AFTER THE ELECTION: The Year of Danger
November 8th, 2012 // 5:51 pm @ Oliver DeMille
The year ahead is a time of danger.
The election of 2012 is over, and you are either happy or upset with the outcome—or, like many independents, you are predictably frustrated with the whole system.
Whatever the case, the next few months is a time of real danger in our nation.
During elections, energy and citizen participation is high.
After elections, it reaches all-time lows. People of all political views tend to focus on other things and leave governance to the politicians.
America has serious challenges ahead, and many of them kick in right at the beginning of 2013.
Moreover, during the next year we will almost certainly determine whether or not the United States is going to fall off the looming financial cliff.
Concerns include:
- The rapidly growing debt
- The overwhelming reality of entitlements
- The growing deficit
- The weakening national credit rating
- The struggling role of the U.S. Dollar as the world’s reserve currency
- Various looming bubbles in the market
- A coming inflation crunch
- A further middle-class squeeze on jobs and discretionary income
- A tax rate that is driving more businesses abroad (or out of business)
- A very nervous small business community that is uncertain about growth or hiring
- Weak consumer demand that is causing businesses to produce less (and cut jobs)
- A rapidly expanding government sector that is threatening free enterprise
Washington needs to address these concerns quickly to relieve business anxiety that we’ll just see more of the same (or worse) from the government for the next four years.
After all, without the necessity of reelection the Obama Administration could be truly anti-business.
Hopefully, in contrast, President Obama will see this as an opportunity to really work with Republicans to fix these major national challenges.
The larger problem is that democratic societies seldom take action until they feel direct pain.
Indeed, democratic nations are notoriously bad at anticipating pain and taking action ahead of time, so they seldom stop crises but rather wait until it is too late to get serious about solutions.
We need real solutions in the months and year just ahead, and we can’t afford to wait for more crises.
We must immediately address the economic realities above (and others like them), at the very time the citizenry is the least likely to stay actively involved.
Whatever your political views, America needs you to stay enthusiastically engaged in watching and influencing government. Now more than ever.
Right now begins the year of danger in government and the future of the economy, and only the first branch of government—the people—can truly ensure that things go well.
The alternative is further major economic downturn.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the chairman of the Center for Social Leadership and co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Citizenship &Current Events &Economics &Entrepreneurship &Featured &Government &Independents &Leadership &Liberty &Mission &Politics
The Presidential Debates
September 26th, 2012 // 7:38 pm @ Oliver DeMille
And What They Should Be
People are getting tired of the presidential election.
It’s too much bad news, week and after week, too many talking heads just saying the same old negative things about the other side, and too many mistakes, gaffes and 10-second clips getting blown way out of proportion.
But all of that is just the way politics works, and people are used to it.
The really frustrating thing in the 2012 presidential election is that neither of the two big candidates has given us a clear, inspiring plan for the next four years.
Both point out flaws of their opponent, and both try to explain away their own unfavorables, but neither have just looked the American people in the eyes and told us what they will do for us if elected.
David Brooks of The New York Times is right that Romney could totally sway this election if he would just ignore the fluff, turn wonky, and outline three or four main things he’s going to do in the next four years.
Romney spent his business life successfully using power point presentations and clear plans to turn things around; the United States needs the same thing right now.
“My fellow Americans,” he should begin the debate. “I’m not going to spend our time tonight talking about every issue under the sun, or answering every question the media thinks is important. We’ve been doing that for years, and it hasn’t gotten us where we want to be.
“What America needs now is leadership. There are four issues that will determine whether the next four years are a time of success and a return to prosperity, or a time of decline. It’s time for our leaders to tell us the truth: if we fix these four things, our future will be bright. If not, it won’t.
