I confess I probably land one standard deviation to the right when it comes to charting the political where with all of the population at large. However, I hardly think I'm a political junkie and I know the sausage making of politics doesn't interest me in the slightest. As I've mentioned many times before, what draws me to politics at all is the psychology that is involved. How we all view ourselves and our connection as a creature, community, and society is simply fascinating to me.
Knowing about politics and the players on the stage is merely a byproduct of my delight at observing the human race. How psychology works its way into the campaign cycle is a spectacle to witness. And for the most part, the camp that understands the human psyche (and holds the best starting hand) seems to come out on top in modern presidential cycles.
When I was still a young boy, just under ten, Ronald Reagan was running for President against incumbent Jimmy Carter. To this day the only thing I can remember about the campaign was the fact I didn't like Carter, he didn't seem as normal and down to Earth as Reagan. Dukakis and Bush wasn't very exciting but Bush's camp certainly painted the former governor as kind of weird (the tank photo) and out of touch. Clinton destroyed Bush totally on personality and the fact the GOP had been in control for twelve straight years didn't hurt.
Now we are a little closer to present day and we see Gore square off against W. Bush. The junior Bush won the "who would you like to have a beer with" contest with the American public in a very tight election. The fact that W. was a pretty likable guy and promised to work across the aisle helped. He seemed like an Okie speaking Spanish when he would pander to the Latino base but he still sounded sincere and it seemed like he did know a cordial amount of the foreign language. He owned a baseball team and even though most Americans don't have that in common with him it's still pretty cool. It's not like he had money and owned a Dressage team. W. had a lot going for him on the personality front but that alone isn't what won the election.
I know some of you are certainly thinking The Supreme Court is what won Bush the election but I view the Court the same way I view referees in a sport. If you don't want the refs to decide the game then don't put the game in the refs hands. It's just that simple. Gore had a ton going for him during his campaign cycle. The country was on a roll and we benefited from a surplus, not a debt. Still, by the end of the cycle Gore seemed like a robot and not like the common man and it was enough to push the tide in favor of the GOP candidate.
Even closer to present day we observed Kerry run against W. Bush. Kerry, known prior to the presidential campaign as an esteemed service veteran, took a pounding when it came to his public image. Remember how the Republicans painted him as a rich guy and shared photos of him on some sort of yacht surfboard? Remember how they informed us Kerry married into money and his wife was loaded from the Heinz fortune? Remember how they told us Kerry came home from the war and burned his medals? The Bush camp painted Kerry however they wanted and it worked.
McCain and Obama was a slight reprieve in intensity of character defining mostly because the Maverick wanted to define himself by nominating an unvetted, unqualified, milf as the Vice President. McCain was a war hero, not disputed by the Democrats, but they still conceded he was a great man and did a wonderful service to this country while subtly hinting he was old and lost his marbles (the Palin nomination played well for this charge). Obama's camp would simply plant this seed anytime McCain did anything a little off. McCain wanted to cancel a debate to storm to D.C. and fix the budget fiasco and even that would end up coming off as a little crazy when it all played out. So even though the Obama camp engaged in the character defining of their competitor, they were able to play the game in a slightly less traditional fashion, or less intensely, because of McCain's inability to shake the caricature due to his frequent gaffes.
Which brings us to Romney and Obama in 2012. Again, I mention this observation I make about the state of the election to this point from a psychological perspective and not from a political one. It seems to me Obama's camp, this time around, is back to using the more familiar approach of hardcore character defining of their competitor and winning the battle.
This isn't to say Romney's camp hasn't tried earnestly to paint Obama, they most definitely have. It could be argued they've even been successful to some degree. The problem happens to be the Romney camp has painted Obama as a Kenyan plant that was placed in this country to sabotage our freedoms and implant socialism while duping the ignorant and blinded liberals who naively vote for him and this abstract art is only appreciated by a fringe element of society at large. The more enjoyable painting and one much easier to absorb and connect with is the one the Obama camp paints of Romney.
Just like Kerry who should have been running on his service record instead of running away from it, Romney now finds himself running from everything he should be touting. He was a rich, successful business man that headed a respectable company. Now he finds himself trying to prove to the public he wasn't actually running the company as long as his resume suggests. Romney's father, George, laid the ground work for the precedent of releasing multiple years of taxes returns (12 in his case, a remarkable gesture at the time and still is to this day) and now Mitt has to defend why he has provided us with one, maybe two to this point. On top of that it is rumored he hides his money overseas and that just doesn't sit well with the average independent voter. Mitt even loved his family dog enough to take him on family vacations with him (something not many of my friends do) and that ended up a disaster for him when it comes to public image.
Forget the politics and who you like, don't like, want to win, or to go catch a showing of Our American Cousin. Simply observe how it is playing out from the public perception vantage. Naturally there are those that are loyal to their camps and love their competitor. But elections are won by who captures the vote of the independent voter, the voter that might lean a certain way but has the ability to vote for either camp. Both Obama and Romney are trying hard to paint a picture of the other guy and one that isn't pretty. However, it would seem the Obama portrait of Mitt resonates more with those in the middle while Romney is working with an Etch A Sketch and his attempted portrayal of Barack doesn't seem to stick.
It's still only July and a lot will transpire before election night. We haven't even experienced a presidential debate to this point. The vast majority of polling falls within the margin of error. There are a ton of things working against the incumbent President and history shows us the champ is dethroned under the current circumstances more often than not. Add to that tighter voter registration laws that are predicted to benefit the GOP and the fervor of the Tea Party to oust Hussein Obama and things look rough on the President. It, simply from a political numbers game, looks to be a very tight race all the way through.
This is where I go out on a limb and predict, if Romney continues to lose the character defining competition, it might not be as close as it seems in the end. If the moderates in the swing states gravitate toward Obama's portrayal of Romney, which it seems they are doing, then electorally this could be a blow out. People like to vote for a winner and if Romney continues to be a dud candidate the winner might become apparent earlier then most currently predict. I know this will be the third time I've mentioned this, but I can't stress the importance of clarifying this prediction is based on a psychological observation. If Romney does win I predict the John Titor predictions were four years off (Cern just concluded it's Big Bang tests) and civil war will break out.
