Obama and Romney Campaigns Play the Waiting Game (November 6, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

For those of us who haven’t yet completed our ballots, there’s nothing left to do but vote. Residents of the hotly contested and closely watched swing states must be ready to breathe a sigh of relief, welcoming a return to fast forwarding through conventional television commercials promoting toothpaste, cars and tampons. I wrote these lines last evening on my blog:

T’was the night before the election, and all through Ohio
Margaritas were flowing like Cinco De Mayo.
Because Buckeye State residents were confident no matter who won,
Their days in the swing state spotlight were temporarily done.

After an extremely long and intense campaign, there is something to be said for the collective exhaust of the voting public. On a certain level, before the returns are counted and cable news channels morph into trigger-finger caffeine freaks, ready to call the election at a second’s notice, and before the long-winded pundits begin their Wednesday morning quarterbacking, it’s nice to take a moment and exhale.

We the people have worked hard during this interminable electoral season. While the Wall Street Journal reported that 41 percent fewer television viewers tuned in to see Paul Ryan accept the Republican Party’s nomination for vice-president (versus the near-record numbers of disbelievers who couldn’t stay away from the spectacle of Sarah Palin), and less folks checked out the Democratic presentation as well, it was a banner cycle for the the presidential and vice-presidential debates.

According to the Los Angeles Times, “A total of 67.2 million people watched the [first] debate between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney, according to figures released late Thursday by the Nielsen Co. – a 28% increase over the 52.4 million who tuned in to the first debate in 2008.” It is meaningful that the public remained this engaged heading into the home stretch, suggesting that years of prolonged unemployment, decreased home value, rising fuel and food prices and skyrocketing college tuition led to a certain thirst for voter information.

And despite the endless flip-flopping and shape shifting of Candidate Romney, it was entirely clear that the electorate was left with two very distinct choices: Obama the incumbent, the idealist come pragmatist who displayed fortitude, character and leadership in bringing the U.S. economy back from the brink, ended the war in Iraq, took steps to stem the rising tide of healthcare spending and clarified the rights of gays and lesbians to serve their country without retribution. On the other hand, voters were presented with Romney, the shameless panderer who positions were often impossible to quantify, but in instances of clarity, a return to Bush-era failings was the clear takeaway. Let’s call this agenda the Survival of the Mittest.

No matter who emerges victor (Obama) today is a day for celebrating ourselves and our participation in the democratic process. We survived a tough four years: reducing our household debt, looking for work or clinging desperately to the jobs we have and finally, finally under the leadership of our President, things are looking up. Despite the concerted efforts to disenfranchise voters at the polls, unaffected by the struggles of daily survival, we are the winners today. Our voices will be heard.

 

Chris Christie Ignores the GOP Mandate to Condemn the President at Every Turn (October 30, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

Upon reflection, it’s actually tragic that this is newsworthy. But such is the state of the Republican’s Party’s rancorous war on the sitting President that when an elected official stops to commend the POTUS on handling a situation with deft compassion and solid policy, it’s enough to garner major headlines.

It’s been no secret since October 23, 2010 that above getting Americans back to work, shoring up the nation’s fiscal situation and making the other tough decisions required to reverse the country’s Bush-era slide, the GOP has focused on ensuring that Obama is relegated to a one-term also-ran. It was on that date that Senate Minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said in a print interview with the National Journal, “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

It is a singular feature of the modern Republican Party that despite the President’s success with a variety of hot button issues from foreign policy engagement, to the return of manufacturing jobs and crucial healthcare reform, and despite the Congressional thwarting of many other key initiatives designed to uplift the struggling middle class, he has been painted by the right as a do-nothing leader. Ah the disingenuousness of trying to have it both ways. We will stymie all efforts to move the country forward, resulting in the lowest approval numbers for Congress of all time, while claiming (somewhat successfully) that the Commander-in-Chief has no ideas.

But every now and again, in certain dire situations, it’s possible to come across a Republican leader who breaks with party dogma and steps outside the insulated world of partisan politics into reality. In this case I am referring to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who is confronting problems in his state today that GOP talking points cannot solve. As the Governor seeks to lead his residents in the early phases of Hurricane Sandy recovery, according to ABC News, Christie has “nothing but praise for President Barack Obama.”

