tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca-fr/topics/us-election-2012-3736/articlesUS Election 2012 – La Conversation2014-01-27T17:53:14Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/224452014-01-27T17:53:14Z2014-01-27T17:53:14ZWith Mitt, Netflix shows human side of a hamstrung candidate<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/39906/original/5zqdnwcr-1390824070.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">'Corporations are people' – and so, apparently, is Mitt Romney.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Gage Skidmore</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Mitt, a newly released documentary about former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, provides an up-close look at the exhausting presidential election process in the U.S. This is no House of Cards when it comes to entertainment; rather, it’s more of a quirky home movie documenting some of the joy and pain of two failed presidential efforts by a man who wanted to fulfil his father’s dream, and earnestly serve his country.</p>
<p>There are countless scenes of the clean-cut Romney with his charming and equally clean-cut, handsome, and well-bred clan, chatting amicably about what he should decide, how he should deal with opportunities and adversity, and whether what he is doing is really worth it. Romney comes across here as a loving family man, a devout Mormon – and unfortunately for him, an insufficiently creative or empathic politician.</p>
<p>Romney ran and failed to win the Republican nomination for president in 2008. His father, George, a talented automobile executive and popular three-term governor of Michigan, ran and lost his own bid to be the Republican nominee for president in 1968. Mitt had also run unsuccessfully for the senate in 1994 (as had his mother in 1970), but he was elected governor of Massachusetts in 2002, and finally win the Republican nomination for president in 2012.</p>
<p>On <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/election/2012/results/main">7 November 2012</a>, he won almost 48% of the popular vote to Obama’s 50.6%. Americans were obviously divided. (Note that Obama’s public approval these days hovers around 43% on a good day.) President Obama won 62.2 million popular votes and 332 electoral college votes to Romney’s 59.1 million and 206. In practical political logistics, Romney lost because he failed to win several <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/the-9-swing-states-of-2012/2012/04/16/gIQABuXaLT_blog.html">swing states</a> such as Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Colorado.</p>
<p>Romney had a chance to pick off these battleground states. Why did he lose? There is no single easy explanation. The American economy was slowly but surely rebounding from its huge recession. While Obama did not have to endure the crazy patchwork of pre-election caucuses and primaries that Romney did, and the republican was hammered and emerged a wounded candidate. Americans wanted the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to end, and Obama appeared to be doing this. On top of these factors, Obama benefited from a <a href="http://www.governing.com/blogs/politics/gov-political-demographic-trends-brighter-for-democrats.html">shifting demographic landscape</a> that looks likely to favour Democrats for some time.</p>
<p>But another reason Romney lost – and here is where Greg Whitley’s documentary is revealing – was his personal style. Romney’s campaign persona was mechanical and seldom inspirational. It was clear that he was an enormously wealthy businessman and a devout family man, but this was not enough.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rLHxbemvpxY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Above all, though, Mitt is a document of how painful and sometimes petty American politics can be. The Romney it depicts can’t understand why rival Republican campaign managers hate him. He agonises about how negative campaign ads smeared him as a “flip-flopping Mormon”. He and his sons wonder aloud about the near impossibility of correcting what they believe is unfair branding. They fully appreciate how first impressions, especially negative images, can be hard to reverse.</p>
<p>Romney’s main message in the 2012 campaign was that America needed to lessen the tax burden on corporations and small businesses. He called for <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/mitt-romneys-rage-regulation/story?id=17128454">less regulation</a> and <a href="http://mittromneycentral.com/on-the-issues/limited-government/">less government</a>. He ran as a <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/167683/mitt-romneys-neocon-war-cabinet">neo-conservative</a> on foreign policy, pledging not to cut military spending. He promised to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/think-tanked/post/ask-a-think-tank-romneys-plan-to-repeal-obamacare-on-day-one/2012/07/02/gJQAxl0QIW_blog.html">end Obamacare</a>, which was actually modelled on the Massachusetts system that he <a href="http://hcfama.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=839&parentID=736&nodeID=2">enacted as governor</a>. He espoused socially conservative positions on <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/291860/romney-conservative-immigration-steve-baldwin">immigration</a>, <a href="http://mittromneycentral.com/on-the-issues/same-sex-marriage/">marriage equality</a> and abortion. Some of these positions were contrary to majority sentiment in the US but were fixed Republican dogma from which he could not waver.</p>
