-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Over the last two days, Barack Obama’s reelection strategy has become clear. If the health care law is overturned, he will run against the Supreme Court. If the law is upheld, he will run against Paul Ryan. But what would the first scenario look like?
On the one hand, a Supreme Court reversal of the president’s signature domestic achievement would fire up the Democratic base. Liberals would be outraged. It would help the Obama campaign get turnout among minorities and younger voters to approach the improbable 2008 levels, as the president would treat it as an undemocratic attack on his legitimacy. It would help solve whatever enthusiasm problems remain among liberal voters.
The flip side is that the law is unpopular, especially among groups the president needs to win reelection and who in some cases exist in larger numbers than liberals. Many Americans believe Obamacare is unconstitutional and would like to see it repealed one way or another. Is Obama really going to campaign on reinstating a law large numbers of swing voters intensely dislike? It seems to be a good way to remind independents of what they came to dislike about the administration and its policies.
Obama may be hoping for an assist from Mitt Romney, his likeliest Republican challenger. A Supreme Court decision against the individual mandate would in many respects help Romney neutralize the issue. But Obama will probably use it to muddy distinctions between the two major party candidates on health care while reminding liberals that some Republicans didn’t have a problem with the mandate before the Democrats took office. Whether that strategy would work is less clear.
View all comments (26) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/04/04/what-would-a-scorched-earth-ca
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- A President Loses His Power
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
RJ| 4.4.12 @ 3:46PM
Obama making a major campaign issue out of a rejection of a highly unpopular law? Go for it, Clueless. If ObamaCare is ruled unconstitutional, it will help Romney because RomneyCare made him a weak candidate to challenge ObamaCare. If ObamaCare is overturned, it will put more focus on the economy, not a strong suit for Obama.
crazy| 4.4.12 @ 3:59PM
He's running against Romney the same way he ran against McCain - run against something Romney's for half the R's don't like and run for something Romney's against the other half do like while hanging everything Rush, Palin, Newt, Paul, etc says around Romney's neck.
Clint| 4.4.12 @ 4:47PM
The Axelrod/Obama : Blame/Credit Campaign Game Is More Shuck & Jive Trash Talkin'.
"Desperate and demagogic is how I would describe his speech in two words," Ryan said. "Unfortunately we've become accustomed to this kind of rhetoric from the president. I feel like it's Groundhog Day, except it's April. He essentially said the same thing last year.
"His speeches are becoming more partisan and desperate by the day and his attempts to divide the nation and to distract people from his own failure to lead - I just don't think are going to work," he continued. "I think people are smarter than that.
"The president's attacks on our budget are as disappointing, as revealing as his attacks on the Supreme Court," Ryan said. "It seems that he takes anyone questioning his vision of limitless government as a personal affront and he's lashing out. That's hardly the kind of leadership we were expecting when he ran for office."
Bob| 4.4.12 @ 4:58PM
If Obama can actually use the Supreme Court decision to fire up young voters against an "undemocratic" attack, then the country is truly lost. If young voters are so dreadfully uninformed that they actually believe the Supreme Court is a threat to their liberty, then it's time to call it a day, because there's no way you can stop his power grab if the young voters have been so brainwashed.
I really, really hope this isn't the case. If Obama succeeds in de-legitimizing the Court, his power grab is complete. Then he will just use the Court to justify his power, like Daniel Ortega does to get re-elected against his country's constitution. I hope our young voters are at least educated enough not to fall for populist propaganda and truly understand the function and purpose of the Court.
Trinacria| 4.4.12 @ 5:39PM
"If Obama can actually use the Supreme Court decision to fire up young voters against an "undemocratic" attack, then the country is truly lost."
