Excerpt
As I’ve noted before, Republicans often seem conflicted about which version of President Obama they should be attacking. Mitt Romney’s original theory was that he could paint Obama (the Good Obama) as a nice family man who’s in over his head on the economy; Romney’s aura of competence would be enough to persuade voters to pick him as an alternative. But Obama held a persistent lead in the face of months of criticism on the economy. So Romney shifted into a harsher resentment-based message to appeal to blue collar whites and maximize his white vote share, suggesting Obama (the Bad Obama) disdains their hard work and wants to redistribute what’s rightfully theirs downward to others.
The problem with an overly negative approach is that it risks a backlash among voters who like the President. And so, as Jim Rutenberg reports this morning in a must read, Romney strategists are well aware of the difficult balance they need to strike, and are working to get it just right in the home stretch. Romney’s brain trust thinks voters are reluctant to break from Obama because his initial victory felt historically transformative, and that they need to give voters a way to feel emotionally okay about ending their relationship with him:
The sort of visceral attacks that conservative talk show hosts are calling for risk sending them into a defense posture on behalf of Mr. Obama and, more to the point, of their own decisions four years ago.
Rather, strategists say, it requires providing a path that gives them permission to make a break. They need to be told that it is O.K. to remain proud of their initial support for Mr. Obama, but that they can be equally at peace with a decision to change their minds now.
“There is no need to make people feel bad about what they’ve done to feel good about what they’re going to do,” said Stuart Stevens, a senior adviser to Mr. Romney.
Romney’s speech tried to strike this balance; there were some red meat attacks on the Bad Obama but also testimonials to the historic nature of his victory and the more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger suggestion that we’ve shown enough patience for Obama and it’s okay to turn the page now.
What’s particularly striking is the Romney camp’s view of this in such overly emotional terms, as if the undecided voter is like your high school daughter you’re trying to persuade to break up with a decent local guy who just isn’t going places. Romney advisers seem incapable of imagining that there are substantive reasons these voters might be sticking (at least for now) with Obama over him.
And this goes to a fundamental distinction that’s central to this race: The question of whether undecided and persuadable voters think Obama failed, or whether they are merely disappointed with the pace of the recovery but find it understandable, given the circumstances, that he has been unable to improve things faster. Judging by Rutenberg’s story, the Romney camp operates from the assumption that voters have concluded Obama is an abject failure but don’t want to part ways with him because it would make them feel guilty. This assumption is what has led Romney to adopt a strategy of being as vague as possible in hopes of making the race a referendum on the president; surely voters who have decided Obama has failed just need time to get used to the idea of dumping him, and won’t be too picky about the alternative Romney is offering
But persuadable voters may be taking a more nuanced view of the economy and this presidency. Perhaps they are no longer sure how much a president can do to fix the economy; they understand the depth of the crisis and of our underlying problems; they disapprove of the pace of the recovery but understand Obama faced relentless partisan opposition and haven’t concluded Obama’s approach is discredited. They actually agree with his basic priorities and governing goals in key areas, and they are open to the argument that Romney’s approach is not the solution to their problems. The simplistic Obama-as-abject-failure formulation may be a misreading of voter perceptions and of why some are remaining with Obama, and may hamper the Romney camp’s ability to make a stronger affirmative case for his alternative.
No comments:
Post a Comment