Election 2012 recap: Obligatory Victory Lap Post

By Nathan Rothwell

I remember like it was yesterday thirty years ago.

It was late 2011, and I was writing a political column for a small community college newspaper. The Republican presidential primaries were just on the horizon, meaning that political pundits and the blogosphere at large was about to turn its primary focus to pontification about who would challenge President Obama for his job in less than a year. And I was somewhat lamenting having to write about it.

I was not looking forward to spending months speculating who would win the presidency when I was already convinced how it would unfold. At the time, I made the following three predictions to just about anyone who would listen:

• Mitt Romney would win the Republican primary and earn the presidential nomination
• Romney would eventually select Governor Chris Christie as his running mate
• The Romney/Christie ticket would go on to lose to Obama in November 2012.

As it turns out, I just barely missed going three for three on my predictions. Paul Ryan would ultimately be selected to round out Romney’s losing ticket, but my other two predictions indeed proved true.

I’m sorry, I’ve put my horn away now – there will be no further tooting. I only bring this up to say that while I did expect Obama to defeat Romney for a good while, what I did not expect was the triumph of liberal candidates and ballot measures that would also earn clear victories last night.

Maine, Maryland, and Washington became the first three states in the union to approve same-sex marriage by popular vote, while Minnesota voters struck down a constitutional measure that would have defined marriage as only between a man and a woman. Washington also made news, along with Colorado, for ending 70 years of marijuana prohibition.

Elizabeth Warren defeated Scott Brown to become the newest Senator from Massachusetts, earning a sweet revenge over the Republicans who blocked President Obama’s attempt to name her director of the newly-created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Tammy Baldwin became America’s first openly gay Senator by defeating Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin. And Republican senatorial candidates Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, they who believed the rights of unborn cell clusters trumped those of rape victims, were soundly defeated by Claire McCaskill and Joe Donnelly, respectively.

Last night proved to be a night of clear victories for the left in America, which I hope will be remembered by the public and our media long after our post-election hangover. Jon Stewart of The Daily Show joked last night that after two years of campaigning and roughly $3 billion spent on the process, we’re right back where we started. 

To a large extent this is true; the House of Representatives remains in Republican control, while the Democratic majority in the Senate remains not enough to overcome the GOP’s blatant filibuster abuse and rampant obstructionism. So while Mitch McConnell’s dream of basing the entire Republican party platform on making Obama a one-term president has failed, there is little doubt that they will cling to these congressional numbers as an excuse to now make Obama a lame-duck president.

But for now, America appears to have made its choice. Obamacare lives. Rape apologists and “traditional marriage” proponents have been decidedly smacked down in the polls. Marijuana prohibition will soon earn its place alongside alcohol prohibition as one of the more bizarre chapters of American history. And Mitt Romney, assuming his wife’s words were true, will fade off into the political sunset forever.

Go ahead and enjoy your victory lap, Democrats. You’ve earned it. Just don’t forget that when you’ve finished, the Republicans will be waiting with an army of excuses and redoubled resolve in their obstructionism.

Obama vs. Romney: Presidential Campaign Branding

By Heather Turner

Branding undoubtedly plays a role in influencing voter perceptions of Presidential candidates. Ultimately, voter reactions to campaign images is subjective. That being said, if the election was solely based on image and branding, then President Barack Obama, is clearly winning.

Mitt Romney's camp is incredibly lacking in artistic or mind-blowing campaign posters (my search for iconic Romney art didn't go well). Rather, many of the images associated with Romney's campaign have typically been mashups, created by satirists and pretty much anyone with a sense of humor and Photoshop. In this way, Romney's campaign has been its own worst enemy and despite six years of preparing to run for the office of the Presidency, Team Romney still can't seem to inspire an image that is anywhere near as rhetorically powerful as this:

 coulda been 

a tramp stamp

Even when reproduced as a tattoo on a random appendage for some (probably drunken) reason, it is instantly recognizable as a rendition of the "Hope" poster designed by artist Shepard Fairey. Fairey's poster was adopted by Team Obama after the independently produced stencil portrait became viral. At the same time, to Conservatives, elements of Obama's branding, including the Fairey stencil, confirmed their perceptions of Obama being communistic and even a messianic figure of sorts to the political left wing.

