or some variation thereof.
…why people think a bunch of people are living off the system, or why they think these people aren’t working at all. I have to tell you, I’ve tried the not working lifestyle (not by choice), and it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. In fact it is incredibly boring.