<p>Romney was unabashedly proud of being a successful capitalist, but sometimes came across as dismissive of those without <a href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/mitt-romney-make-business-experience-a-requirement-for-the-presidency/">business experience</a>. His opponents, in both parties, portrayed him as <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19682947">so rich</a> that he could not understand the average person. (It didn’t help that he was reluctant to release tax returns.) His strength was his ability to celebrate freedom and free enterprise, but many of his other policy initiatives seemed recycled and even cold-hearted. </p>
<p>Candidate Romney was attractive and persistent, but unlike <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEXOpm0H7QA">Ronald Reagan</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7EyYhbLn98">Bill Clinton</a>, or <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv9NwKAjmt0">Barack Obama</a>, he <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2h8ujX6T0A">could not</a> fire up a crowd. He gained a reputation for being formal and stiff.</p>
<p>This documentary – with wonderful footage from both the 2008 and the 2012 campaigns – reveals a more likable and sometimes even light-hearted and playful Mitt Romney than was ever seen in public. It also captures his understandable unease with (and sometimes disdain for) the strange and often demeaning presidential election process.</p>
<p>Mitt is a film for political junkies. It is unlikely to be a major hit or prizewinner. But its intimate, unrehearsed insider access to a patriotic and earnest national politician, one who struggles to find his way up the proverbial “greasy pole” of politics, makes for a poignant and winning film. It is undeniably a friendly bouquet presented in honour of Governor Romney, but it also leaves the viewer questioning the lengthy, convoluted and unseemly process by which Americans select their presidents.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/22445/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Cronin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Mitt, a newly released documentary about former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, provides an up-close look at the exhausting presidential election process in the U.S. This is no House of Cards when…Tom Cronin, McHugh Professor of American Institutions and Leadership, Colorado CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106112012-11-15T19:30:01Z2012-11-15T19:30:01ZObama’s second term challenges must include tackling climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17560/original/3s6tkw2g-1352779705.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The American people have spoken in favour of climate change by re-electing Barack Obama to a second presidential term.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr/350.org</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In his acceptance speech of November 6, Barack Obama at long last <a href="http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/obamas-victory-win-reason-and-moderation%22">reaffirmed the need</a> to address global warming. </p>
<p>But unfortunately he also reaffirmed the spurious goal of US oil independence, which can be at odds with climate policy when used to promote CO<sub>2</sub>-intensive options such as tar sands and shale oil. The fate of the <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/266855-energy-lobbyist-pipeline-decision-an-early-test-of-obamas-pro-oil-stance">Keystone tar sands pipeline</a> will be an early test of Obama’s bona fides on climate change as distinct from his <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-elections-and-environment-the-dubious-goal-of-us-energy-independence-10075">being hostage</a> to the “oil independence” goal and Big Oil.</p>
<p>If US climate change policy is to be more than cosmetic, the real questions should be about its part in an internally consistent set of fundamental policies within a “whole of government” approach.</p>
<h2>Pricing and regulating emissions</h2>
<p>In the 2008 presidential elections, both Obama and John McCain supported cap-and-trade as a means of meeting designated abatement targets by 2050. But pricing US greenhouse gas emissions has been abandoned since the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11671935">advent</a> of the Tea Party’s power in the Congressional elections of 2010.</p>
<p>However, such political difficulties need not preclude regulatory policy action, such as by the <a href="http://www.epa.gov/">Environmental Protection Agency</a>. The EPA <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/epa-unveils-new-standards-coal-power-plants_n_892486.html">has closed down</a> emissions-intensive, coal-fired power stations and blocked new ones. Total CO<sub>2</sub> emission reductions have also reflected federally subsidised growth in wind-power and tightened vehicle efficiency standards.</p>
<p>The aggregate level of US CO<sub>2</sub> emissions has in fact declined to mid-1990s levels. This is due also to the glut of natural gas which has displaced some coal-fired electricity generation. It is also an unintended side effect of the 2008 economic crisis, “off-shoring” (“deindustrialisation”) and the tripling of oil prices since 2003.</p>
<p>An integrated approach can address the above-noted political obstacles. Fiscal policy is a case in point.</p>
<h2>“Green” investment and fiscal policy</h2>