The 2008 election set a high bar for image and branding excellency, as the most viral presidential candidate was also the one who got elected. In fact, Obama's election brought on a period of extreme "Baracksploitation," in which the President's image was applied to pretty much anything, from sushi, to t-shirts, to action figures, to hash bricks. The 2012 election was already going to be an uphill battle for anyone running against our resident Presidential icon.

However, whether or not a candidate's campaign "get it right" with their branding, candidates of both parties adopt rhetoric that draws from ubiquitous American national myths concerning 'God and country' to appeal to the electorate, as crafting a clear moral agenda is also a major aspect of Presidential branding. The national myths invoked by the previous four presidents reflects the complex historic and nationalistic, yet pseudo-religious identity of America.


Read the rest at Spin and the Media.

Binders full of women, empty of ideas

By Nathan Rothwell

Romney's gone viral (again). Just not in the way he wants.

Those in the market of turning soundbites into Internet memes were not disappointed by last night’s presidential debate.

President Obama and Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, squared off in a town-hall style debate on Tuesday where they fielded questions from the audience. Both were asked by a young woman how their respective administrations would tackle inequalities in the workplace – specifically, the fact that women on average make only 72% of what their male counterparts earn.

Both candidates gave wildly different answers. For his part, President Obama mentioned the very first bill he signed into law upon becoming President in 2009; the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which gives women full opportunity to sue their employers if they experience undue discrimination. As Obama explained, before the Act passed women who were being unfairly paid had only 180 days to discover the discrimination and file a lawsuit. Even if they had no way of discovering the discrimination until after this 180-day period, they were out of luck. The Act signed by Obama allowed for a new 180-day period to begin each time a woman received a paycheck that unfairly paid her lower wages based solely on her gender. 

While Obama directly answered the question of unequal pay by referencing the Lilly Ledbetter Act, Romney dodged it almost entirely when given a chance to respond. Instead, he revealed that he initially couldn’t find enough capable women to serve in his Cabinet upon becoming governor of Massachusetts in 2003, and in doing so coined the phrase “binders full of women”:

“…I said, ‘Well gosh, can’t we find some women that are also qualified? And so we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women’s groups and said ‘Can you help us find folks?’ and they brought us whole binders full of women.”

As the New Yorker put it, Romney’s “binders full of women” phrase provoked instant fascination with debate-watchers nationwide. Facebook groups, Tumblrs, and Twitter accounts devoted to Romney’s inartful phrase captured the attention of thousands, and could very well spell doom for Romney in the polls. Yet as much fun as it is to poke fun at the imagery, Romney’s answer should sound alarms among voters for two important reasons.

Ann Coulter: "Civil Rights are (only) for Blacks"

By Nathan Rothwell

Conservative darling Ann Coulter, who I can’t believe is still allowed on TV, made remarks this morning that hopefully disqualify her from future public appearances.

(h/t to C&L's Videocafe for the video)

Appearing on This Week with George Stephanopoulos to promote her latest book in a 75,869-part series that blames liberalism for any and all of America’s woes, Coulter claimed that gay people, women, and immigrants have “commandeered” the “civil rights experience” in America. 

When Stephanopoulos pressed her on the matter, the following exchange actually, and almost unbelievably, took place:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Immigrant rights are not civil rights?

COULTER: Umm…  [pause] No. I think civil rights are for blacks.

Coulter’s remarks were part of a discussion of the Republican and Democratic parties’ attempts to earn the Hispanic vote. President Obama leads Republican challenger Mitt Romney 70% to only 22% according to Latino polling group Latino Decisions, while a more recent poll conducted by Fox News Latino gives Obama a 60% lead to Romney’s 30%. No matter whom you believe, Romney is still doing worse than John McCain (31%) in 2008, and George W. Bush (44%) in 2004.

While Coulter is not an elected Republican official or official Romney campaign spokesperson, comments she made several weeks ago paint the picture that she’s trying very, very hard to influence his campaign with her own ideas. So while I have a hard time believing Mitt Romney wants any part of Coulter’s “civil rights are only for blacks” comment, I’m happy to hold her to the standard of Romney spokesperson, since she seems to fancy herself one.

There are two major problems with Team Romney’s Coulter’s statement. The first, obviously, is that civil rights aren’t just for African-Americans – they’re for everyone.

Cartoon of the Day: Mitt Romney's Control Room

Mike Luckovich: Trouble on the Bridge via Truthdig

Did Election Season really just end before a single debate?

