But He's Better Than Romney... No, Really; I--I--I Swear
I've had several offers to go Charlotte for the Democratic convention-- invitations to parties, invitations to enter contests, invitations to apply for press credentials, reminders I'm on the host committee for events down there, and so on. I'm not a fan of conventions to begin with, but one to nominate Barack Obama as the Democratic Party candidate for president? I avoided the one 4 years ago, even when there was still some glimmer of hope that the whole Hope and Change thing might possibly be, on a good day, more than a cute campaign slogan. Now there are no glimmers of hope... none whatsoever, not for anyone who's been paying attention. Instead there's a threat that Pete Peterson and his minions' nonstop lobbying for a toxic Grand Bargain that will destroy the Democratic Party brand is exactly what Obama intends to do after he's reelected. Except reading what's he's been saying about his willingness-- if no eagerness-- to compromise with the adamantly Austerian Republicans, I'd say there's a lot bigger chance of a horrid Grand Bargain after November 6 than there ever was that Hope and Change would lead to anything aside from the requisite election results last cycle.
So, yes, if you read DWT you know with which utter contempt I hold Republicans and conservatives and corporate whores and you know I agree with all that horrifying stuff Nick Kristof claimed about the Republican war against women in his NY Times column yesterday. Would it be catastrophic if Obama were to lose and Romney win in November? Yes. And if I lived in Ohio or Florida or Colorado or Wisconsin or any other swing state, I might even hold my nose and vote for Obama. But I live in California and I care barely wait to go to the polls and not vote for him.
I never read the NY Daily News when I was growing up in New York and I still don't. But I did note Jamelle Bouie's piece yesterday, Yes, We Must, in that paper. His point is that the demoralized Democrats who handed control of Congress over to the GOP in 2010 by boycotting the polls "need to snap out of it... They need to realize that Obama has been a very successful President, and the Republican alternative is as stark and dangerous as anything offered by President George W. Bush." And, he reminds us that the Republicans are awful and that they have a chance to win because of all the demoralized Democrats who are disappointed in Obama. "According to the latest Gallup poll, 53% of registered voters say they are enthusiastic about voting this year, compared to just 46% of Democrats." Imagine that! I understand why Democrats aren't enthusiastic about Obama-- he's turned out to be, at best, a mediocre hack-- but it's shocking that even Republicans could be enthused about a supreme nothing like Romney.
While the President is supported by the vast majority of Democrats and benefits from high intensity of support, it’s not hard to find those who are disappointed with Obama and the pace of change.
“I want to be happy with him,” said Democrat Kristine Vaughan, a 45-year-old school psychologist from Canton, Oh., in an interview with CBS News.
“But I am finding that he has succumbed to the corporate influence as much as everyone else. I think he has so much potential to break out of that, but overall he has been a disappointment.”
...Obama isn’t perfect. Democratic voters have some reason for disappointment or fatigue. But the simple fact is that for the vast majority of Americans, there’s nothing to gain from punishing the President.
Romney and Ryan are existential threats to everything exceptional about America. Is Obama? Is he less a corporate pawn? If he's reelected will his "Nixon's-China-Moment" be leading the Democrats into a crappy Austerity deal with the GOP and Mugwumpery? And this despite the utter failure of the Austerity agenda in Europe. Even conservative British businessmen have come to realize that it's all be a rather disastrous mistake.
Business support for the government’s austerity plan started to fracture on Thursday after one group called for a small stimulus funded through extra public borrowing.
The British Chambers of Commerce, which represents more than 100,000 businesses, said the UK had enough “wiggle room” to use a “moderate fiscal stimulus” to help lift the stagnant economy. ...With the economy in a double-dip recession and the budget deficit rising, pressure is building on the coalition government to do more to support growth.
However, Mr Osborne, the chancellor, has rejected calls to borrow more to stimulate demand.
George (formerly Gideon) Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Second Lord of the Treasury, a baronet and a crook, could be any of Obama's economic policy advisors, although none of them were members of the Bullingdon Club at Oxford. [This morning, Paul Krugman referred to him as a toned down Paul Ryan-sans-Ayn-Rand character.] I can't believe I get to run my favorite political song of the Age of Austerity again. I'm over the moon... even if it makes me cry (literally) to apply it to Barack Obama.
Oh, by the way, supporting and electing progressive proponents of growth and Prosperity Economics (like these men and women) is the way to counter whatever nightmares either presidential candidate is conjuring up for... well, the common people.