American Spring

An entire Generation is demanding its future!
- Protest sign in an Israeli mass demonstration
(http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/protest-leaders-present-their-vision-for-social-justice-in-israel-1.377683 )

"If you don't let us dream, we won't let you sleep"
- Protest sign in Spain

( http://www.news.com.au/world/unemployed-youth-protest-over-economic-policy-in-spain/story-e6frfkyi-1226060277267#ixzz1VA9TDjbG)


At the beginning of the year a Tunisian fruit merchant set himself on fire to protest near endless harassment by the Tunisian police. This final act against a regime that robbed its people of its present and future touched off upheavals all across the Arab world. The regimes in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have fallen. Protests continue in Bahrain. The government in Syria is teetering, the government in Yemen is all but gone. Young Arabs feel robbed of their future by stagnant economies, and governments run for the benefit of the wealthy few who are deaf to their voices and unresponsive to their dreams.

These feelings are not confined to the Arab world. Massive protests are also taking place in Israel. Over the past eight weeks the Social Justice movement has grown from a few student protestors to a nationwide march where 450,000 people, took to the streets across Israel against a system that asks much of them and gives little in return.

In Belorussia, the government’s strong crackdowns have created an imaginative response from dissidents. Social media spreads the word that if you oppose the government, show up in a city park at a particular time to sit on a park bench and read a book, or stand, or simply walk through the park. Flash mobs turned social protests.

In May and June young people camped out in public squares across Spain protesting economic conditions and an economic structure that makes it difficult to impossible for young people to find work.

All of these movements have cited the Arab Spring as an inspiration.

Since Tahrir Square, American reporting on these protests has been sporadic. The sit-ins in Spain were barely reported, the protests in Israel aren’t mentioned at all. Yemen is off the front pages as is Bahrain. The Libyans are getting press but only because the memory of Lockerbie has not faded.

By treating these stories as isolated events they have missed how connected these protests and revolutions are. All of these protest, the Arab Spring, Israel, Spain, or even Greece as well as the 2009 Iranian Green revolution spring from a common force – a generation who feel they have been cheated of their futures.

Will the Arab Spring sweep into the US?

After all some of the same conditions that drive the protestors in the Middle-East and Europe exist here in the US. Wealth continues its race to the top that started in the Clinton-Bush years. Fewer people are employed 2011 than were employed in 2001. Job growth in the US has been in a steady decline since before the 2008 crisis. The Bush tax cut saddled the country with a massive debt burden which will limit opportunity in the country for a generation.

The government votes against help for the unemployed, keeps tax cuts for the rich while moving to end middle class tax cuts for struggling families. Democrats and Republicans both seem more interested in throwing a lifeline to the person in the yacht than the person being pulled under in the economic undertow.

The forces that drove Wisconsinites to protest day after day in Madison are the same frustrations that fueled the Arab uprisings. There a State Government moved to strip bargaining rights for workers to fill a budget hole created a passing a tax cut for the powerful. The chants of “Shame” in the State House gallery in Madison were no different than the chants of protesters in Israel, the Middle-east or Europe.

The Tea Party is also driven by the same forces. Its message is one of frustration with a government that seems to ignore the dreams hopes and voices of its citizens while amassing power for itself. Madison and raucous Tea Party town hall meetings in 2010 are two sides of the same coin.

Standard and Poors cited the government’s inability to reach a solution on the American economic crisis as the main reason for their downgrade of America’s credit rating. 78% of respondents in Gallup’s daily economic survey believe the economy is getting worse. In the same survey, 46% of respondents feel they are struggling. This is no surprise when Gallup shows over 27% of workers are unemployed or underemployed. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/110824/Gallup-Daily-US-Economic-Outlook.aspx).

Just because there aren’t tent cities in the Capitol Mall doesn’t mean that the same frustrations, angers and fears that drive these protests and revolutions across the world are not prevalent and strong here as well. How the Government responds will determine the strength of the Arab Spring in the US.

Wisconsin Warning

“These two wins means Democrats have officially won a majority of the Wisconsin recall elections!”

- Line from a Democratic Fundraiser email, dated August 16, 2011 hyping the results of the Wisconsin State Senate Recall elections.

“Close doesn’t count in elections — just ask Al Gore or Norm Coleman.

- Nate Silver – August 10, 2011, Fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com

We lost pure and simple.