“So, others can talk about whatever they want, but I’m going to focus only on these four things that will make all the difference in America’s future. If you don’t like that, elect someone else. If you elect me, I’m going to fix four things. Here they are:
#1 jobs
#2 health care
#3 the economy (including entitlements, the national debt, government
spending, deficits and our credit rating)
#4 oil dependency
“So, for you who are asking the questions tonight, if you ask about how we’ll fix these things, I’ll tell you. If you ask me anything else, I’ll tell you my entire presidency is going to focus on these four things. Period. That’s what we need our leaders to do, and that’s what I’m going to do. The only other thing I’m going to focus on is to maintain a strong national defense.
“That’s what my presidency will be, a strong national defense and fixing these four things. That’s what America needs for the next four years, and as president I will make sure these four problems get fixed.
“I have a full written plan on how to accomplish each of these 4 priorities, and it has just been posted to my website in the last minute since I started speaking. I hope every American will read it. And in the days and weeks ahead I’m going to clearly explain this plan in every speech I give and every question I answer.
“If any of the media want to ask questions about the plan, I’ll answer them. If any citizens have questions, my website has a place to send questions and my team and I will answer every single question you send.
“I want every American to clearly understand exactly how we’ll fix these four problems, and to ask every question anyone has until we all fully understand the plan. Then you can decide whether to vote for me, based on a clear knowledge of what I will do in the next four years as your president.
“Because if I’m elected, I’m going to fix these four things. Nothing will distract me from these four priorities, because these are the greatest challenges for our nation right now and only by overcoming them can America truly be the great nation we should be.”
Then he should stick to his guns and only, only, answer questions about national defense and fixing these four things.
He should constantly refer to his plan, he should know his plan so well that he can refer to it in detail and answer every question, and Paul Ryan should do the same.
He should have the plan outlined in simple words in a short power point presentation on his website, and he should have a longer power point for those who want more details.
He should provide the full plan written out, word for word, and available for every person who wants to read it.
He should print his plan with an engaging cover and mail it to every home in the United States.
He should sell it in the bookstores, and have volunteers give it away to their friends.
He should talk about nothing but the plan, and he should refer to the plan in every setting and spread it far and wide.
He should buy prime time specials on television and give the power point and answer questions on live tv.
Frankly, Ron Paul should do exactly the same thing.
And if Romney doesn’t do it, President Obama should do it. In fact, if Romney does it President Obama should do it too.
Imagine a debate where both candidates are passionately dedicated to fixing these four things, and the question just becomes which plan we as voters think is best.
For once, we’d have a really excellent election.
Note that President Obama hasn’t given us a plan for the next four years any more than Governor Romney has.
They have both talked about dozens of issues and concerns, but neither has taken a stand about the future of American greatness, how they will fix the economy, or any other clear plan for the next four years.
We are left to vote on personality, ideology, lack of mistakes, partisan trust, or our general sense of who will do best.
But we should be choosing between specific plans, voting on the one we think will be best for our nation.
Besides, presenting and sticking to such a plan would just be good politics!
Tell us what you’re going to do, have an excellent plan for backing it up, and hold the nation to account: “I promise you this,” he should say. “If you elect me, four years from now these four things will be fixed. The biggest challenges of our nation will be met and overcome. And America will be great again. It will be like the difference that happened when Reagan beat Carter.
“On the other hand, if you elect Mr. Obama, four years from now you will still be struggling with all four of these problems. The debt will be bigger, our credit rating will most likely be further downgraded, we will be spending and borrowing even more, and the deficits will be bigger. Most importantly, unemployment will still be high and too many families will still be without jobs.
“In addition, if you elect Mr. Obama, the health care law will increase taxes and spread even more government regulations that hurt the economy. And entitlements will be bankrupting us by 2016.
“Four years from now, we will either live in an America where these things are fixed, or in an America where these problems are just as bad or worse. It’s up to you as voters. If you want a president who will fix these four things, you know what to do. My name is Mitt Romney, and I’m running for president of the United States in order to fix these four things!”
This election is still up for grabs.
Imagine the power of the following speech to sum up the debate: “My name is Barack Obama, and I’m running for president in order to fix these four problems, the four greatest challenges America will face the next four years. If you elect me, I’ll fix all four: #1 jobs, #2 healthcare, #3 the national debt and deficit, and #4 our oil dependency. These four things will be the focus of my entire presidency. If you want these things fixed by the time of the next election, vote for me.”