I've got bad news, Bob. The country is already truly lost. Any country in which a majority of it's citizens are intellectually impotent simpletons who neither understand nor take seriously the responsibility entrusted to them and chose rather to vote for the candidate who offers them the biggest teet from which they can suckle is most assuredly lost. There is simply no credible scenario in which a society that has so carelessly abdicated its responsibility can reverse course and salvage what was once a great country.
fiscal| 4.4.12 @ 5:57PM
So, Trinacria, if you don't like this country you can always go someplace better... Oh, that's right, even with all of our faults, we are still the best country on earth...
As for intellectually impotent simpletons, we find those on both the left and the right. The left does want the government to provide for their welfare and can't seem to add up the costs, but the right is just as bad with their ideology that also can't evaluate budgets like Ryan's, don't understand that tax cuts don't stimulate GDP, believe that we can invade other countries and make them democratic, and don't believe in science and mathematics.
It will never happen, but I would like to see a country that can utilize math and science to make informed decisions. Interestingly enough, those tools favor fiscal conservatism but disfavor social conservatism. We generally call that Libertarianism, but then again, the Libertarians mucked that up with radical, and not reasoned, positions.
On second thought, maybe you were right in the first place that this country is lost....
Mike 3/505| 4.4.12 @ 7:49PM
"and don't believe in science and mathematics."
Liberals are the ones who don't understand or believe in science & math. Just look at Obama's budget or his "investments" like Solyndra!
YES! Nuthin' but net.
Trinacria| 4.4.12 @ 9:01PM
Fiscal,
It appears that you've rather made my point; indeed, you've not only conceded my point regarding those who are content to suck from the government's teet, you've elimated the possibility of hope in those in the minority who don't subscribe to the handout mentality.
With respect to your opening question, I hasten to note that I have recently completed the process of obtaining dual citizenship (a process, not coincidently, that was initiated in January 2009) in order to facilitate the exucution of precisely the course of action that you recommend. I shall be making my felicitous departure from this formerly great, but now disgraced nation in due course (who knew it could take so long to find a well appointed luxury villa in Tuscany?). Damnest thing about those of us in the 1% - we generally have the means to go elsewhere when circumstances warrant. Rather selfish of us, isn't it?
fiscal| 4.4.12 @ 5:10PM
The election and positioning is all about numbers as Rove will tell you... According to the latest Gallup data, 27% of voters are Republican and 30% identify as Democrats. With leaners, that goes to 41% lean Republican and 46% lean Democrat. Topline is that Obama only needs to get 31% of the middle. Therefore, his campaign will target that small group. That's why he WON'T use the Supreme Court as a major campaign issue, but will try and position Republicans as radical extremists by using the Ryan budget which guts social programs, the war on women (because now more women vote than men), and tying Romney to the Bush era as a neocon.
Unfortunately, Romney's current strategy against Obama is dumb because it targets the Republican base and not the voters he needs to get over the top. Going over the top in trying to identify Obama as a socialist and a know nothing will only make Romney seem more radical. If you notice, Romney is going directly after Obama while Obama is going after policies and not calling Romney names.
I don't fault Romney on this as he has never had a connection with real people. But he won't have a chance of winning unless he gets some advisers around him that can connect. Just as Obama makes the huge mistake of not having business savvy people around him, Romney makes the mistake of not having "human" savvy people around him.
gearjammer| 4.4.12 @ 6:45PM
I think Rassmussen paints a different picture.
fiscal| 4.4.12 @ 7:51PM
Take a look at the Rassmussen methodology. They use automated calling to landlines only and then weights the results to census data. This methodology always oversamples Republicans and skews older than actual voters. Gallup uses a more standard call center methodology that is demographically balanced. Republicans are also more likely to answer surveys than Democrats as they tend to be more involved politically.
That's why Rassmussen is the polling firm used most when Republicans answer questions. Interestingly enough, they are not used very much for internal polling because of their bias.
WL| 4.4.12 @ 6:10PM
Doe anyone besides me wonder why our side is always legitimately concerned and borderline scared to win a victory...such as a Supreme Court striking of this horrible law???
Why is it that we are always urged to fight for something or support something or advocate for something...as long as it is un-attainable. But then...WHENEVER it is almost in our grasp (or at least it appears to be) our side always sees the doom in winning ANYTHING.
