A very bad 12 hours for the Obama campaign
The Obama campaign is fast running out of bullets.
The double-whammy of Bill Clinton’s remarks last night — about Mitt Romney’s “sterling business career” — and the abysmal job-creation numbers that came out this morning has got to force some soul-searching from the West Wing to Hyde Park.
The Obama campaign will look simply foolish trying to continue peddling its attacks on Romney’s years at Bain Capital after what Clinton said on CNN last night:
In case you didn’t/can’t watch, here’s the gist:
So I don’t think that we ought to get in the position where we say this is bad work, this is good work. I think, however, the real issue ought to be what has Governor Romney advocated in the campaign that he will do as president? What has President Obama done and what does he propose to do? How do these things stack up against each other, that’s the most relevant thing. There’s no question that in terms of getting up and going to the office and, you know, basically performing the essential functions of the office, a man who’s been governor and had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold.
Clinton went on to say he believes the Obama record and proposals would be better for America than Romney’s would be, and it would be a far bigger story if he had said otherwise. But if Obama believes that, too, why isn’t he running on his record? In large part, I have to believe, because the record is not good. And that doesn’t help his pitch when his proposals are basically for more of the same.
In any case, the damage was done before Clinton made those qualifying remarks, because his defense of Romney’s qualifications are a direct contradiction of the distinction Obama tried to make recently: that running a private-equity firm doesn’t match up well with the job description for the presidency.
With the Democratic Party’s elder statesman now joining those other Democrats who have expressed misgivings about the Obama campaign’s anti-Bain attacks, the attacks are all but neutralized. More and more, Obama looks out of step with his own party on this issue.
And his record on the economy gets harder to defend with each report showing the economy has no momentum. Jobs growth of 69,000 in May represents about half of what’s needed simply to keep up with population growth. The rest of the report is a mixed bag at best: The labor force participation rate nudged upward, which is good news, but unfortunately so did the number of people working part-time who would prefer to work full-time.
Earlier this week, economic growth in the first quarter was revised downward to 1.9 percent from the initial estimate of 2.2 percent. The bad economic news and worries from Europe during the past week pushed the Dow this morning into the red for the year. The S&P 500 is still ahead for 2012, but it’s down almost 10 percent in the past two months. So, retirement accounts are taking a beating right now, and that won’t give people confidence.
As long as this drumbeat of bad economic news keeps up, there will be regular interruptions in the Obama campaign’s preferred narrative of distraction issues: the “war on women,” etc.
Ironically, the best argument for Obama right now is that the president never deserves as much credit or blame for the economy as he gets. And that’s true. The problem is that you can’t very well make that argument on behalf of a president who has spent three-plus years trying to gain more control of the economy through higher spending and more regulation.
It seems to me this leaves the president with one choice: Presenting a raft of new ideas for the future. The problem with that tactic is his demonstrated lack of ideas that are anything more than recycled efforts from Democratic presidents past, Europe, or both: “stimulus” spending financed through borrowing or higher taxes on “the rich,” greater government control of health care, cap and trade, and so on.
The longer this pattern persists, the more likely it is to show up in the polls. Already, we’re seeing Obama’s number steadily declining, even as he remains a couple of points above Romney on average. As the incumbent, Obama doesn’t want to see his numbers consistently in the 45-47 percent range, even this far out. He’s the more-known quantity, and it suggests people don’t like what they know.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
179 comments Add your comment
Kyle Wingfield
June 1st, 2012
3:51 pm
Finn @ 3:48: Like I said, you needed to understand the theory before you chose to disagree with it. Say was not talking about the merits of individual goods or services.
DAVETV
June 1st, 2012
3:51 pm
Oops- darn that refresh rate.
td
June 1st, 2012
3:55 pm
md
June 1st, 2012
3:37 pm
Some people will refuse to see the truth even if you slap them in the face with it. The truth may make someone examine their belief system and there ego refuses to allow them think they may be wrong.
Rafe Hollister- trying to save the Choom Gang
June 1st, 2012
3:57 pm
Eve was kinda like the entitlement generation we have created, no matter how much you give them, they always want one more thing.
Entitlements do not work, Eve proved it long ago.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
4:01 pm
ok, my Eve was a bad analogy.
Dusty
June 1st, 2012
4:14 pm
MarkV
As usual, you run in circles.
I said that I thought that the news was bad for Obama, the country and Georgia. Since Obama is the president, don’t you think it is logical to include him?.
Then I ask YOU a question and you replied by saying you did not say that. Please! I said it. It was a question for you.
Now what. Am I not to mention the president’s name? I AM against Obama’s policies because they are unsuccessful. I think we need a new president. Pronto!
md
June 1st, 2012
4:18 pm
“And that wasn’t the intial statement. The initial statement was that he ended the war. BO pushed the button that ended it.”