This is winning politics, whoever uses it.
Alas, I fear the debates will be far less entertaining.
Or, in other words, in four years these four serious problems—along with China—will probably still be America’s biggest challenges.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the chairman of the Center for Social Leadership and co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Current Events &Featured &Government &Leadership &Politics
An Election Disaster
September 24th, 2012 // 4:19 pm @ Oliver DeMille
There are six weeks to go before the 2012 election, and currently President Obama is way ahead.
If the election were held today, according to the average of polls, not only would President Obama be re-elected but he would sweep the election.
This election will come down to the top swing states, as I’ve stated in the past, and right now President Obama leads in all eight of the biggest swing states.
He’s eight for eight.
He’s also ahead by 7%, 5% and 5% in the top three swing states, Florida, Ohio and Virginia, respectively.
In presidential politics, 3% is a landslide and 5% is a huge mandate for change.
The reason for this increasing lead by President Obama is simple.
Latino voters believe the Republican party in general, and Governor Romney specifically, is not on their side—not in favor of more open immigration and, in contrast, likely to take a harder line against immigrants.
The short-term concern for Republicans is that Romney has a lot of ground to make up and not much time to do so.
The bigger worry for Republicans but also for independents is that this will lead to House and Senate elections that give a lot more seats to Democrats and bring increased taxes, a bigger national debt, larger deficits, and more runaway spending and regulating in the next four years.
The long-term problem for Republicans is that as a Party they are seen as anti-Latino.
The sad thing about this is that most Republicans who are anti-immigrant and anti-Latino are just plain wrong—like the South was wrong about slavery before the Civil War.
Freedom should be extended to everyone, regardless of race, religion, gender or country of birth.
If you don’t believe this, you don’t really believe in freedom.
America used to be the beacon of freedom to the world, and the Statue of Liberty invited all immigrants to come to America and get freedom.
Two things killed America’s role as the light of freedom to the whole world: 1) we became a welfare state, and 2) we stopped being an open society that passionately encouraged immigrants to come here.
To solve our current direction away from freedom and into decline, we need to adopt two grand strategies: (1) stop giving welfare to anyone and basing a government on the welfare ideal, and (2) drastically open immigration to any honest, hard-working people around the world who are seeking freedom.
We should implement the first change wisely and in stages in order to do it right, but the second one can be enacted almost immediately.
In short, we need a rebirth of free enterprise and the widespread freedom and prosperity it always brings.
America needs to stand for freedom again, not build walls to keep people out.
And as for the future of the welfare state, unless Republicans change their position to wildly pro-immigration, the Democrats are going to keep winning and expanding a welfare society.
The three upcoming presidential debates may be interesting theater, but unless Republicans get serious about being the freedom party there isn’t much chance they’ll win the White House on November 6.
Something could change in the weeks ahead, but unless it does the Republican leadership is going to have to take a good hard look at itself if it wants any success in 2014 or 2016.
Anti-Latino parties aren’t going to win much in the United States today.
In all of this, independents are rightly frustrated because one party stands for more welfare, and the other stands for building fences that keep freedom limited to those who already have it.
That makes neither party the party of freedom, and neither the party of progress.
The only solution is to put as many anti-welfare and pro-immigrant candidates as possible into the Senate and House, as well as into state and local governments.
And in the long-term, it’s time to get over the desire to withhold freedom and opportunity from immigrants.
It’s time for America to once again stand for freedom for everyone—immigrants and everyone else—and to do so boldly and without apology.
We either stand for freedom, or we don’t.
And freedom means freedom for everyone, or it really isn’t freedom.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the chairman of the Center for Social Leadership and co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Citizenship &Current Events &Featured &Government &Independents &Leadership &Liberty &Politics &Statesmanship
The Turning Point of the Election
August 22nd, 2012 // 7:43 am @ Oliver DeMille
Based on the current breakdown of the electoral vote, if President Obama wins Florida, he’ll win the election.