While the Democrats did win a majority of the recall elections, they only flipped two of the three seats they needed to take the Wisconsin State Senate back from the Republicans. These results are a warning for the President. They show Obama can’t win re-election simply by not being crazy.

Over the years I have worked in all parts of Wisconsin. My experience is Wisconsinites are honest, hard working people, with a strong sense of community and fair play. I wasn’t surprised at their outrage over Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s proposals to strip the public employees union of collective bargaining rights.

After weeks of protests in Madison against the Governor’s proposal, Wisconsin seemed to be at the start of its own “Arab Spring”. The protestors stayed at it for weeks. The media was there in force, and it looked like momentum was finally on the side of the little guys as they stood up to powerful out of state interests bent on breaking the unions.

Initially, I was optimistic the Democrats would succeed in taking back the State Senate, but the first signs of trouble came early.

After the Wisconsin legislature passed Walker’s anti-union plan, the State held an election for a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Republican candidate, Supreme Court Justice David Prosser a conservative jurist, was being challenged for re-election by Democrat JoAnne Kloppenburg. Justice Prosser would be the deciding vote if Walker’s collective bargaining law came before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. As a result what would normally have been a sleepy low turn-out judicial election became a major event.

Justice Prosser won re-election by 7,000 votes in a close race marred by election officials who misplaced thousands of ballots in the initial count.

However, if Wisconsin voters were as outraged as they seemed, Justice Prosser should have been easily defeated. If you can’t win a judicial election when the whole state is angry and in the streets protesting in favor of your position, how do you expect to win recall elections in six months?

You can’t.

One of the two Republicans who lost, Randy Hooper, (R-Dist. 18), originally won his seat by less than 200 votes. When protestors went to his house in Fond du Lac, he wife said he wasn’t home. Instead she told them they could find him in Madison shacked up with his 20-somethng year old mistress. To make matters worse for Hooper, it came out he had arranged a state job with a hefty raise for his girlfriend. Winning that seat should have been a “gimmie”. But the Democrats won it by only 2 percentage points.

The only strong showing the Democrats had was when they recalled Dan Kapanke (R- Dist. 32), by 10% of the vote. The Democrat, Jennifer Shilling, drew most of her support from the city of La Crosse, which over the past several cycles has been trending Democratic and is the home of a University of Wisconsin Campus.

In the remaining Districts where Republicans won, they won by margins at or near the margins they won with in 2010, and by which Gov. Walker had carried their Districts when he was elected.

Granted the Democrats set themselves a tall order. The targeted Republicans were all from Districts that were solidly Republican. One District hadn’t been represented by a Democrat since Grover Cleveland was President.

The Democrat’s defeat in Wisconsin was also a warning sign for President Obama.

The Democrat’s loss shows Obama can’t assume that people will be so angry at the Republicans or so afraid of Perry, Bachmann or any other crazy in the race that they will flock to him if he simply looks reasonable.

People are too afraid for that work.

They have been terrified since the 2008 economic collapse. They want a leader who will stand up to the forces that got them in this mess, and who has a plan for getting them out. That is why they are attracted to the Tea Party movement. Tea Party candidates appear to have nothing directly to do with creating the current crisis and appear to have a plan for steering the country safely through the storm.

To win in 2012, Obama must convince voters he has clear plans for the country’s future, and he will defend those plans to the end against the Republican Tea Party bullies.

Right now they don’t see that in Obama. He can’t win if all he says is “ I’m not as crazy as the other guy.”

What is a Democrat?

“If I were a Republican this would be a night to party.”

Rep Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo,) Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus - 07/31/11 on MSNBC

“We are tying similar handcuff to the next time we raise the debt ceiling.”

Rep Michael Grimm (R-NY) - 07/31/11 on MSNBC

“It is often poor people, the young and the elderly that get the short end of the stick. Somehow I don’t think the Defense Department is going to suffer as much.”

- Mayor Jean Quan, Oakland CA. - New York Times 08/02/11

I would love to say I am Democrat - but I simply don’t know what that means anymore.

To me a Democrat believes in using the power of the government to help people with problems beyond what their own communities can solve. Democrats understand that the hidden hand of capitalism reaches towards greed and self-interest, and that sometimes the power of government is the only way to block its grasp. Democrats stand up to protect a weaker minority be they women, blacks, gays, the uneducated, the sick, the elderly or the poor from a powerful majority determined to rob them of their rights, their homes, or their health.

