Robert Reich has two interesting new articles in his blog that you should read.
The first one is an analysis of why Romney is losing the election. The conservatives are already trying to spin this as Romney’s fault. He is a bad politician running a poor campaign, and most of all, he isn’t conservative enough. He shouldn’t run from his statements about 47% of Americans being slackers, he should double down!
But that explanation doesn’t hold much water. If Romney is the problem, then why are other Republican candidates also dropping in the polls? Just a few months ago, Republicans were set to take over the Senate and increase their hold on the House. Now it looks like Democrats can hold the Senate, and some wishful thinkers are even talking about taking back the House.
Instead Reich argues that the Republican Party is the problem:
Americans are finally beginning to see how radical the GOP has become, and are repudiating it.
The Republican primaries, and then the Republican convention, have shown America a party far removed from the “compassionate conservatism” the GOP tried to sell in 2000. Instead, we have a party that’s been taken over by Tea Partiers, nativists, social Darwinists, homophobes, right-wing evangelicals, and a few rich people whose only interest is to become even wealthier.
These regressives were there in 2000, to be sure. They lurked in the GOP in the 1990s, when Newt Gingrich took over the House. They were there in the 1980s, too, although Ronald Reagan’s sunny disposition gave them cover. In truth, they’ve been part of the GOP for more than half a century — but never before have they held so much sway in the party, never before have they called the shots.
Romney’s failing isn’t that he’s a bad candidate. To the contrary, he’s giving this GOP exactly what it wants in a candidate. And that’s exactly the problem for Romney — as it is for every other Republican candidate — because what the GOP wants is not at all what the rest of America wants.
The second article gives four compelling reasons why Romney still might win the election.
First, who knows what will happen with the economy. Did anyone predict that the economy was about to crater just before the 2008 election? Would Obama have won if it hadn’t?
Second, Romney has an advantage in the debates. Obama’s strength in the 2008 election was not at the debates, where he could come off as slow and ponderous. He also has not been in a debate in four years, while the Republicans had more primary debates than anyone cares to remember, providing Romney lots of experience. Plus Romney has had plenty of time to practice recently, while Obama has a more-than-fulltime job.
Third, the Republicans still have LOTS of money to throw at this election. Seriously.
And finally, the Republicans have repeatedly shown that they will do anything to win an election. Have we already forgotten what happened to Gore in Florida? Eleven states have enacted voter ID laws specifically designed to suppress the turnout of Democratic turnout. And there are still plenty of Diebold voting machines in use.