<p>To be effective, fiscal policy in the present deep slump needs expansionary investment programs but also to address the public debt concerns. Resulting sustainable economic growth helps the latter by augmenting tax revenues. Additional revenues can also be sourced from taxing the super-rich, as Obama is seeking to do, and by <a href="http://www.ecosocnsw.org.au/Portals/0/Aspromourgos%20-%20The%20General%20Theory%20After%2075%20Years.pdf">taxing beneficiaries</a> of infrastructure programs. Retrenching wasteful <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/01/obama-defense-cuts/1">military expenditures</a> (especially foreign) will also help.</p>
<p>To facilitate such investment in assets that are both productive and ecologically sound, the US also needs institutions such as Skidelsky and Martin’s proposed <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/apr/28/national-investment-bank">National Investment Bank</a>. Such a Bank (as the authors claim) “could take the lead in financing green technologies such as wind and geothermal power by evaluating and incorporating into its appraisals the value of their benefits to the broader economy”.</p>
<p>This proposal includes explicit criteria about due process and transparency, to prevent the kind of pork-barrelling evident in “Big Oil” and corn-based ethanol fuel supports. </p>
<p>A Republican-dominated House will no doubt seek to block such measures in favour of concessions to big business based on dubious <a href="http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/files/documents/CRSTaxesandtheEconomy%20Top%20Rates.pdf">“trickle down”</a> or <a href="http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rep/v25n2/a04v25n2.pdf">“sound finance”</a> ideologies. The solution is not <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/opinion/krugman-lets-not-make-a-deal.html">deals</a> with <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/11/what-happened-to-the-tea-party-and-the-blue-dogs/">economic libertarians</a> in the <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/11/07/tea-party-mortally-wounded-prospects-for-the-empire-strikes-back/">re-arranged Tea Party</a>.</p>
<p>Rather, the political challenge for the presidential arm would be to ensure that these elements bear the electoral consequences of seeking to grant further fiscal privileges to the rich at the expense of a sound macroeconomic strategy.</p>
<p>Effective policy and politics also need to include <a href="http://www.oecd.org/els/employmentpoliciesanddata/50503551.pdf">structural adjustment assistance</a> to ensure fair burden-sharing as well as effective information programs about <a href="http://theconversation.com/the-atmospheres-shift-of-state-and-the-origin-of-extreme-weather-events-9285">extreme climate events</a>, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/17/arctic-collapse-sea-ice">imminent</a> climate system “tipping points” and so on.</p>
<h2>International action on climate change</h2>
<p>Into Obama’s second term, it is a glaring anomaly that the three main long-run energy scenarios <a href="http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/more_highlights.cfm">published</a> by the US Energy Information Administration still do not even include a CO<sub>2</sub>-emission constrained case, such as the 450ppm scenario published by the International Energy Agency in its annual <a href="http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/">World Energy Outlook</a>.
The absence of such a scenario can only indicate that the US does not take this vital target seriously.</p>
<p>Regrettably, the US remains the only OECD member state that has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Given that such ratification requires congressional approval, this is not likely as long as Tea Party libertarian Republicanism holds sway in the House of Representatives. However, this obstacle does not mean the Obama administration is powerless internationally, any more than it is domestically.</p>
<p>Against this less than supportive political background, US performance regarding emissions abatement should be judged internationally on results and projected results rather than adherence to particular policy methods, optimal in theory but for now inaccessible for the evident political reasons.</p>
<h2>Turning to the Pacific</h2>
<p><a href="http://carnegieendowment.org/2012/10/04/what-should-next-american-president-do-about-china/dunx">Some commentators</a> are calling for the US to <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42448.pdf">“rebalance”</a> toward the Pacific and reduce its footprint in the Middle East, oil-rich and otherwise. This cannot be achieved until the US begins to <a href="https://theconversation.com/stabilising-the-middle-east-lessons-from-the-us-rapprochement-with-china-8547">normalise</a> its relations with both <a href="http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/blog/2072">Israel</a> and Iran.</p>
<p>Iran has the largest combined conventional oil and gas resource globally. It is the second largest holder of conventional gas reserves. Normalising Iran’s international relations would enable it to <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-iran-normalisation-could-fight-climate-change-9064">provide</a> CO<sub>2</sub>-saving natural gas to coal-dependent China and India.</p>
<p>At the same time, the US is facing a <a href="http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=3068">bonanza in non-conventional gas supplies</a>. In this context, US gas exports to China become an <a href="http://www.climatespectator.com.au/news/bhp-considers-exporting-us-shale-gas-asia">option</a>. This could not only be profitable but also reduce China’s alarming and still increasing coal dependence. </p>
