Obama’s Winning Election Strategy Revealed
When someone has to use a teleprompter all the time, it’s because he doesn’t believe what he’s reading. The words are not his own. People who know and believe a certain way don’t need notes. You know they believe what they’re saying because the words roll of their tongue. There is passion in their words and fire in their eyes.
President Obama has a love/hate relationship with the presidency. As a Leftist, he believed coming into office that he could change the world by executive fiat. He would speak and the laws would change. It didn’t happen. Sure, he’s gotten some legislation passed, but it’s been hard. He’s not used to hard. You can tell by how much he likes to play. He’s not engaged.
Obama doesn’t have a feel for what America is about. He wasn’t raised in a pro-American environment. He grew up and surrounded himself with Leftists. These people hate America and want it to be relegated to the dustbin of history.
There aren’t enough people in America who fit the Leftist profile to make an easy sweep of Leftist policies. But that’s beginning to change. Daniel Pipes encapsulates what he calls “Obama’s Leftist Conundrum”:
On the one hand, as a Leftist he despises the United States and sees it as a force for ill in the world. On the other, as president, [he] is judged by how well the country fares during his tenure.
Logically, he cannot reconcile the contradiction of these two imperatives: If he wants to be reelected and celebrated as a great leader, he has to forward American interests; but if he wants to implement his preferred policies, he subverts the country and fouls his nest.
This means that if President Obama is to win the presidency again and implement the Leftist worldview that he envisions will bring all of his ideological training to fruition, he has to make an aggressive political decision. He must decide what group of voters will help him further his agenda. Thomas Edsall, surprisingly from the New York Times, writes an insightful article. It’s titled “The Future of the Obama Coalition.”
“For decades, Democrats have suffered continuous and increasingly severe losses among white voters. But preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.”
“All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.
Presently, we are a 50-50 nation. Fifty percent of voters have no economic skin in the game. Then there are the government employees who depend on taxes to keep them employed. Talk about tax cuts scares them. With revenue down, they will be affected first. Nearly 50 percent of Americans don’t pay a dime in federal taxes. Once we reach a tipping point, that is, once that number goes over 50 percent (it’s around 47 percent), the game is nearly over. It becomes an election of sheep and wolves, and we’re the sheep.
“Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote. . . . Voters and politicians alike would do well to take a look at the rights we each hold, which must never be chipped away by the whim of the majority.”
We’re lunch. Obama understands this very simple principle. He is counting on the wolves to vote en masse while hoping that the sheep will divide their vote.
The Republicans can’t get together on a candidate. This is troublesome. I’m not sure what the answer is. At this point, we’re down to Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich. Any one of these candidates will turn off a lot of anti-Obama voters. Personally, I think it’s going to come down to Newt versus Mitt.
What we need is a “Contract for 2012.” Before we get to the primary season, each candidate will be called on to sign the contract and take an oath to uphold it. Part of that contract will include a resignation clause. Any violation of the contract’s provision will mean a 30-day resignation window either to change his mind or resign.