Christie did not mince his words of gratitude in stating, “I want to thank the president personally for his personal attention to this.” At the same time, he delivered a preemptive strike at members of his party, on Fox News no less, who might seek to politicize or condemn his bipartisan cooperation with President Obama. Firmly putting would-be critics in place, Christie declared: “I have a job in New Jersey that is much bigger than presidential politics. I couldn’t care less about that.”

Nothing is more important than beginning to repair the damage wrought by Sandy, to commence rebuilding ravaged homes and assisting displaced families in getting back on their feet. It is commendable that Governor Christie has his priorities straight. It would be wonderful if his Republican colleagues in Congress had been able to set aside a mercenary, win-at-all-costs approach to governance in developing solutions for crises like 2011’s self-inflicted debt ceiling debacle.

It is also comforting to witness a President acting like a leader, recognizing that his job is not to serve the half of voting populace that supported his Oval Office bid in 2008, but ALL Americans in dire straights, whether or not they approve of his overall job performance. It’s times like these where it’s tough to forget that Mitt Romney said of FEMA’s disaster-relief budget in 2011: “We cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we’ll all be dead and gone before it’s paid off. It makes no sense at all.” Cue the Etch-a-Sketch shake.

Thus it appears that the much-discussed “October Surprise” of this electoral cycle is not a Donald Trump vanity-tainted “bombshell” announcement, nor the appearance of weather-related trauma. Instead the surprise is that a member of the GOP could skip the schadenfreude and work with the President to get something accomplished.

 

This Week in Alienating Female Voters Starring Mitt Romney (October 19, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

At the close of 2011, according to the United States Census Bureau, women comprised no less than 50.8 of the nation’s population, or slightly more than half. I will not go through the exercise of breaking down this statistic into socioeconomic groups, ethnic heritage or religious affiliation. Because I firmly believe, for the purposes of this column, that those distinctions don’t matter.

So why bring up the data at all? Well quite frankly, a sizable proportion of my fellow female citizens and I aren’t sure the Republican Party in general, and Mitt Romney more specifically, yet understand the implications of pissing us off less than three weeks before the election. American women are not a special interest group but a diverse MAJORITY of residents who can nonetheless usually come together on one issue: we hate being marginalized whether that discrimination comes in the form of public policy, religious dogma or the blustering of a Presidential candidate who fails to recognize that this is no longer the early 1960s, and he is not guest starring on an episode of Mad Men.

Heading into Tuesday night’s second Presidential election debate, Obama supporters had good reason for concern. Whether the week 1 Romney “victory” was real or imagined, the court of public opinion had somehow ruled in Romney’s favor. What would round two portend? Would we see a more contentious, vivacious President, ready to deflect the charming deceptions of his smarmy opponent? Would Mittens be able to maintain his current pretensions toward moderation or would the pendulum swing hard right again?

On the question of Obama’s performance, the answer, fortunately, is that television viewing audiences once more saw a candidate fired up and ready to go, a man who successfully called his challenger to the carpet on issues such Romney’s flip flop on the construction of coal factories (“Does anybody ever actually look at that guy and think, man, he’s really into coal?”). However the answer to the second question is a bit more complicated. While Romney did his best to sustain his latest persona, Fall 2012’s Mitt the Moderate, several noticeable cracks appeared in the facade. And nowhere were these schisms more apparent than in Romney’s responses to town hall questions related to women’s issues.

I won’t revisit Romney’s rhetorical blunder regarding “binders full of women,” except to remind people that the larger point of the candidate’s meandering answer is that a man with decades of private sector business experience blithely reported that he knew of exactly zero qualified female candidates for his gubernatorial cabinet – before the appearance of the much-discussed Trapper Keepers. While certainly less attractive comedic chum than the binder remark, it is epically disappointing that journalists and pundits failed to stone the candidate for this disingenuous claim.

