I like newspapers, I always have. \u00a0When I was a kid it was the funny pages (that’s what my grandmother called the “comics”), particularly “Peanuts.” \u00a0I think Linus and Charlie Brown had pretty good instincts about life. \u00a0As I got older I stopped reading the funnies, and moved on to the news. \u00a0Whether that is a good thing or not is up for debate.<\/p>\n
At any rate I get my news from reading newspapers or online news, not watching television. \u00a0I find that reading allows me a better chance to comprehend the various events, facts and opinions that comprise the news. \u00a0Sometimes I watch network news, but not often.<\/p>\n
One disadvantage of not being plugged into network news is that I miss a lot of details, breaking news, various “sound bites” and cultural highlights (I confess I watch the television show “Extra!<\/a>” so that I am not completely left out of the social loop.) So my timing is a bit off and perhaps I’m not on the cutting edge of the news cycle.<\/p>\n But I think I have one big advantage: I’m not bogged down in details and I get to focus on the bigger themes.<\/p>\n There are three big trends that I’ve noticed lately: it’s an even race between Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney<\/a>, the public doesn’t care very much about Bain<\/a>, \u00a0and\u00a0the economy is top-of-mind<\/a>.<\/p>\n One would have thought that Mr. Obama’s status as an\u00a0incumbent\u00a0president, and a better\u00a0campaigner then Mr. Romney, would be a distinct advantage. \u00a0I don’t think that a statistical dead heat at this stage of the election is a good sign for Mr. Obama.<\/p>\n Next, I believe the Bain attacks have run\u00a0their\u00a0course and the tax return questions will be a non-issue. The public doesn’t care about Bain very much, and the only reason Mr. Romney’s taxes<\/a> are an issue is because the Obama team says they are — but what if there is no smoking gun? What if the tax returns reveal that Mr. Romney does what everybody else does — tries to find ways to pay less taxes? I suspect that will be the case, and no one will care.<\/p>\n What people do care about is their own financial security. Mr. Romney seems to enjoy an advantage on that topic<\/a>. \u00a0Mr. Obama gets some high marks for being\u00a0Commander-in-Chief, but then so did George HW Bush, and he lost to Bill Clinton.<\/p>\n So given the the election is tied right now, and the big issues are something of a draw, where will Mr. Obama get the votes he needs to win?\u00a0I don’t see a lot of upside. \u00a0He will have to mine the undecided and\u00a0independent\u00a0voters, but I \u00a0fear that may be a lost cause.<\/p>\n A week before last I wrote that Mr. Obama was making Mr. Romney look silly<\/a>, but last week Mr. Obama delivered the “you didn’t build that<\/a>” speech and I think that was a game changer. \u00a0It’s getting quite a bit of press coverage<\/a>, as one might expect. The upshot is that plenty of people found it insulting<\/a>. I can’t blame them.<\/p>\n My sense of things is that what we’re seeing right now is not Obama vs. Romney, it’s Carter vs. Reagan (mainly because of the “you didn’t build that” speech.) And I think that gives Mr. Romney a big, big advantage. \u00a0If Mitt Romney can keep his head above water, stay on the offensive, and get just a few more people to question Mr. Obama’s ideals and his track record on the economy, he can win the election.<\/p>\n Is that good for the United States? I doubt it. \u00a0Because\u00a0the other huge trend I notice: the complete and total\u00a0polarization\u00a0of US politics. \u00a0Given Mitt Romney’s performance so far, I give him low marks for being able to find his way back to the center and bridge the gap.<\/p>\n Just my 2 cents.
\n