Can the Dems control the conversation for a win in 2012?

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager for the 2008 election and the upcoming 2012 election said Wednesday that he thinks the Dems will win back America's vote in 2012.  In his talk at the University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication Plouffe outlined what he though about the Republican's win in the recent mid-term election. 

Why did the Republicans win?  Because mid-term electorates tend to be older and white- a demographic, David says, Obama has always had a hard time winning- especially in certain areas of the country.  (I am just going to come right out here and say that I believe these are probably the more racist areas of the country.  Not something Obama can openly talk about in our culture, but there nonetheless.  I will not be shy about this topic, as racism is an issue that needs to be spoken honestly about).  Millions of 2008 Obama supporters failed to turn up at the polls on Nov. 2.  Plouffe is sure the electorate that shows up in 2012 will bring a much larger coalition for Obama, including more hispanics, blacks and more moderate independents.

The electorate, of course was not the only problem.   "It's the economy, stupid." When things are bad, incumbents lose out.

I would also like to pose the question, "Where have Obama's supporters been since they elected him?"  Obama made it clear that it was the people who had to do the hard work, but his people seem to have abandoned him.  Likewise, Democratic senators and representatives in congress failed to lead on Obama's messages. 

I am confident that Plouffe is right about a more favorable electorate.  What worries me is the alarming ability of the neo-conservatives (Rove, Cheney, Wolfowitz, otherwise the PNAC) to co-opt the Tea Party movement, and convince 50% of Americans that the bailouts were on Obama's watch, among other fallacies.  How will Obama challenge lies and doublespeak (i.e. Dems not working with Republicans) set up by his opposition?  He has failed in addressing this communication failure so far.  I argue that above the Administration not explaining its accomplishments well enough to the public, they have not refuted the lies and propaganda coming at them from the far right.  This failure is what has stacked a recession of morale on top of our devastating economic recession.

Plouffe asserted that, come November, 2012, the Country will be able to tell the difference between the extreme right and their destructive contributions to society, and the progress that Obama has made during one of the toughest times in America's history.  I guess history will be the judge of that.

More Stimulus

Republicans and Tea Party followers would not like to see a second stimulus, but the Fed has a different opinion.  The Federal Reserve Bank, headed by Ben Bernanke (stayed over from the Bush admin), announced it's plan to print $600 Billion dollars to buy our own treasury bonds.  This does a number of things to stimulate the economy.  It lowers the value of the US dollar, making American goods cheaper for export and makes tourism in America more tempting to foreigners.  Come have a stay in one of Central PA's quaint country Bed and Breakfasts! You may even experience some partisan ruckus first hand!  (May I just insert here that my son has been napping for over two hours.)  It will also set the stage for low interest rates in the long term.  This is because an increase in money = inflation = decreased interest rates. What good are low interest rates?  Well, low interest rates make it easier for people to borrow.  This is good for borrowers, but bad for the entity giving the loan, since they will see low returns on their investment.  So, we will see if this money infusion will lend itself to easier borrowing for you and me (assuming you are not a big bank). 

Some may argue that the middle part of that equation- inflation- is a reason for concern.  The Fed asserts that we are in such a deep hole from what has happened over the past decades (bubbles, tax changes, 9-11, wars, wall street, oh my!) that the growth needed to spur inflation simply will not appear. 

According to some economists, the better way for our economy to get this stimulus is through fiscal policy (that is government spending) and not monetary policy (that is interest rates etc. through the Fed).  Why?  Because government spending can put money right into the hands of people, who will spend that money, creating demand.  Big business and banks have money, what we need is support for the demand side of our 'free trade economy' equation. 

Welcome

Well, I have been wanting to get my view out there for the past decade.  I have always cared about who our leaders are, what they are doing and how it is that ordinary people can change things for the better.  My youth was spent talking, talking, talking, to anyone who would listen about any number of topics.  Things seemed exciting in the Clinton era (the first presidential cycle in which I was at all politically aware) and my thoughts spun around saving the oceans and our land, honoring Indian treaties and global justice. Not getting anywhere, I decided to break my vow of treading paths less trodden, and attend a University.  I graduated last May from Penn State with a BA in International Politics and a BS in Agricultural Sciences.  I had my first son two weeks after graduation (and he is a dream).  I can't say that I am happy with my decision to attend a University...yet.  I was very politically active before college, and I was active as a citizen during college, but not the extent needed in this historical time I am witnessing.  I regret that I could not devote myself wholly to political activism over the past five years, but will try to make up for that now.  I am also 60,000 in debt.  If I had started a business (which I was adamant about doing before my decision to attend University) I may have 60,000 or more in my bank account.  Ah, well.. moving forward.