Our President doesn’t look like a Democrat. The Senate Majority Leader doesn’t look like a Democrat. The 95 House Members who voted for the debt ceiling deal don’t look like Democrats.

They all look like weaker versions of President George W. Bush.

The Party establishment and the President both are trying to put a good face on the deal. (http://swampland.time.com/2011/08/01/five-things-for-liberals-to-like-in-the-debt-ceiling-deal/). (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/08/01/not_as_bad_for_democrats_as_you_think.html). Their arguments revolve around the amount of cuts to the Defense Department, the small size of cuts scheduled for 2012, and most cuts are “back-loaded.”

The issue for Democrats is not the size of the cuts, but that they happened at all.

If the cuts to entitlement programs are the smoke and mirrors that the Tea Party dissidents claim they are, then we gave on core principles too soon, and got nothing in return. If they are as deep as Liberals fear, then we truly gave away our moral high ground for nothing.

At this point in history there is little difference between Republicans and Democrats.

We can no longer say Republicans will cut Social Security and Medicare and we won’t, because we just did. We can’t run against the “Ryan Plan” because we just adopted it.

Both Parties will cut the social safety nets that support the poor, the elderly, and the disabled. Neither Party will ask the people who benefited the most from the pirate years of the Bush presidency to sacrifice a cent for the greater good of the country.

Both parties believe in domestic spying. Both parties support torture. Both parties continue the massive rollback of civil liberties that have occurred in the US since 9/11. Both parties are willing to protect big business from any consequence of the fiscal meltdown of 2008 but leave the average mortgage holder in the cold. Neither party is focused on creating jobs or doing anything meaningful to end the recession.

Obama the candidate and Obama the President are two different people. Think of all the differences Obama drew between himself and John McCain during the 2008 campaign - end the Bush Tax cuts, end the war, support single payer health coverage. Look at what he delivered. Did all those people who cheered in Grant Park on election night vote for this?

Presidents Johnson, Kennedy, Truman and Roosevelt would not believe what they would see in the White House today. Not only that an African-American is President but that a Democrat without strength, without principles, whose main policy seems to be to appease political extremists sits in the Oval office. They would turn their surprise to Congress and see Democrats in both chambers who supported the President as he gave ground on every single core principle of the Party.

The Party that I believed in, volunteered for, voted for without exception for my entire life no longer exists.

The Democratic Party as I knew it is gone. I may as well say I am a Whig.

Learn to Share

"It's unthinkable that this country will not meet its obligations on time. It's just unthinkable we'd ever do that. It's not going to happen.''

- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on CNN's "State of the Union" 07/25/2011

"You know, what I really want right now is to -- to get a debt ceiling deal for my birthday. That's kind of sad, I know."

- President Obama in an NPR interview answering the question of what he wants for his birthday.

"Show me the Money!"

- Jerry McGuire

The American people know that the Republican position in the debt ceiling debate, of all spending cuts and no revenue increases doesn’t make sense.

Congressional Republicans thought that they could bully President Obama into cutting entitlement programs, then blame him for the collapse of any debt ceiling deal when he wouldn’t. They would get the cuts they wanted and not take any heat for their inflexible anti-tax stands.

Much to their surprise Obama called their bluff.

Obama signed on to large cuts in Social Security and Medicare angering his base. But, he also supported a modest increase of revenue that was based almost entirely on closing tax loopholes. This offer turned into a trap for the Republican who now appear they are more interested in protecting their “no tax increase” pledge to Grover Norquist than the world economic system.

When Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) walked away from a deal not once but twice, he missed a huge opportunity to get everything he said Republicans wanted. Now the Senate will step in with a more moderate proposal that will pass the Senate quickly, which the House will be forced to accept.

If Congressional Republicans don’t cooperate, they will suffer a tremendous backlash as average voters pay a high price for their intransigence. Maybe that will jolt the Party back to reality.

Since 2000 Republicans have operated in a political atmosphere where facts mean nothing and spin means everything. The Bush tax cuts didn’t create jobs and under-taxed rich people are not “Job Creators.” The Bush Administration has one of the worst job creation records of any modern Presidency. All the Republican economic policy has done is squander the Clinton Surplus and create an economic catastrophe. Yet the Republicans remain committed to repeatedly driving over the same cliff. Economic reality simply don’t matter as much as keeping their Tea Party base happy.

And they have to.

