On Nov. 6, 2012 the American people will go to the polls to determine the next President of the United States, and for all intense and purposes, the direction of this country and even its form of government.
In brood brushes, Obama represents a ‘borrow and spend policy’ which has created a $16 trillion debt with more and more people falling into poverty and going on government assistance. At this rate America, within a few years, will owe $20 trillion and will be paying about $2 billion a day in interest alone. This is a dead end. It is the way of Greece. Something has to change and it is not going “forward” with the same strategy.
On the other hand, Romney’s plan is, at least to many, a commonsense straightforward plan. It is a plan that one may make at the kitchen table to handle everyday household problems. You sit down; determine how much money you have and then the bills you owe. If you can only pay a little at a time, do that and you will eventually have no bills. Tear up your credit cards and don’t borrow – especially from China. That’s Romney’s plan. Stop borrowing and cut spending. There are specifics to be worked out as with Obamas.
With respect to taxes Obama wants to tax the “rich” – those with income over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. Obama wants tax breaks for the middle class. It is argued that Obama’s plan will hurt job creation.
Romney wants to focus tax breaks on small businesses that are the job creators. Even when making very pro-Romney assumptions about growth and loophole elimination, some experts found that the Romney tax plan will radically increase the debt and deficit.
Some Romney advocates have argued the plan will work, but even some of them concluded that the plan would increase taxes on people that Romney considers middle class (those earning between $100,000 and $250,000).
Pouncing on the most recent modest economic growth numbers, GOP nominee Mitt Romney pounded home the message at a couple of campaign stops that President Obama has failed to deliver on his promise to revive the economy and to nurture the bipartisanship necessary to confront the nation’s problems.
Other issues include defense cuts based on sequestration, the deficit, balance of trade, a tougher stance on China and its money manipulation, and reproductive rights of woman.
As the Benghazi cover-up unfolds there could be many concerned about the character of Obama as president since he knew of the attack early on and watched it in the comfort of the White House with others while Americans were pleading for their lives. This is more galling since military assets were in range to help.
Speaking in the critical swing states of Iowa and Ohio, Mr. Romney derided Mr. Obama for blaming his poor economic record on the recession he inherited from predecessor George W. Bush, saying the Democrat also inherited the “most productive and innovative nation in history” and a “people who have always risen to the occasion.”
“Despite all that he inherited, President Obama did not repair our economy, he did not save Medicare and Social Security, he did not tame the spending and borrowing, he did not reach across the aisle to bring us together,” Mr. Romney told the 2,000-plus people who turned out in Ames, Iowa for what his campaign touted as a major economic speech. “Nor did he stand up to China’s trade practices, or deliver on his promise to remake our relations with the Muslim world, where anti-American extremism is on the rise.”
“What he inherited wasn’t the only problem. What he did with what he inherited made the problem worse,” Mr. Romney said.
The campaign has gotten nasty.
“That’s because all Mitt Romney has is a one-point economic plan that he’s been running on for two years: The very wealthy get to play by a very different set of rules than everyone else,” said Lis Smith, an Obama campaign spokeswoman. “Unfortunately for working Americans, his tax math doesn’t add up without raising middle-class taxes and independent economists agree his jobs ‘plan’ wouldn’t create jobs and could slow the recovery. Romney has started promising ‘big change,’ but the only change Romney’s offering is to take us back to the same failed policies that crashed our economy in the first place.”
The former Massachusetts governor is trying to keep the momentum going that he carried out of his three debate showdowns this month with Mr. Obama. Late last week he edged past Mr. Obama in the Real Clear Politics average of national polls for the first time.
In the key battleground states, though, the men are basically running neck-and-neck. Polls say Mr. Obama leads by slim margins in Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and Wisconsin. Mr. Romney, meanwhile, is running slightly ahead in Florida, Virginia and North Carolina. In Colorado, Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama are basically tied.
This week Super storm Sandy dominated the news squeezing out virtually all coverage of the Romney-Obama presidential race. Sandy touched in19 states and devastated New York, New Jersey, and some states above Atlantic City. It is believed to be the worst storm to ever hit New York City. Current estimates put the damage at over $20 billion.
With only five days to the Nov. 6 elections, the question arises who will Sandy help or hurt the candidates. There is something Macomb about considering political consequences over the deaths of so many and the complete destruction of whole communities by fire and flooding. Yet, the political consequences are being calculated.
Obama’s former Chief of Staff Rom Emanuel once said, “Never let a crisis go to waste.” Sandy has certainly made the normal presidential conduct when disasters occur. Mobilize FEMA, try to get Federal Funding for victims, viewing the scenes, and sending the normal condolences to victims and responders. Romney was left, so to speak, in the shadows.
Asked whether he was concerned that Mr. Romney had peaked too early, Eric Fehrnstrom, a top adviser, said briskly, “No.”
“We are riding a wave and we have not hit the beach yet,” he said, adding that “it is going to be a tight race right to the very end.”
By D. Lindley Young