By Nathan Rothwell

Fuck it. I'm just gonna vote for Hypnotoad.

I was already planning to write a piece on how the Romney campaign had become so desperate following the big party conventions, they were literally heaving Hail Marys. Hoping to seize on the debacle at the DNC where the word "god" was removed from the party platform and then reinserted, Romney seemed to bizarrely suggest that the word might also disappear from our coins if he's not elected, saying "I will not take God out of our platform. I will not take God off our coins. And I will not take God out of my heart."

And even though Romney pledged to refrain from politics for a day to honor the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, his unofficial surrogates over at Fox & Friends kept up the motif by attacking Obama for not including the word "god" in his proclamation commemorating the solemn anniversary. To provide a little context, President Bush also did not use the word in any of his similar proclamations in 2006, 2007, or 2008. This of course was met with silence from Fox News, so it's really hard for the champions of "Fair and Balanced" to wash off the stink of selective outrage in this case.

From the moment Republicans decided to center their convention around a quote from the President that was deliberately and almost gleefully taken out of context, it had become painfully clear that the Romney/Ryan ticket was growing desperate. Their further attempts to paint Romney as a man of piety and President Obama as a godless socialist moved them into almost comical desperation. But with Romney's mindless criticism of Obama following the tragic attacks on the U.S. embassies in Libya and Egypt yesterday, the campaign may have very well driven off the proverbial cliff, and all before a single presidential debate could even take place.

Friendly Reminder: Mitt Romney Still Hasn't Released His Tax Returns

By Nathan Rothwell

Just 58 days remain until Election Day, and Mitt Romney still has not released any complete copies of his tax returns for review by the American people. He remains the only presidential nominee not to release several years' worth of tax returns since his father George Romney made the practice an unofficial requirement for running for president back in 1968. For those returns he did release (2010 and 2011), the former was incomplete; the latter only an estimate.

Many have speculated why Romney feels he is exempt from a practice his own father devised to promote transparency in politics. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid believes Romney hasn't paid taxes for a decade; others have speculated that Romney participated in a 2009 IRS tax amnesty program designed to quietly punish wealthy taxpayers who attempted to stash money overseas. Still others have guessed that Romney doesn't want fellow Mormons to know his true income, due to the fact that he failed (at least in 2010) to follow through on his commitment to tithe 10% of his income to the Mormon Church. Whatever the reason might be, we can safely assume (as George Will put it) that the political costs of releasing his tax returns must outweigh the negative press he's received from turning his returns into the figurative skeleton in his closet.

Perhaps Romney assumes the issue will go away, and voters will decide his record as an American taxpayer is no longer relevant; but with each passing day, it seems the questions over his taxes become more and more relevant.

On today's edition of This Week, George Stephanopoulos grilled Romney's running mate Paul Ryan over how Republicans would be able to reduce the deficit while establishing tax cuts even larger than the reckless cuts brought to us by the Bush Administration (which many believe is the single-biggest contributor to the federal deficit). The Romney/Ryan ticket claims the answer lies in closing tax loopholes, but Ryan dodged Stephanapoulos' repeated inquiries about which specific loopholes would be eliminated. What little Ryan offered, however, was interesting:

The GOP's Last Gasp: The "Independent" Voter

By Nathan Rothwell 

As the Republican National Convention convenes this week to officially nominate Mitt Romney for president, the GOP is desperate to reclaim the narrative from the potential devastation of Tropical Storm Isaac and the definite devastation of party castout Todd Akin. Governor Bob McDonnell, head of the GOP Platform Committee, spent time on This Week with George Stephanopoulos to drive home a new narrative: Mitt Romney is the new best pal of independent voters.

After attempting to lay the blame for the U.S. credit rating downgrade on President Obama, McDonnell had this to say:

“So on the things that really matter to voters, George, I think the records are stark, and I think that’s why independent voters have a ten-point margin in favor of Mitt Romney right now.”

Such a claim seems dubious. And according to Politifact, the poll McDonnell referenced comes from (surprise!) a Fox News poll. Recent CNN and Gallup polls, however, show a Romney lead among independents closer to the 3-4% range.

In my opinion, if Republicans are willing to exaggerate how well Romney is doing among independent voters, that narrative must mean something to them. Yet this seems like a fool’s errand. I would argue that these independents Romney seems so desperate to court don’t actually exist – or at least, the GOP doesn’t quite understand what an independent voter actually looks like.