The Republican establishment looked the other way for years and years as the anti-tax crazies, xenophobic nativists, and the hard core Christian right, took over Republican Party organizations in State after State. Even before these groups formed into the Tea Party movement, the Republican establishment thought they could control them and treated them with the same condescension as the Liberal establishment.

They were wrong.

Those activists have now worked their way up through the ranks to the national stage. Their loyalties are not to the Republican establishment, or even big business. Their loyalties are to each other. They can ignore the establishment and rely on each other for funding and volunteers. Furthermore, Citizens United insulates them from the need for big business or Party money. Outside groups from all over the country can come into any Congressional District and drop lots of money on extremest candidates far to the right of the voters.

As a result Congressional Tea Partiers have no need for, and nothing to fear from the establishment groups that ran the Party for years.

The Senate is a different matter. Senators need the support of big business to run expensive statewide campaigns. They don’t share the hard core self destructive fanaticism of the House and they need a deal that doesn’t hurt their big business donors.

Unfortunately for them, the Republicans have trapped themselves in an anti-revenue philosophy driven by the hard right of their party. (http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/mark-mellman/168895-gop-gets-it-wrong-on-tax-increases). Their position is not held by the American voter, and is far outside of the main stream. (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/house-republicans-no-tax-stance-far-outside-political-mainstream/).

Skepticism of the “cut only” philosophy runs long and deep. A recent compilation of polls show 19 different polls validate the findings that Americans support revenue increases along with spending cuts as a way balance the budget. (http://www.capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/2292/americans-support-higher-taxes-really).

Republicans need only to look to Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio, to see what can happen to them nationally, if they don’t moderate their position. These three states had freshman Republican Governors who took office in January with high approval ratings only to devastate those ratings with hard core, ideologically driven policies that were immensely popular with their hard core base, but far out of line with voters beliefs.

If they don’t cooperate on some sort of deal, the budget debate will be devastating for the Republicans in 2012. Right now the Democrats look like the only adults in the room and the Republicans look like a spoiled, self-centered child in the middle of a tantrum.

For the future of their Party and for the future of the Country it is time they grew up and learned to share.

A Tough Road Ahead

- 47% of Registered Voters would vote for an un-named Republican Candidate, and only 37% would vote for President Obama - Gallup Poll released July 14, 2011

(http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/Republican-Candidate-Extends-Lead-Obama.aspx)

Michele Bachmann’s red meat line is how she can make Obama a one term president. It is possible, but it won’t be as easy as she thinks.

President Obama’s approval ratings move within a narrow confine in the high 40’s and are a statistical tie with his disapproval rating.

Obama’s challenge is not his poll numbers but the Electoral College.

In 2008, Obama won the Presidency with 365 Electoral votes - 95 votes more than he needed to win. He broadened the Democratic map winning Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada and Indiana for a combined 112 Electoral votes. These were all states John Kerry lost. Al Gore won only two of them - New Mexico and Iowa. (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/04/05/us/politics/key-states-for-obama.html)

To win Republicans, will have to flip many of these states back to the “Red” column.

Republicans are in a strong position to reclaim North Carolina. They control both houses of the State Legislature for the first time since Reconstruction, and the Democratic Governor is unpopular. In 2008, Obama won this state by less than a percentage point. Even with the Democratic convention being held in Charlotte, North Carolina’s 15 electoral votes will likely go back to the Republicans.

In 2008 Virginia voted for the Democratic Presidential candidate for the first time since 1964. It will be a tight Presidential race in 2012. However, Obama continues to out poll Republican candidates in the state, and has had a strong approval rating in the state throughout the year (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/05/obama-still-strong-in-virginia.html). African Americans in Virginia remain loyal to Obama, as do white voters. With a long history of voting Republican, Virginia could slip back to the Red column, but the Republicans will have to expend resources they may not have to make that happen.

Indiana is a reliably Red state that got pulled into the Blue column by the strong anti Bush undertow. Pull the 39 Electoral votes from North Carolina, Virginia and Indiana out, and Obama still has 326 Electoral Votes. To win, Republicans will have to pick up 56 more votes, which they can do by a combination of Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and flipping one more medium size 2008 Obama State.

Florida has voted for the Democratic candidate twice in the past four cycles, but voted solidly for the Republican only once in that time - 2004. Currently Florida’s Governor is a hard core Tea Party Conservative and is the most unpopular Governor in the nation. With Obama’s outreach to Hispanics, the unpopularity of the Tea Party Governor, and Ryan Plan to restructure Medicare, Florida is definitely in play and Obama has the tools the nail the state down.

