Instapundit recently linked to an essay by "Baseball Crank" that contrasts today's political climate with the political climate of 1995 - 1996, when Bill Clinton ran for re-election. The essay is interesting and well worth your time to read, and it got me thinking about the upcoming Presidential election, specifically campaign fundraising.
It has been predicted that 2012 might be the first election in US history where the winner will have to spend upwards of $1 billion to get elected. Will that candidate be Barack Obama? Perhaps, but there will be some major differences between 2012 and 2008.
First and foremost, there will be no Messiah running for President in 2012. Not Barack Obama, and certainly not on behalf of the Republicans. To paraphrase Bill Clinton, the Era of Hope and Change is over. The overwhelming sense of goodwill and justice that emerged as a compelling reason for upper middle class educated whites to vote for Barack Obama has evaporated. The "racism" card, in lieu of honest efforts to rebut criticisms of the President, has been severely overplayed, which probably explains better than anything else why record numbers of whites are now turning their backs on the Democratic party.
It will also be impossible for the Obama campaign to take millions in secret contributions from Big Finance and Big Energy. The initial "seed money" acquired by Obama's exploratory committees and campaign organizers in 2006 and 2007 came primarily from big corporate interests, most notably Goldman Sachs. And the 2008 Obama campaign notoriously disabled basic credit card verification on its website, allowing donors to contribute illegally to the campaign by making hundreds or thousands of donations in increments of $10 and $25. It's unlikely they will be able to get away with that again.
Finally, there is the Tea Party, which in practical terms is a true grassroots organizing and fund raising apparatus of epic proportions. Tea Partiers are fired up and ready to send as many candidates committed to fiscal responsibility to Washington, DC as possible. They are also ready to back that enthusiasm with their checkbooks, and with Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and other populist cheerleaders on board they have the potential to raise unprecedented amounts of campaign cash.
Because he raised so much money privately, Barack Obama became the first major candidate in modern history to refuse public campaign funds. This was a brilliant move on his part, because it exempted his campaign from audits and disclosure requirements. With the financial support of the Tea Party, Republicans should also be able to refuse public campaign funds in 2012, and unless they are incredibly foolish they will do so.
All of this means that in 2012 Barack Obama will find himself running against an opponent who will be backed by an invigorated group of supporters and who will have a huge campaign warchest -- just like candidate Obama enjoyed in 2008. But he won't have the "hope and change" magic to carry him through the primaries and into the general election, and he won't be able to hide his substantial financial ties to corporate special interests.
It will be an interesting election indeed.
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Democrats
Tags: 2012, Barack Obama, campaign contributions, Goldman Sachs, Republicans
Comments (11)
I'm thinking that the elect... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Hank | January 25, 2011 10:03 AM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
I'm thinking that the election of 2012 will tell us just how much influence the LSM still has.
Illegal donations for Obama? It won't be reported and even if it is, I seriously doubt the Holder Justice Dept will even notice.
The race card? Sure, it's been overplayed but the LSM and democrats will still use it. Except this time they'll be adding the "violence" aspect to it. Loughner will still be used to push the narrative, facts be damned.
The Tea Party may play a role but if anyone emerges as a leader, they'll be villified like we've never seen.
I think the best hope of unseating Obama is someone like Chris Christie who has shown a remarkable ability to explain his positions, think quickly on his feet and deal with the slander and attacks. I don't expect Christie to run. But we need someone with his fiscal values and the ability to articulate them.
1. Posted by Hank | January 25, 2011 10:03 AM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 10:03
2. Posted by James H | January 25, 2011 10:09 AM | Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
If the economy swings up, President Obama will win. If it stays in the doldrums, he will not.
2. Posted by James H | January 25, 2011 10:09 AM |
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 10:09
3. Posted by jim m | January 25, 2011 10:27 AM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
The economy may improve but if jobs do not come back Barry can forget it. Also, with inflation starting to rev up we might see the stock market rise but it won't mean anything. People will look to see what bread and gas cost. The economy needs to grow in real terms. If inflation rises the cost of goods will increase long before wages rise to meet that increase. The resulting hardship for families will mean that Barry's ratings now will look like his glory days.
If inflation takes off Barry will be facing a rout like Jimmy Carter.
