US Election: Decision in Times of Crisis
There are only 36 days left to the presidential election and Mitt Romney faces his greatest challenge yet: to reverse the popular opinion that he will lose and to convince voters—even donors—not to lose heart. (Romney needs to perform well in the debates convince voters that follow him closely.)
Like it or not, Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and their convention did a much better job in getting their message across. This message was so effective that in less than a month, there is still a feeling of a bitter election dispute whose outcome will be a huge unknown. Therefore, it will be very difficult for the president to win with the economy ailing and his popularity seeming to have dissipated.
The idea that Romney’s campaign is discredited has been dominating media coverage in recent weeks, not only in the progressive or leftist press but also with independent and even conservative columnists. They all mention problems with the conduct of the Republican campaign. For example, they point to Clint Eastwood and his enigmatic monologue to a chair during the Republican convention and Romney’s comment that about half the electorate wants to be dependent on the government. All of these events clearly do not help the Republican message.
Unfortunately for Romney, this negative perception seems to be silent yet understood by the public. Not only is there this opinion, but numbers and money as well. On the site Intrade, which functions as an electronic betting exchange, the odds of Obama winning jumped to 75 percent.
To make matters worse, in a survey on the site The Hill, 53 percent of voters, regardless of their choice of vote, said the president will be reelected. Before the Democratic convention, only 43 percent believed in this possibility, while another 46 percent said Romney would emerge victorious (the remaining 11 percent were undecided).
It would be pure "chaos," no harm intended, if not for one detail: voting in the U.S. is not compulsory. Many voters may simply choose not to vote if they feel that their candidate has no chance.
Likewise, the campaign donors may also be convinced to stop giving money to the presidential election and instead donate these resources to senatorial campaigns, where the Democratic majority can be reversed.
Romney’s chance(s) to reverse the bad perception about him lies with the three debates: the first one is scheduled for Wednesday, October 3; the second is on October 16; and the third is on October 22.
To address the chances the Republican candidate has, the first debate only deals with domestic issues, especially the economy. The issue of the economy in the government's assessment has improved slightly in recent weeks. The economy is not a bad field for Romney, but it does prevent him from discussing Libya.
The weakest part of the Obama administration right now is, in fact, foreign policy (yes, the scenario is a reversal of last month). Yet there are still growing doubts about the U.S. strategy and whether the problems were underestimated in the African country, which led to Ambassador Chris Stevens’ unnecessary death in Benghazi on September 11.
Romney can always manipulate the radio commercials and of course TV. But debates are followed more closely and by a greater portion of the population. If Romney waits until October 22 to address President Obama’s foreign policy, it may end up being too late for the Republican, if he does not do anything else.
Like it or not, Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and their convention did a much better job in getting their message across. This message was so effective that in less than a month, there is still a feeling of a bitter election dispute whose outcome will be a huge unknown. Therefore, it will be very difficult for the president to win with the economy ailing and his popularity seeming to have dissipated.
The idea that Romney’s campaign is discredited has been dominating media coverage in recent weeks, not only in the progressive or leftist press but also with independent and even conservative columnists. They all mention problems with the conduct of the Republican campaign. For example, they point to Clint Eastwood and his enigmatic monologue to a chair during the Republican convention and Romney’s comment that about half the electorate wants to be dependent on the government. All of these events clearly do not help the Republican message.
Unfortunately for Romney, this negative perception seems to be silent yet understood by the public. Not only is there this opinion, but numbers and money as well. On the site Intrade, which functions as an electronic betting exchange, the odds of Obama winning jumped to 75 percent.
To make matters worse, in a survey on the site The Hill, 53 percent of voters, regardless of their choice of vote, said the president will be reelected. Before the Democratic convention, only 43 percent believed in this possibility, while another 46 percent said Romney would emerge victorious (the remaining 11 percent were undecided).
It would be pure "chaos," no harm intended, if not for one detail: voting in the U.S. is not compulsory. Many voters may simply choose not to vote if they feel that their candidate has no chance.
Likewise, the campaign donors may also be convinced to stop giving money to the presidential election and instead donate these resources to senatorial campaigns, where the Democratic majority can be reversed.
Romney’s chance(s) to reverse the bad perception about him lies with the three debates: the first one is scheduled for Wednesday, October 3; the second is on October 16; and the third is on October 22.
To address the chances the Republican candidate has, the first debate only deals with domestic issues, especially the economy. The issue of the economy in the government's assessment has improved slightly in recent weeks. The economy is not a bad field for Romney, but it does prevent him from discussing Libya.
The weakest part of the Obama administration right now is, in fact, foreign policy (yes, the scenario is a reversal of last month). Yet there are still growing doubts about the U.S. strategy and whether the problems were underestimated in the African country, which led to Ambassador Chris Stevens’ unnecessary death in Benghazi on September 11.
Romney can always manipulate the radio commercials and of course TV. But debates are followed more closely and by a greater portion of the population. If Romney waits until October 22 to address President Obama’s foreign policy, it may end up being too late for the Republican, if he does not do anything else.