Musicians to GOP: Stop using our music!

By Nathan Rothwell

A brief history of GOP musical fails.

Dee Snider joins the growing list of musicians who are not taking it.

Those of you who were around for the summer of 1984 probably remember Bruce Springsteen being a huge part of it. Seven songs from his Born in the U.S.A. album would rank on Billboard’s “Top Ten” hit singles list, a record that still stands today. None of those seven, however, were as iconic and controversial as the album’s title track. While the lyrics tell the story of a working-class American in the midst of a spiritual crisis after surviving the horrors of the Vietnam War, the song’s famous and catchy chorus caused many casual listeners to misinterpret the song as a patriotic anthem.

President Reagan’s 1984 re-election campaign was definitely guilty of making that mistake. Reagan and other conservatives praised the song for confirming the values they promoted, while of course paying little heed to lamentations of the song’s protagonist; a man deeply troubled by a government that “put a rifle in my hand, sent me off to the foreign land, to go and kill the yellow man.” The Reagan campaign would go on to seek official endorsement from Springsteen, but anyone who knows Springsteen well can tell you how that turned out.

And so, unofficially, began an era of a strange relationship between music and Republican political campaigns. While Reagan never actually used any of Springsteen’s music at any of his campaign events, other Republicans would later make such attempts with the music of other artists. There have been more than two dozen documented instances since 2008 of a Republican using a band’s song at a campaign event, only to later receive a request from that band to stop using their music. Most likely, every one of those requests read something like the one Dee Snider of Twisted Sister used when he found out VP candidate Paul Ryan was using “We’re Not Gonna Take It” at one of his events:

"I emphatically denounce Paul Ryan's use of my band Twisted Sister's song 'We're Not Gonna Take It' in any capacity," Snider said in a statement. "There is almost nothing he stands for that I agree with - except the use of P90X."

To paint a better picture of just how curious the music choices have been for the GOP, I refer you to the following list (h/t to Redditor Alyeska2112, who came up with this list and even more examples):

Mitt Romney makes his tax return troubles worse

By Nathan Rothwell

Mitt Romney displays "Presidential Accountability Scorecard"
source: Charles Dharapak/AP Photo

An excellent piece from Steve Benen over at the Rachel Maddow blog appeared yesterday on the ongoing tax-return saga with Mr. Romney. It seems that while he just wishes the issue would die already (even though he could very easily make that happen by just releasing the returns already!), he manages to keep it going by opening his mouth every now and again to put his foot in there.

I won't get into the six reasons Benen lists for how and why Romney continues to make life difficult for himself, as I highly recommend showing him some love and traffic by reading them over at the Maddow blog. However, I would like to add a seventh reason Romney dug his hole even deeper: he compared his religious tithing to his tax obligations.

Forgive me if I am mistaken, but I thought the entire point of giving to charity was to do so out of the goodness of one's heart. Romney may be required by his church to tithe 10% of his income, but this requirement comes from the idea that those who live comfortably and are well-off in life should feel obligated to make the world just a little bit brighter for those less fortunate. Unlike the tax debate plaguing this nation that centers on "fairness," charity tends not to get involved in that debate. No one argues over whether the impoverished "deserve" any help. It's done first and foremost in the name of human decency.

Granted, the Mormon Church tends to lavishly spend a great deal of its collected tithes on itself. It also uses much of that money to enter into the political arena (such as its enthusiastic and infamous backing of California's Prop 8 in 2008), which can hardly be considered charity. But like most religious institutions, it also contributes a great deal of money toward helping the less fortunate, which should be commended.

Maddow points out shoddy reporting in WaPo Romney article

Rachel Maddow spots some sketchy political reporting that recently appeared in the Washington Post. The journalist who wrote the WaPo piece detailed by Maddow has pulled a "repeater," when a reporter passes on the talking points of their sources as reporting.

It's only class warfare when the poor fight back

“Class warfare” has been one of the prevailing themes of this election season. While nearly everyone agrees that our federal deficit is in serious need of address, there are sharp divisions between Republicans and Democrats on how best to go about it.

Both parties have acknowledged that the government needs to spend less money. However, the Democrats are alone in believing the problem also requires additional revenue in the form of tax increases.