I'm not saying Antle is necessarily saying this...but I am seeing this narrative out there alot in the last couple of days...
WHEN will anything that could happen FOR our side not be considered a big BOOST for the Democrats?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
RJ| 4.4.12 @ 6:21PM
Hi WL,
I think comments like that come from liberal moles who hope to mislead conservatives. I never trust someone who says we are better off 1) not pressing a winning point; or 2) losing. There is no advancement in losing. Whoever advocates it is really on the other side.
WL| 4.4.12 @ 6:39PM
I'm sure you are right about that.
Nite| 4.4.12 @ 7:54PM
Personally, if Obamacare is totally tossed, then it is a personal victory for the states and voters. Anyone stupid enough to vote for Obama, deserves anything they get.
C Bowen | 4.4.12 @ 8:55PM
WL;
Paul Ryan's health plan keeps the mandate, yet some people still push him forward as a conservative, or a solid Republican.
Sometimes it is so obvious the fix is in, doom thinking is the realist position.
In the event the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare in an act of judicial activism, it will only be because the consensus is that it will help...Obama. Otherwise they will let it go.
I don't know who "conservatives" are kidding but if Medicare and Social Security are deemed "Constitutional" by the robed folks, there really isn't a leg to stand on in real politik.
Still hope we pull this one out, and buy some more time, of course.
WL| 4.4.12 @ 11:19PM
Very interesting point. I fear there is alot of truth in what you say there.
I agree that at times such as this "the fix" is pretty hard to miss...but at other times, I think the fix is not really "the fix"...it just seems that way.
Good thoughts.
WL| 4.4.12 @ 11:27PM
You know...your line of thinking really made me think...
How perfect would it be for the statists if the Supreme court struck down the "mandate" that private citizens bought health insurance in the market place...THEN, we get the old switch and the Dems and Phony Repubs get together and figure out an even worse mandate that has been "proven" constitutional before...
And mandate that people participate in a fully "constitutional" program....THE GOVERNMENT PLAN!!
WL| 4.4.12 @ 11:28PM
The more I think about this...the more I realize...
ALL ROADS LEAD TO TOTAL CONTROL AND TYRANNY.
aware| 4.5.12 @ 6:39AM
The gravitational pull of the State is irresistible.
"For the Rulers of this world use authority to lord over the people and call themselves Benefactors..."
C Bowen | 4.5.12 @ 7:24PM
WL;
I am remiss to offer a reply so late--on this awful commenting system.
I am happy to offer you more doom, but staring into the abyss and all that...but you are on the right track. What is missing is that the Big Insurance is competing against the Government--and we don't really have a dog in the fight. We lose either way, Republican bleating that Big Insurance is the "free market" not withstanding--but wait, Obama sings the same tune.
Ping me on another thread or here, and pleased to commence a correspondence if it might help.
Drek| 4.4.12 @ 7:16PM
What would it look like?
Massive street unrest, which is already entrain for all of us this Summer. They'll tie in there class warfare angle against Romney with massive unrest triggered supposedly by the overturning of socialized healthcare.
What we are all going to see this Summer will be unlike anything any of us can recall.
Mike 3/505| 4.4.12 @ 7:51PM
That's ok by me. I haven't been in a good brawl in years. Might help me reclaim my lost youth.
WL| 4.4.12 @ 11:21PM
The sad thing is...I don't believe that ANYTHING...from civil unrest...to riots...to this...or that...is out of the question.
When this beast, or machine (whatever each of us calls it) is threatened in any way...there are no ends that it will go to hold onto the "ring of power."
Drek| 4.4.12 @ 7:17PM
Rather one sentence should read "their class warfare angle...."
ejjr| 4.5.12 @ 12:22PM
Mr. Antle, you've clearly overlooked the real reason that the SCOTUS would rule against ObamaCare. They are racists. Trust me, time will tell.