But things went from bad to worse when, in the course of breaking his arm patting himself on the back, Romney went on to detail the tremendous working environment his Massachusetts administration created for female employees. This nurturing setting was constructed not in the form of challenging leadership roles or demanding policy work. No, Team Romney deemed themselves pro-women….because they permitted flex time which allowed working moms to get home in time to put dinner on the table.

Say what?

It is incredibly disheartening that amongst all the social network memes circulating about the “binders” sidetrack, there were not equal numbers of interrogations regarding the real takeaway: working women are nice and all but their real place remains in the home. And once again, just like that, the Republican party standard bearer attempted to roll back 50 years of social and workplace gains so hard won by female Americans.

Blogger Brenda Peterson, writing for the Huffington Post this week, said it best: “Women were the real winners in this presidential debate. We clearly recognized the real Mitt Romney — and he’s just like every domineering and sexist boss we’ve worked with. While Romney boasted about considering his infamous ‘binders of women’, for a job, it was clear he and his policies are the true binders of women.”

So to return to my original argument: we are the 50.8 percent. Romney can stand there and smile, blandly reporting that he wouldn’t fight to repeal the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (gee thanks), and asserting that women would never have to question their access to contraception under his tenure. But the candidate has spent years undermining his own credibility with female voters and there’s no reason, particularly after Monday night’s showing, to trust him now. Across party, socioeconomic and spiritual lines, I have a feeling women will ensure that the already-unemployed Romney is left with plenty of flexible hours after Election Day.

Biden Versus Ryan: Defense is the Best Offense (October 9, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

Following a somewhat unusual Presidential candidate debate last week, featuring possibly the most futile moderation in history from PBS’ Jim Lehrer (I’m still puzzled by Lehrer’s good-natured laugh in response to Romney’s vow to cut funding from the public broadcasting network as a method of balancing the Federal budget), liberal voters are left to anticipate this week’s Vice-Presidential throw down between current office holder Joe Biden and GOP hopeful Paul Ryan. The event is being positioned by both parties as a clash between the old and new guards of American politics.

Team Biden is promoting the debate as the definitive choice between experience and wisdom versus youthful, brash ignorance. On last Sunday’s edition of Meet the Press, NBC’s Political Director Chuck Todd cautioned those who might expect a fumble from the foot-in-mouth-prone VP, “Everybody talks about the gaffes on the trail, but he won most of the Democratic primary debates in 2008.”

Joe Biden, a man with a lifelong penchant towards shooting from the hip, is not the bumbling caricature of Gerald Ford comically delivered by Chevy Chase in the Saturday Night Live parodies of yesteryear. It would serve naysayers well to remember that Biden was a Senate veteran with 26 years of experience before he was promoted to the White House. The 15th longest serving Senator in history built a career out of bipartisan cooperation, and is widely considered one of the most likeable lawmakers in the nation. It may also serve the opposition to recall that when Biden was added to the 2008 ticket, it was in part an effort to strengthen then-candidate Obama’s foreign policy credentials. Joe Biden is no lightweight.

On the other side of the spectrum, Paul Ryan supporters are positioning the week’s rhetorical skirmish as a battle between fresh, wonky ideas versus the old and tired status quo. In the same Meet the Press broadcast, panelist and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich characterized the 42 year-old elected official as “one of the brightest people in Congress. I think he knows an immense amount of facts.” It is tempting to point out that personality traits that might render one well-prepared for an evening of bar trivia are hardly a recommendation for America’s second-highest office.

Debate watchers may also be curious as to what set of “facts” Ryan will be armed with on the evening in question. Will he bespeak the much-maligned, if personably delivered, “truth” about the Romney budget plan that Mittens tried to sell to registered voters last week, a plan infused with magical fairy dust that permits the elimination of the deficit without destroying the social safety net or cutting taxes further for the wealthy? Or will Ryan adopt the Dr. Phil-esque “get real” approach so yearned for by the likes of New York Times columnist David Brooks? Does Ryan have the courage to talk to likely voters like adults, detailing the real impact of a Romney administration?

Scheduled several weeks after the strangest, most deceptive Republican National Convention in recent memory, gamblers may want to place their bets on the fairy dust edition of Paul Ryan.