This was the chief underlying issue in last month’s debate over the “Buffett Rule,” a proposed modification to the federal tax code designed to ensure that every American who earns at least $1 million per year must pay a 30% income tax rate.  Presently, those earning over $389,000 per year are supposed to pay a 35% income tax rate, but many are utilizing loopholes to redefine their earnings as something other than income, allowing them to be taxed closer to 15%.

Democrats presented a sound argument in favor of the Buffett Rule. The United States has relied on a progressive income tax code for hundreds of years, which taxes wealthier citizens at a higher rate than those with less income. When multi-millionaire Mitt Romney can get away with paying the same amount of his yearly earnings to the federal government as a fast-food worker who makes $9,000 a year, it is a blatant subversion of the progressive tax. After all, money functions the same no matter how it’s classified by the tax code – if you want to buy a Lamborghini, the dealer is going to sell you the car regardless of whether you pay for it with earned income or capital gains.

Santorum Suspends Campaign

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum announced he was suspending his campaign at a press conference in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. His exit from the campaign all but assures that Mitt Romney will be challenging Barack Obama for the presidency in November.

It's unclear why he picked today as the day to step aside, although a look at the polls in his home state offer a clue. According to Public Policy Polling, Romney was leading Santorum in the polls among likely Pennsylvania voters by a score of 42 to 37 percent. Many people argued that Romney's campaign would not survive if he could not win his home state of Michigan, so perhaps Santorum saw the doom facing his own political future if he couldn't win in Pennsylvania.

The GOP's Southern Problem

By Nathan Rothwell

Republican presidential candidate Rick Buttfroth picked up Mississippi and Alabama in Tuesday's primary contests. Although fellow candidate Mitt Romney has failed to pick up any southern states in this primary season (Virginia and Florida don't really count, in my eyes), Tuesday's results all but assured that Romney will eventually be named the nominee.

As many have already predicted would happen, the social conservative wing of the Republican Party, once their greatest asset, has now become marginalized within their own party. While they still exist in large enough numbers to propel Santorum and Newt Gingrich to victories in the southern states, they are practically voices shouting in the wind everywhere else. According to CNN exit polls on Tuesday, even in Mississippi Romney is still the preferred choice among Republican women, those making at least $50,000 a year, and anyone who identifies as something other than "very conservative."

Six things rich people need to stop saying

From the fine folks at Cracked. h/t to David Wong, I implore you to read it.

Cartoon of the Day

America For Sale

The last time I wrote about Mitt Romney, I reported that his religious beliefs were curious but mostly harmless, and ultimately of little concern.

This remains true. However, I also noted that “the former governor of Massachusetts and current Republican candidate for President in 2012 is a charlatan and a swindler.” Now that he has achieved so much success campaigning for president, I think it’s important to talk about how he’s earned those distinctions.

Romney has amassed an enormous fortune in the private sector; by his own estimation at least $200 million, with others speculating that it could be as high as $260 million. For some reason, a number of uninformed voters equate his vast wealth with his grasp of how the entire U.S. economy operates. As best I can tell, the argument appears to be “How could he have made so much money without understanding how the business sector works?”

As evidenced by his career with Bain Capital, the private equity company which Romney co-founded and obtained most of his wealth while working for, Romney does know a lot about the economy – but only enough to exploit it for its own game.

Religious Beliefs Should Remain Private

Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts and current Republican candidate for President in 2012 is a charlatan and a swindler. 

He was a supporter of women’s rights when he was running for governor of one of America’s more liberal states, then ever-so-conveniently changed his mind years later in order to boost his social conservative credentials. He’s worth more than $260 million dollars, yet tells unemployed voters he sympathizes with their plight because he’s also “unemployed” (while running for President is hardly a money-earning endeavor, he’s still doing so by choice). Romney also once infamously asserted that his sons’ service to his failed presidential campaign in 2008 was a more important task than the service of those in the U.S. military.

However, rather than focus on these and other examples of his chicanery, prominent media figures have instead elected to unfairly attack his religious beliefs. So as much as it pains me to do it, I believe Romney deserves some defense here.

Romney is a Mormon, one of the newer and fastest-growing sects of Christianity. Even though Mormonism dates back nearly 200 years and has always professed itself as part of the umbrella of Christianity, some (such as Baptist minister and Rick Perry supporter Robert Jeffress) have obnoxiously proclaimed that Romney should not be considered a candidate for President because he’s not a “real” Christian.