John Kerry lost Ohio by 2%. Obama won it by 6%. But the Republicans have taken over the state since them, and have enacted a raft of unpopular legislation. The weak popularity of the Republican governor could help Obama, if he makes the case that with a Republican President, these unpopular state laws will become national policy.

In 2008, Obama won Pennsylvania by 10 points. But today only 47% of Pennsylvania voters support his re-election. Interestingly, his main weakness is with former “Hillary” voters. (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/07/obama-weak-in-pennsylvania.html). The Republicans are even weaker. Only Mitt Romney is competitive with Obama, who handily beats all other Republican hopefuls in the Keystone State. It is hard to imagine “Hilary” voters staying home or voting Republican in 2012. When they return to Obama, Republicans will have their work cut out for them.

In 2008, an increase in Hispanic and Black voters, turned Georgia from a deep Red state to a light pink. Atlanta has one of the fastest growing populations of African Americans in the county. It also has a growing Hispanic population that could support the President. Georgia will be a state Republicans have previously taken for granted, on which they will now have to concentrate resources.

Obama’s team knows they have a tough map. Unlike the Republicans they can take all their resources and focus them on the general election now.

And those resources are considerable.

Team Obama has already raised close to $86 million ($21 Million were from donations of $200 or less). They are able to build on the 50 state infrastructure they created in 2008 along with Howard Dean. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56565.html).

The Republicans lag far behind the President in fundraising. Combined they raised less than the President. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-money-2012-20110716,0,6297117.story) Governor Mitt Romney raised the most money of the Republican candidates with $13 Million dollars - over three times the $4 Million raised each by, Rep. Ron Paul, Governor Tim Pawlenty and Rep. Michele Bachmann.

Overall the Republicans have a weak field of candidates to convince the country it wants what they have to offer. Unfortunately for them, they can’t run an “un-named” Republican for President.

A Patriotic Act

“Our Country was founded on Dissent!”

- The reaction of Ann, a friend of the Operadem, to a yard sign in New York

Ann was reading a homemade yard-sign proclaiming “Dissent is Patriotic,” posted in front of a house in upstate New York. She is right. Our country was built on a solid foundation of dissent.

In a recent survey, 24% of respondents couldn’t identify the country from whom we won our independence. Americans see the founders as bewigged men signing the Declaration of Independence and then going home to idle away the time to the inevitable victory at Yorktown, after which George Washington becomes the first President. Other than Jefferson, best known for his memorial and Sally Hemmings, there were no Presidents until Abraham Lincoln, who saved the Union for Teddy Roosevelt of the Rough Riders.

So it is not surprising the hard, sharp edge of our revolutionary past is hidden under store sales and fireworks.

But, it was the sharp knife of dissent, that carved our nation out of the British Empire. The revolution started because the British Government didn’t listen to dissent. They viewed the dissenting colonialists as a small minority, in a loyal colony.

The heavy handed reaction of Britain to the patriots began to unify the colonies into a country. With large English armies roving the country, carrying out a scorched earth policy, Americans began to unify around the revolution and the concept of a new nation.

What began as dissent from the British government ended in the creation of a new nation.

Throughout the years of the Articles of Confederation, the new American government drifted and after 11 years was non-functioning. Again dissenters took over and drafted a new government to overthrow and replace the old.

But, the Constitution’s ratification was not a foregone conclusion. Dissenters, who opposed its ratification - extracted a price for their support. That price was a package of amendments that became the Bill of Rights, which guarantees dissent can continue and not be seen as treason.

Dissent was enshrined in the constitution.

Since its ratification, most of the changes to the constitution have come about as a result of some national trauma and debate. Whether it was giving women and eighteen year olds the right to vote, the great Civil War amendments, or even something as technical as how the Vice President is elected and appointed, the constitution was changed by open honest dissent.

Dissent is not only patriotic it is vital. It is our right and duty to speak up for what we see needs to be changed in our government.

Dissent is why America has been able to grow, adapt and in some cases drive change in the world. Countries that don’t allow dissent, wither and die under their own weight and encrustations.

As we watch fireworks, wave flags - and yes go shopping - we need to remember the greatest patriotic act we can do to keep this country alive and moving forward is an act of dissent.

Republican Cross-roads

Obama is the most serious radical threat to traditional America ever to occupy the White House."