Governor Romney would have to carry every other battleground state if he loses Florida.
Similarly, if Romney wins Florida, he’ll take the election.
We’ve always known that the election would be determined by a few battleground states, but it has now come down to two states: Ohio and Florida.
And Ohio only counts if the candidate who loses Florida is able to win all the other battleground states.
It appears that as goes Florida, so goes the election.
Let’s consider a few thoughts about this.
First, while the 2012 Democratic Convention will be held in North Carolina, the Republican Convention will be in Tampa, Florida.
“All politics is local,” Tip O’Neill said, and the energy of the national convention in Florida is an advantage for Romney.
The popularity of Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio in the state also benefits the Republicans.
Second, however, Florida is a swing state precisely because it is too close to call.
There are at least three contested voting groups that both sides are courting: the Latino vote, seniors, and transplants from New York and New England.
All three have natural leanings toward the Democratic Party, and President Obama is a talented politician who knows how to effectively appeal to targeted constituencies.
Expect him to actively attract all three in the weeks ahead, and for the Romney-Ryan ticket to attempt the same.
Third, Israel could be a tipping point in this vote.
There is significant support for Israel in Florida, not only among conservatives but also from seniors and Northern transplants.
Washington insiders during the past week have been floating the rumor that Israel may be planning a military action against Iran—timed close to or during one of the 2012 conventions in order to give pro-Israel Romney a chance to speak directly in support of Israel and simultaneously make it more difficult for Obama to take a strong stance against the Netanyahu government.
Fourth, Obama handily won Florida in 2008, carrying a majority of the female vote and a large majority of minority voters.
The Romney-Ryan ticket is playing from behind in both Florida and Ohio, and the election may well be determined by which party organization generates the biggest voter turnout on November 6.
People typically have a sense about an upcoming election, based on the views and thoughts of those around them.
In red states, the overwhelming support for the Republican candidate convinces most that the election results are all but determined in their favor.
People in blue states are persuaded that the Democratic contender has a huge lead.
In reality, the election of 2012 could well come down to a few votes in a few Florida counties.
But before we have recurring dreams of hanging chads and the Supreme Court joining the election, we should remember that the one sure rule of presidential politics is to expect the unexpected.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the chairman of the Center for Social Leadership and co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Current Events &Featured &Government &Politics
A Choice Election
August 15th, 2012 // 8:08 pm @ Oliver DeMille
(And a proposal for a Cable TV Debate between Barack Obama and Paul Ryan)
With the selection of Paul Ryan as the Republican vice presidential candidate, Mitt Romney turned the 2012 campaign into a Choice Election.
This is rare in modern times.
The norm has been for Republican candidates to stay centrist—this pattern was followed by Bush, Dole, Bush and McCain.
Not since the Reagan-Carter contest have we seen a true Choice Election, where the sides are clearly divided and both passionately appeal to their base instead of tacking to the center.
Senator McCain may have attempted to create a Choice Election in 2008 with his selection of Governor Palin as running mate, but it appears Ryan’s fiscal conservatism may resonate more with independent voters than Palin’s social conservatism.
Romney’s choice also signaled two departures from his campaign to date.
First, it was bold and risky, which hasn’t been his m/o so far in this election.
Second, it was a significant move toward a big, overarching vision of American greatness.
The Romney message isn’t yet Reaganesque, but it seems to be at least trying to head in that direction.
Ryan’s budget proposals in the past few years have made him a controversial figure, and his inclusion on the ticket may signal that Romney has decided to go all in.
The choice couldn’t be clearer: The Obama/Biden message is that an increasing number of people are dependent on government, and that Washington simply can’t let them down—therefore, it must raise taxes on the rich and increase regulation on business.
If it wins, it will finally be able to do this on the grand scale, in the U.S. and internationally.
This worldview considers government the arbiter of fairness and often feels that government jobs are more honorable than those in private enterprise.