No, BO adhered to the agreement already in place……….no different than any other international agreements we have in place….such as NATO.
Dusty
June 1st, 2012
4:32 pm
md,
LIberals are still trying to get Iraq straight in their minds. Iraq was bad as long as Bush was in charge and finished it. But now it is CREDIT to Obama because he signed a paper after the final paper.
Speaking of Bush, I am sorry to see that Jeb is distancing himself from politics. There’s an honest, intelligent, experienced man with a good record. But I don’t think he feels like “running the gauntlet” again with liberals.
Who can blame him? It was a fanatical inquisition of his brother George (whom Obama is following in his footsteps in many cases.)
No wonder Washington does not get the “stars” anymore. They don’t enjoy being treated like criminals.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
June 1st, 2012
4:41 pm
Our President Bush will have to be content with freeing 50 million people and planting a big old’ democracy smack in the Middle East. Ain’t gonna be no libtarded Nobel Peace Prize for actually accomplishing something.
duke
June 1st, 2012
4:42 pm
All of you miss the point. Obama and his hard-left advisers are destroying the economy deliberately, in order to prove that capitalism does not work. Bill Clinton was never that far to the Left. But Obama’s parents and his maternal grandparents were Marxists. His closest friends, advisors, and mentors have all been Marxists. His pastor in Chicago, Jeremiah Wright, preached Black Liberation Theology, which is Marxist ideology expressed in Christian terminology, with a nasty racist twist. Obama has never even been exposed to any other viewpoint. The mainstream media completely abdicated their responsibility to vet this President during his candidacy, and they ruthlessly demonize anyone in the alternative media who does the job they should be doing.
MarkV
June 1st, 2012
4:47 pm
Dusty @4:14 pm
“I said that I thought that the news was bad for Obama, the country and Georgia. Since Obama is the president, don’t you think it is logical to include him?”
I did not protest including Obama. I referred to your order of words: “a very bad 12 hours”. for Obama ( and Georgia and the rest of the USA).
“Then I ask YOU a question and you replied by saying you did not say that. Please! I said it. It was a question for you.”
Dusty @2:54: ”Are you trying to say that all this bad news is really good news and the country is doing exceedingly well under President Obama? “
Don’t play coy, Dusty. You intimated (“Are you trying to say….?”) that I had said something about the country doing exceedingly well under President Obama. I did not. As a matter of fact, had you read my post on May 30th, 2012 @2:55 pm, you would have seen that I wrote there that in my view the situation was at least as bad as Kyle wrote about, if not worse. However, if you start writing about “under President Obama,” I will start writing about what happened “under President Bush.”
MarkV
June 1st, 2012
4:53 pm
Some people have a real bee in their bonnet about Marxism and Marxists.
md
June 1st, 2012
4:53 pm
Here Finn (and Attitude), educate yourselves:
“On 16 November 2008, Iraq’s Cabinet approved the agreement, which cited the end of 2009 for the pull out of US troops from Iraqi cities, and 2011 as the fixed deadline for removal of US military presence in country.”
“On November 17, 2008, the Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari and U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker signed the agreement in an official ceremony.”
In case one wasn’t aware, BO was sworn in in Jan of 2009…………..
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
4:56 pm
Dont confuse the libs with facts, md.
It’ll make their poor empty heads explode.
John Birch
June 1st, 2012
4:59 pm
Bush’s own words early on when asked how the surplus had turned into such a deficit in so short a time said something like, “we had a recession, we were attacked, adn we are at war.” All pretty true but he neglected to mention that in the face of all that he gave the largest tax cut ever, primarily to the already rich amd got the more-cost-than-benefits Medicare “”D in place.
Obama said his stimulus bill would keep unemployment below 8% instead it’s been nothing but over 8%, backed down on his pledge to reverse the Bush tax cuts for the rich, and handed out a vote-buying 2% reduction is SS when the future of SS was already seriously underfunded.
Might as well try mittens, how much worse can he be?
saywhat?
June 1st, 2012
5:32 pm
md’s point re: capital and Kyles contribution re: Says law is moot in relation to the current US economy, because there is no shortage of capital. The top 1% are rolling in capital. That they have chosen to hoard it, offshore it, or play non-productive finacial bingo with it does nothing to create jobs or boost the economy. More tax cuts for the rich will produce more capital as md and kyle assert, but it will be just more unproductive capital.
What the economy needs now is consumer demand so that those with capital have something productive to do with it.To increase consumer demand you have to raise wages, rewarding the average American for their decades increased productivity, rather than skimming that money off the top and redistributing it to the 1%.
GT
June 1st, 2012
5:50 pm
Some of Obama is that his opponent is not that good as much as Obama is better. It is like winning the US Open because no other tennis player entered the tournament. Now the Republicans keep trying to make the opponent look like a champ but the truth is the man is slow on his feet and is letting other fight his fight, play his match. When they are in a debate and the subjects are not paid for by a superpac and the bullets are real, I predict you will see the very unsmooth Romney return.