With the benefit of a higher “Q” rating and an established presence as a genial and intelligent public servant, a report this week from Yahoo! News distills Joe Biden’s mission for the evening to one simple goal: “Biden needs to enter the ring with his boxing gloves on. Ever since Romney picked Ryan as his running mate, the Obama campaign has been attacking the Ryan plan left and right, and Biden has to be ready to throw punches against Ryan’s economic philosophy.”

That’s right. Vice-President must accomplish what President Obama failed to do in his opening battle with Romney: put Ryan on defense and keep him there. It’s a winning strategy because Ryan’s budget plan is heartless, bad for America and when properly scrutinized, indefensible. Just keep smiling Joe and watch the young kid strangle himself.

Like the Work of the NFL Replacement Refs? Then Vote for Mitt Romney (September 25, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

I have to credit my boyfriend for suggesting this appropriate extended analogy. After several weeks of delayed games, inaccurate calls and the kind of under-preparedness that threatened to remove the integrity from NFL officiating, dire warnings came to fruition last night when the Green Bay Packers were essentially robbed of a victory. Although I am by birth a Chicago Bears fan, this was a uniting moment for football enthusiasts of all stripes. At the end of the day, it’s a love of the game that brings us together, and those who don’t stand in protest against the league’s continued lockout of unionized officials might want to consider who will side with them when their home team is cheated.

As my partner and I looked on in horror at the pandemonium that erupted at Seattle’s Qwest Field after the game’s controversial conclusion, he made a keen observation: “This is what will happen if the country votes for Mitt Romney.” Immediately, I asked for further clarification.

Basically the argument is this: President Obama has a great deal in common with the locked out NFL officials. These are the people that many fans, players and coaches take for granted during a normal season. They do their jobs without glamour, striving to make the best calls according to the league’s rule book. They don’t get it right every time, leading to the requisite jeers, but by and large, students of the game can rest confidently knowing that if nothing else, the referees decisions do not affect the match’s outcome. The best team will usually win. It is not until these shepherds are taken away that we feel the pain of their absence.

President Obama is just such a leader on a national level: a brilliant thinker and empathetic man entrusted with stewardship of the country in the midst of one of its most historically challenging epochs. Every call the POTUS has made since taking office in January 2009 may not have been the right one, but the choices were made through a combination of strategic thought and genuine respect for the American people. However much work lies ahead, in under four years, Obama has brought the union back from the brink of complete financial and foreign policy collapse.

Those that have grown impatient with the slow and steady progress of nation rebuilding would like to substitute Barack Obama for Mitt Romney, an ignorant charlatan who has made lofty promises about “putting people back to work” and “restoring the middle class” without the benefit of specifics. Seeking to capitalize on a stubbornly sluggish job market while conveniently forgetting that it was eight years of GOP policy making that landed us in this protracted mess, Republicans have the audacity to suggest we give them another go, because you know, destructive management is bound to yield completely different results this time. So send in the scab!

But as we have seen over and over again throughout this long campaign, Romney doesn’t have the chops to step into Obama’s shoes. He has no specific plans for uplifting America’s beleaguered middle class. His foreign policy ineptitude is now well documented, as is his disdain for the working poor and any average American struggling to keep a roof over their head and food on the table. To underscore Romney’s utter cluelessness, it is now apparent that he doesn’t possess the basic understanding of your average first grader in grasping why commercial airline windows can’t be manually opened.

Last night’s Seahawks/Packers game, which bore witness to two awful contest ending calls from officials, was a case study in inexperience compounded by frozen ineptitude. No lives were lost and I do not mean to suggest that the NFL scandal is on par with the dire consequences we are bound to collectively suffer by replacing Obama with a cartoon punchline. However, those who enjoy the sporting element of politics yet approach the coming election with seriousness were gifted with a foreshadowing allegory from, of all places, a football match. Imagine Romney in the end zone during a matter of national urgency, surrounded by a team of confused advisers more interested in saving face than protecting the honor of the institution. That’s our future should the Romney/Ryan ticket prevail.