The Romney/Ryan view is precisely the opposite: Free enterprise is the hope of the future and America needs to rekindle its belief in limited government spending, minimal regulation, and a more business-friendly environment that encourages private-sector economic growth.
This agenda affirms that Washington has a spending problem, and that government’s immediate focus must be getting our financial house in order and incentivizing business growth.
The common wisdom on the Right is that our nation is on the verge of significant decline, and that major financial and policy changes in Washington are desperately needed.
The Left generally feels that our economic struggles were brought on by weak government policies that allowed the “haves” to exploit the “have nots,” that far too many people are hurting right now, and that only government stands between them and even more widespread failure.
Here is how this all plays out.
Most conservatives will vote Republican, and most progressives will support the Democratic ticket.
As we’ve discussed in the past, the election will be determined by independent voters in the battleground states.
But the fact that this is now a true Choice election puts a different spin on the vote.
If independent voters in the swing states see America at a crossroads, on the verge of serious decline and in need of big, difficult changes to reboot our economy, create huge private-sector growth and compete with China, the Republican ticket will win.
Romney was clearly banking on this when he selected Ryan as his partner.
But if swing voters think the ideas of decline and a looming major financial emergency are overblown, they’ll opt for another four years of President Obama.
Most voters—Republican, Democrat and swing—generally support getting our fiscal house in order, but they don’t want to give up any specific government programs that benefit them directly (e.g. entitlement changes).
A Choice Election is emerging on two fronts.
First, as mentioned, one side wants to increase the size and scope of government to help more people in need, while the other promises to reduce spending, taxes, regulation and effectively revive the economy (whether it will actually do so once in office is a different topic).
Secondly, Republicans see an American electorate ready to take drastic steps in the face of imminent decline and the threat of our nation going broke, even as Democrats are betting that people are more concerned with maintaining their government benefits.
In short, one side sees Paul Ryan as an excellent choice and the other thinks Romney has made a fatal (if welcome) mistake with this selection.
The choice is stark, and only time will tell how independents in the swing states actually vote.
So far the Obama campaign has played the small game, focusing on Romney’s tax returns, offshore accounts, and attacks on his work at Bain, and now criticizing details of Ryan’s budgets.
Romney has opened a big issue campaign, and he will likely escalate with a full-blown vision of American greatness.
But Barack Obama has proven to be an able politician with an uncanny sense of timing, and savvy Americans expect his Carteresque tactics to evolve into a Clintonian crescendo in the weeks ahead.
President Obama frequently seems to bumble along, only to strike with a lightening success in things like passing Obamacare, taking out bin Laden, or making unexpected announcements that win him the loyalty of various groups from immigrants to women to supporters of same-sex marriage.
Expect at least two Obama surprises before November 6.
Indeed, three or four wouldn’t be shocking.
If Romney waits around and reacts to such surprises, he’ll get stuck on the defensive.
To win, the Republican ticket needs to go big, really big, as quickly as possible.
And neither side can afford to let the debates determine their momentum.
Frankly, I think I speak for most political watchers when I say there should be an Obama-Ryan debate.
It would be a top seller on Pay-For-View.
Charge $29.95 per watcher, have Chuck Norris and George Clooney moderate the event, and apply the profits to paying down the national debt.
The band One Direction can open for each debate, thus ensuring that nearly every home in America with young girls signs up and reduces our deficit.
Better still, hold three such debates Lincoln-Douglass style in the most contested battleground states.
Then have a fourth swing-state debate where Obama and Romney face off and we measure them against each other as the leaders of our future.
This last event will be high drama after the guaranteed fireworks of the first three.
This election is still up for grabs, but it is a very different election than appeared to be shaping up last spring.
The Supreme Court decision on Obamacare and now the Ryan selection have made it a real Choice, and an American crossroads is certainly ahead.
Whatever your political views, the stakes could hardly be higher.
***********************************
Oliver DeMille is the chairman of the Center for Social Leadership and co-creator of Thomas Jefferson Education.
He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.
Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.
Category : Blog &Current Events &Featured &Government &Independents &Leadership &Politics