Dusty
June 1st, 2012
5:54 pm
MarkV 4:47
I love being coy! ‘Tis better than being deaf, dull and dim!
You, dear MarkV, have shown your great admiration for President Obama many times. No need to back off now. That fact has already been established.
In the status quo of citizens, I would say that we are “serving ” under President Obama. We certainly are not dancing & singing!! You have no need to talk about “serving” under President Bush. The liberals before you have already beat that one to death with venom but without veracity. Where were you when the fires were burning? Studying Marxism, facism, socialism and Progressives?
RAMZAD
June 1st, 2012
6:06 pm
I refuse to be cowed by Right Wing propagandists like Wingfield. We almost had a depression in 2008. Republican frauds took us there. It was on their watch, their policies, their leadership, their lies about yellow cake uranium, their lack of leadership in the financial sector and we almost fell off a cliff. Some would say we did fall off a cliff. Things have improved. It is still rough going. It is getting better. Obama is doing a great job, and I am going to support him; racists and jackasses be damned.
MarkV
June 1st, 2012
6:08 pm
Dusty @5:54 pm
“You, dear MarkV, have shown your great admiration for President Obama many times. No need to back off now. That fact has already been established.”
Where have I backed off?
“Where were you when the fires were burning? Studying Marxism, facism, socialism and Progressives?”
You should not disparage studying.
“In the status quo of citizens, I would say that we are “serving ” under President Obama. “
Wrong. President Obama is serving in accord with the Constitution.
Thinking over Attitude
June 1st, 2012
6:08 pm
md,
Does this get the “facts” right?
- Obama pledges as a presidential candidate to bring our troops home from Iraq
- Dubya signs the pact as a lameduck (trying to save some face while dodging two shoes)
- Obama brings the troops home
As for your other responses, citing that some segment disagrees with a big policy decision or doesn’t find favor with a new law doesn’t mean it’s not an achievement. Presidential leadership is about standing up for the greater good.
Have a good weekend and God Bless America!
md
June 1st, 2012
6:36 pm
“To increase consumer demand you have to raise wages, rewarding the average American for their decades increased productivity, rather than skimming that money off the top and redistributing it to the 1%.”
That 1% cunard is a voodoo talking point……we ship biggey bucks overseas to regular Janes and Joes….THAT is where the money goes:
http://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_snapshots_archive_02282001/
One may notice that “our” wages starting stagnating when “we” (those dastardly consumers) decided to consume many many goods from other countries (amvet’s Infiniti included)…….
In short, we did it to ourselves…….but those folks that have been lifted out of poverty around the globe are surely grateful……….
md
June 1st, 2012
6:41 pm
“Obama pledges as a presidential candidate to bring our troops home from Iraq”
Well….since Bush had already made the agreement, Obama may as well have been saying he promised the sun will come up in the East……
“Dubya signs the pact”
Yes he did……..there’s the “fact” part.
“Obama brings the troops home”
You mean he honored the agreement? Good for him……..
“As for your other responses, citing that some segment disagrees with a big policy decision or doesn’t find favor with a new law doesn’t mean it’s not an achievement. Presidential leadership is about standing up for the greater good.”
Can you tell me how many responsible credit card holders find favor with paying for the deadbeats?? I’m curious as to how many idiots there really are.
And of course the deadbeats are thrilled…………..
davetv
June 1st, 2012
6:50 pm
MD – there you go again… basing your opinion on the truth and then having the audacity to back it up with the facts.
Circumventing the U.S. Constitution is now a “big policy decision”? I have a real problem with Libs determining the “Greater Good”
Dusty
June 1st, 2012
7:10 pm
Dear Man of Semantics known as MarkV
You agreed that the economy was not doing well. (Obama fails!)
I did not disparage study as I have done quite a bit myself. (but not m, f, s, & p)
President Obama is president of our country and we are its citizens. We all serve together, with, under, around, up & down!
Now go battle windmills, Don Mark Quixote. I hope you win..
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
June 1st, 2012
7:13 pm
We almost had a depression in 2008.
———-
Yeah, it was so horrible that it took until June 2009 to end the recession.
Yawn.
Just saying..
June 1st, 2012
10:36 pm
Kyle: “I like Bill Clinton’s interview remarks except for the ones I don’t”.
kelly
June 3rd, 2012
2:36 pm
“Two years of a nearly filibuster-proof majority”…what a silly statement. Makes about as much sense as being almost pregnant. The rules of the game are clear. Take this President down by all means necessary, including deliberately tanking the economy. I wonder how you unemployed republicans feel about that. Your party is doing this to you too.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
June 5th, 2012
11:45 am
Another bad 12 hours for the Schwartzenfuehrer is on its way when the Wisconsin recall results are announced!!!