3. Posted by jim m | January 25, 2011 10:27 AM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 10:27
4. Posted by Les Nessman | January 25, 2011 10:35 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
pffft. I'll believe it when I see it. If he runs, Odumbo will do all the things you say he "can't" and mostly get away with it.
If the economy is spun as good he wins, if it is recognized as bad he has at least a 50/50 shot of winning.
If the Reps nominate the same old 'Rudy McRomBerry', or even a 'fresh' face that acts like the Old Guard GOP--- they'll lose.
4. Posted by Les Nessman | January 25, 2011 10:35 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 10:35
5. Posted by Les Nessman | January 25, 2011 10:48 AM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Hank: "I think the best hope of unseating Obama is someone like Chris Christie who has shown a remarkable ability to explain his positions, think quickly on his feet and deal with the slander and attacks. I don't expect Christie to run. But we need someone with his fiscal values and the ability to articulate them."
Yep, as long as it isn't Christie. I like him but he is no conservative or Tea Partier. We need someone who fights like him, though.
5. Posted by Les Nessman | January 25, 2011 10:48 AM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 10:48
6. Posted by 914 | January 25, 2011 11:07 AM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Gas and grocery items will not decrease in price with the corrupt leadership now in place. Barry is history. The only chance he has is another lame McCain run and 20 million dead voters.
6. Posted by 914 | January 25, 2011 11:07 AM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 11:07
7. Posted by Jay Guevara | January 25, 2011 12:48 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Barack Obama became the first major candidate in modern history to refuse public campaign funds. This was a brilliant move on his part, because it exempted his campaign from audits and disclosure requirements.
No, it was a brilliant (actually, make that "obvious") move by Soros and his handlers, for whom Obama is merely a spokesmodel. That's why they constantly wheel a teleprompter around in front of him. Without it, God knows what he'd say, because he's stupid enough to say anything (e.g., talk about asthmatics using "breathalyzers," or fixing our energy problems by inflating our tires. That last is a classic, comparable with warning against islands capsizing.)
Memo to Soros: use phonetic (fone-et-ik) spellings on the teleprompter, to help Barry avoid future contretemps (apologies for the big word, Barry - it means "fuck ups") such as the "corpsman" fiasco.
7. Posted by Jay Guevara | January 25, 2011 12:48 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 12:48
8. Posted by BluesHarper | January 25, 2011 1:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Les Nessman: I find myself in agreement with you quite often. You say Christie isn't a conservative or Tea Partier. Could you shine some light on why you say that. I like Chris Christie quite a little, and would like to see him kick some ass - but I think you may be correct but I have nothing to say why.
8. Posted by BluesHarper | January 25, 2011 1:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 13:34
9. Posted by TaterSalad | January 25, 2011 2:17 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Please let your voice & opinions be heard and join the following Tea Party websites to become part of the movement in taking our country back from liberal/progressive left wing loons who are destroying capitalism and the Free Market System that has built this great country:
http://www.meetup.com/Informing-for-conservatism/
http://www.nbra.info/
www.TeaParty.org
www.TeaPartyExpress.com
www.TeaPartyNation.com
www.TeaPartyPatriots.com
www.The912Project.com
www.NationalCenter.org
www.teapartyrevolution.com
http://teapartybell.com
www.TeaPartyActivists.com
http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com
www.IamtheTeaParty.net
9. Posted by TaterSalad | January 25, 2011 2:17 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 14:17
10. Posted by JB | January 25, 2011 3:06 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Christie is a squish on illegal immigration. That's a dealbreaker right there. No need to go further.
10. Posted by JB | January 25, 2011 3:06 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 15:06
11. Posted by Les Nessman | January 25, 2011 3:40 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
BH: I'm not a NJ resident, so someone who lives there would be a better source than me.
Having said that, like JB said above, immigration is a problem for him. Also he is for Democrat-style gun control.
I realize he's probably about as good as we can expect from blue NJ, but it's not good enough for the Presidency; unless he credibly 'refudiates' some of his Blue East Coast positions.
But we are in such dire straits that even a 'smaller, but still kinda big gov't guy' just won't cut it anymore. We need people with the TeaParty attitude.
I wish more Repubs had his fighting spirit and quick-witted, take-no-shit attitude.
11. Posted by Les Nessman | January 25, 2011 3:40 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on January 25, 2011 15:40