Obama would not have been nominated if it were not for the "urban strategy" of David Axelrod.*There's a difference between a demographically-based strategy and one fueled by fear and hate, and you know it. Demographics are the building block of any marketing strategy, political, product or otherwise.
Axelrod made a career out of operating a racially-derived election strategy which has worked well for electing Mayors in major cities for over thirty years, but for which Obama was the first candidate suitable to use this strategy on a national level.
The strategy is simple:
Find an African-American candidate who is acceptable enough to white voters so the white vote is split around 50/50.
Then the African-American vote will come in at over 90% for that candidate because he's African-American.
That will be the margin of victory.
In terms of Obama's chances for winning re-election, the Republicans have to show that they can field someone capable of winning, and of exploiting Obama's weaknesses. They've got to produce someone who's alternative to the crowd they've so far spawned. They're a lot of bad Republicans and few good ones....some of the good ones have to come forward, even if it might be someone like General Petraeus or the Mayor of New York....someone who's not a career politician but has shown some accomplishment in a profession or life career.
*"Urban strategy" is the name Axelrod himself uses to refer to this. I know it's almost incredible, but look it up and you'll see he claims he invented it. Originally Posted by theaustinescorts
I do not think the people are going to elect a rookie, like Petraeus. And TAE, how can you even suggest Bloomberg when you won't even mention his name?
Fact is, they've got nobody right now.
GM is productive again, so are the banks. If we stopped spending billions on bombs and redirected that into education and health care, shit would turn around REAL fast. And, for the record, creation of new jobs rose in March, and unemployment fell. Certainly neither to any great whoop-de-doo, but considering the recession Obama was handed by the previous administration ...
(According to PolitiFact)
The GDP has stopped falling and has risen each of the past FIVE quarters.
Personal income was more than 4 percent higher in the third quarter of 2010 than it was in the first quarter of 2009. Meanwhile, average hourly earnings and average weekly earnings for private workers are almost 8 percent higher and three-tenths of 1 percent higher, respectively, than they were when Obama was sworn in. Some of these gains are modest, but they are gains nonetheless.
Industrial production has increased by a little over 4 percent since Obama's inauguration, though today's level is still lower than it was in 2007. However, it is growing again.
The stock market is one step removed from basic economic indicators, but it does show what investors think about the prospects for the broader economy. And since Obama was inaugurated, it's been going like gangbusters. The Dow Jones Industrial Average increased by a whopping 44 percent between Jan. 20, 2009, and Dec. 12, 2010. And the Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index -- a broader indicator of the domestic stock market -- rose by more than 61 percent over the same period.
Do your homework, man. There's been a lot of bad going on with the economy of this country over the past 9 years and a lot of stuff is still in deep trouble, but there are definite and measurable indications that the economy is recovering and growing.
To call that delusional is simply, well, simple. And totally predictable, logically speaking.
