As a presidential candidate, there is no bigger juggernaut to be faced than the economy. In good times, an incumbent tends to have the advantage, as he can claim the prosperity enjoyed in the country is a direct result of his agenda.
But what’s more interesting to observe is how candidates act when the economy is doing poorly. The incumbent tries to look for signs of improvement, no matter how marginal, explain why his policies were a good idea, or often, will instead just blame it all on the president that preceded it. On the other hand, the opposing candidate wields a lethal advantage: he has the ability to make the president look ineffective by blaming the incumbent’s economic policy for a lack of economic growth. Afterwards, the opponent can point to his own policies and detail reasons why America will benefit.
We’re seeing one of these situations with the 2012 presidential election. While statistics like growth in the stock market are aiding President Obama, he’s still being forced to explain his decision use taxpayers’ money to bail private companies out, while all along the American economy drags along with minimal signs of growth. Unemployment, while going down slightly, is still at a high rate, gas prices are skyrocketing, and many Americans are disenchanted. All of this is fuel for Mitt Romney’s fire. While still technically in the race for the Republican nomination, Romney has turned his attention to Obama’s economic policies, promising to lower taxes and bring economic peace of mind to all. Romney is capitalizing on a strategy employed by many, many candidates in the past half-century or so: use broad, appealing statements to your advantages. Romney promises to lower taxes, create more jobs, and increase production. Obviously, using sweeping rhetoric can also be used in a negative fashion. Romney has taken to exaggerating the inefficiency of the Obama bailout while on the campaign trail in order to appeal to conservative Republican voters, while he once praised the benefits of such a policy.
By making broad, universal, and critical statements about Obama and his policy during a time of economic crisis, Romney hopes to court voters that are simply looking for a candidate capable of beating the President. Romney hopes to draw upon the financial frustration experienced by many Americans, blame it on the President’s economic policies, and pick up more voters. It’ll be interesting to see how far and fast he changes his tone in the general election - after all, Romney is an “Etch-A-Sketch” - so why not use this recession to his advantage and court more voters?
After all, all’s fair in politics and war...
Rate this posting:
{[['
']]}
']]}