A few days ago on MSNBC’s “Hardball” program, journalists Susan Page and the Huffington Post’s Howard Fineman discussed the question: “How Can Obama Win?” Based on conversations he claimed to have been having with “top administration officials,” Mr. Fineman reported that Obama’s reelection strategy against the Republicans is going to be down and dirty – a strip-the-bark-off-the-tree type campaign that will portray Republican policies (and Republican ideas) as harsh and draconian and very much against the interests of average "hard working" Americans. In short, the campaign is going to be negative and very … hardball.

According to Mr. Fineman, President Obama will refrain (or attempt to refrain) from directly engaging in the trashing himself – as he tries to appear “Presidential” and above the fray – but his minions will be taking it to the Republicans like junk yard dogs. A persistent theme of these attacks will be that Republicans are out to destroy Social Security, Medicare, and other programs designed to help older Americans. If Republicans have their way, according to Team Obama, the budget will be balanced on the backs of the poor and the middle class. Such a campaign will be class warfare raised to the tenth power.

The thinking in the White House is that the economy and unemployment is so bad, (with no significant prospect of improvement between now and election day), that a positive uplifting “It’s Morning in America” type campaign will not work. With an angry frustrated electorate, attempting such a campaign in this political environment is likely to fail, so the only alternative, given that reality, is to go negative.

That, of course, raises the $64,000.00 question: Will “down and dirty” work? Assuming Mr. Fineman’s reporting is correct, what do you folks think? If Republicans respond in kind, giving as good as they get, will their candidate prevail? Do the American people have the stomach to endure a campaign of unrelenting negativity? Does Obama himself have the stomach to oversee such a campaign given that he tends to view himself in the same light as Abraham Lincoln – a uniter and not a divider genetically predisposed to trying to bring people together? What about the possibility of a third party candidate, (a la Ross Perot circa 1992), rising up amid all the discord to mount a major challenge against the two parties? If the economy remains down in the dumps for the next 12-14 months, is Obama doomed anyway, so what’s there to lose by going negative?

While you folks ponder these weighty questions, I shall spend the day studying for a professional certification exam. I'll check back in later tonight.

Former DJ

Obama currently has a war chest of money which is approx. equal to all of the repubs combined & the repubs are spending their money much faster than Obama.

Now, this will be the 1st presidential election since SCOTUS said corporations can campaign on behalf of the candidate of their choice, so that is who will win:

The candidate in which the majority of the corporations support. Voters are dumber than dirt and will vote for the candidate that gets the most airplay. People love a good ad!

Hence: The reason people don't fast forward thru the commercials during the super bowl.

So, if Obama, with all his money, has enough corporations campaigning for him, doesn't matter if inflation is 11%, because corporations can drill home just how inept and fork-tongued the repub candidate is & vice versa.

If the corporations are split, then we have a ballgame, however, due to SCOTUS's ruling propaganda is The KING of the United States.

Wasn't there a debate ~3 years ago where Obama got upset at McCain for having, what he claimed, were nothing but negative ads?

Obama is a politician thru & thru, and a Chicago politician at that. You can't take anything he says at face value.

Many of the statements he made during his campaign were the same type of lies all politicians make.

His ability to make them sound credible was demonstrated when he (on public t.v.) told America that he couldn't guarantee they would be able to send out the social security checks if the debt ceiling wasn't raised.

The SS Trust Fund is owed approx. 2.7T dollars, so failing to pay receipients is the equivalent of defaulting on its loans.

Considering Obama has refused to play hardball in any facet of his candidacy or Presidency I find it hard to believe he's going to start now. It's just not him.

I find it much easier to believe that "Hardball" has nothing to report on a day-to-day basis and this hypothetical was a good way to kill some time.

I would think as a counter UtzChips, he might have amassed that war chest because 1) why the hell not? and 2) it's gonna take a serious amount of positive ads to override the negative from the (R) side. Seems just as reasonable.

True.

True, but also true for every major news outlet.

Sucks that the majority of the population will have 2 options this election cycle: vote for someone you know will ignore your interests or vote for someone who has done nothing but ignore your interests.

Obama's campaign strategy:




I kid, I kid. Just some random dude that doesn't seem to care much for the Governor of Texas.

Its not Obama's style, but he has to do it to get re-elected and the Republicans wrote the book on how to get an unpopular president re-elected.

If this is true Perry may actually be a decent opponent for Obama over Romney, but either way they gotta be hoping to get Bachmann (or even Palin, zomg, awesomeness).

Here is a link to the National Review's analysis of the upcoming election.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...r-davis-hanson

Don't forget. He can spend, what many will say will be a billion, on positive notes, while the SuperPacs spin the negative material. Obama can claim he has no control of the SuperPacs

I find it much easier to believe that "Hardball" has nothing to report on a day-to-day basis and this hypothetical was a good way to kill some time.

Well, I don't know that Romney's machine has the money to fully attack Perry and unearth all of Perry's skeletons, however, the SuperPacs will have no trouble once a repub is nominated.

IMO, If the corporations want Obama to stay in office, they Perry runnin' against him, as he is the complete opposite of Obama and has many skeletons as has already been seen.

Romney on the other hand, has been thru this before, so most voters know him and because he does have some similarity, although slight, to Obama, he may get some Obama votes.

I think this is going to be one of the most historical presidential elections in our history & I believe I have been the first to label it:

"The SuperPac Presidential Election"