- Newt Gingrich, quoted in a new book, Subversion Inc., as reported by the American Spectator. (http://politicalwire.com/)

The 2012 Republican Presidential campaign is swirling across the national political landscape like a dust-storm.

2012 will be the final battle between the “Establishment” and the “Tea Party” for the soul of the Republican Party. Whichever side wins the nomination only to lose the election will be on the outside looking in on 2016 and beyond.

How will the election playout for the Republicans?

What happened to the Democrats in 1984, 2004 and 1912 highlight three likely scenarios.

In 1984 the Democrats were convinced America hated President Ronald Reagan. The 1982 recession left a lot of pain in its wake, and Reagan’s poll numbers were not much better than Obama’s. (President Obama’s current approval rating is 47%. At the same point in June of 1983 President Reagan’s approval rating was - 47%. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx)).

The Democratic field was crowded with eight serious candidates crossing the political spectrum from the more conservative Sen. Fitz Hollings (D-SC), through former Vice President Walter Mondale. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_1984#Candidates)

But the Democratic Party’s liberal wing controlled the nominating process. With the centrists out of power, the nomination was won by the more ideologically pure candidate, Vice President Walter Mondale. President Reagan was able to build on the coalition of centrists and conservative Democrats he began in 1980, to win re-election in an historic landslide. In the process, Reagan turned those voters into “Reagan Democrats” which were the basis for Republican victories in 1988, 2000 and 2004.

In 2011 the Republicans find themselves in a similar situation.

Currently eight candidates are running with two or three more waiting in the wings. All of them are to the right of the American electorate. The conservatives are in control of the Party nominating process. By nominating a candidate on the far right of the spectrum the Republicans are leaving centrist Republicans, and moderate Independents open for Obama to consolidated into a Democratic coalition in the same way Reagan consolidated the Reagan Democrats a generation earlier.

If that happens, the Republicans may suffer a historic landslide much like the Democrats did in 1984.

In 2004, the main qualification Democrats were looking for in a nominee was someone who could beat President Bush. Their assumption was that Bush was so unpopular and incompetent that the voters would naturally support any candidate that was not like Bush, regardless of their positions or qualifications.

The bumper sticker “Kerry/Edwards - bringing complete sentences to the White House” perfectly summed up their view of the election.

The moment Sen. John Kerry (D - Mass) emerged as a front runner the Democrats nominated him. After the convention Kerry spent more time campaigning as the un-Bush, and never addressed the issues that mattered most to the voters until it was too late. Ironically, it was Sen. Obama’s moving convention speech that underscored Kerry’s weakness both as a candidate and a campaigner.

The Republicans could easily coalesce around a weak candidate like Gov. Mitt Romney or Gov. Tim Pawlenty under the delusion that all Americans hate Obama with the same passion they do. Republicans, spend more time deriding Obama, and looking down their nose at him, then they do articulating a coherent program that Americans can believe in.

They, like the Democrats in 2004, are speaking in an echo chamber to a very narrow band of supporters. Meanwhile, the incumbent is raising close to a billion dollars to support his re-election, while actively reaching out to groups, like Hispanics, moderates, and the middle-class, that the Republicans have left behind.

As a result in 2012, the Republicans may be as stunned the Wednesday after election day as the Democrats were in 2004.

In 1912, President Teddy Roosevelt was deeply disappointed in his hand picked successor President William Howard Taft. In Roosevelt’s view, Taft was unwilling to follow through on the progressive policies the former President had left in his care. Angry and disappointed, Roosevelt bolted the party and ran as a “Bull Moose.” The Republicans split, and as result Woodrow Wilson became only the second Democrat to enter the White House since 1856.

The Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, with its substantial amount of money and volunteers, has already shown that they are reluctant to support a moderate like Romney. If Romney is the nominee, the Tea Party may bolt and run Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Min) or Huckabee. At best they will sit on their hands and not provide any meaningful support to the Presidential nominee and turn their focus in ensuring Tea Party control of the House and Senate.

Without Tea Party support, Romney will lose to Obama.

Republican candidates actively ignore the fact that they are less popular than the President, and their policies have little support outside the right wing of their Party. In only one poll out of dozens released in the last month does a Republican candidate (Mitt Romney) beat Obama. In all other polls, Obama soundly beats all Republican candidates - including Romney (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html)

A lot will happen between now and election day. But right now the Republicans are standing at a cross-roads, choosing which path they will follow to defeat.