<p>But this will not and should not happen unless a US federal administration responsibly observes the International Energy Agency’s <a href="http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/pressreleases/2012/may/name,27266,en.html">“Golden Rules”</a> for regulating non-conventional gas, including not venting the potent greenhouse gas <a href="https://theconversation.com/methane-makes-shale-gas-a-current-climate-danger-5020"> methane</a>. </p>
<p>A similar option but with prospects of a lower carbon footprint is the commercially driven export of the relevant US extraction technology to China, which has its own large untapped resources of non-conventional gas. </p>
<p>In this eventuality, once again ensuring strict obedience to the above-noted “Golden Rules” is another reason for expanding IEA membership to include China and other major energy powers not yet in the OECD club of rich nations. Such inclusion is a policy that the US should strongly support as part of its foreign energy policy, and a general policy of getting China (and other potential or actual adversaries such as Iran) <a href="http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/08/why_the_united_states_should_help_china_get_more_involved_in_world_affairs">“more involved”</a> in responsible global governance.</p>
<h2>Leading by (whose) example to reduce growth in oil use?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17559/original/h673pw93-1352777904.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Where will action on climate change sit on Barack Obama’s second term agenda?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Over the past 70 years, the US has not infrequently wielded the “oil weapon”, or at least threatened to do so by depriving other states of the ability to trade in this vital commodity. Examples have included importers (Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany in WWII, and as an ever-present threat to China) and exporters (Iran 1952-3, 1979-2012; Iraq 1991-2003). There is no doubt that China continues to hold these fears despite its symbiotic economic relationship with the US, and given the overwhelming global naval power of the US.</p>
<p>As Winston Churchill remarked, “safety and certainty in oil lies in variety and variety alone” - or as we would now say, “diversity” of both export and import. China is acting accordingly, through its so-called <a href="http://faculty.buffalostate.edu/qianx/index_files/ChinaOilQuest.pdf">“going out”</a> policy to access global supplies of oil and gas.</p>
<p>But such a policy also has its risks for regional and world peace. The planet, and certainly China, cannot sustain - ecologically or otherwise - the “American” model of escalating private motorisation, low rates of gasoline tax and consequent excessive oil use.</p>
<p>For Barack Obama, there is evidently much to be done in his second term to address climate change, both on a domestic and global scale. Whether he will take this responsibility seriously, however, remains to be seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10611/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barry Naughten does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In his acceptance speech of November 6, Barack Obama at long last reaffirmed the need to address global warming. But unfortunately he also reaffirmed the spurious goal of US oil independence, which can…Barry Naughten, Energy Economist, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106542012-11-14T04:43:20Z2012-11-14T04:43:20ZHeeding the echoes of history as global leadership shifts<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17486/original/k693hzwc-1352676456.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">US President Barack Obama meets with his soon to be Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping earlier this year.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Martin H. Simon</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>CHINA IN TRANSITION: As China goes through its secretive but widely anticipated leadership transition, the rest of the world is watching. This week, The Conversation takes an in depth look at the National Congress of the Communist Party of China.</em></p>
<p>The obsession with changing world orders and premature assumptions that the world is in flux is endemic to the human character. In this sense, we have never stopped being millenarian, hoping that somewhere along the line, the true order of things will stand before us, crystal clear and optimistic. </p>
<p>Two significant events have and are taking place: the concluded US presidential elections, and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/chinese-whispers-the-delicate-art-of-allocating-power-in-beijing-10523">18th Communist Party Congress</a> in China. Several other states in the Northeast Asian region, notably South Korea and Japan, will also see transitions in their leaderships over the next six months. The urge is then to speculate if these might actually change the contours of power, if at all.</p>
<p>In 1991, US President George H.W. Bush <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byxeOG_pZ1o">spoke</a> of a “New World Order”, buttressed by the nonsensical claims of Francis Fukuyama that history had ended with the triumph of liberal capitalism. With the end of the Cold War, the tedium of peace would set in, until the butcheries of Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia muddied the idyll. </p>
<p>In <a href="http://www3.unesco.org/manifesto2000/uk/uk_manifeste.htm">2000</a>, it was again assumed that a world of peace would descend upon the earth, only for this vision to be marred a year later by acts of spectacular violence when planes flew into the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. The language of fundamentalism and weapons proliferation replaced the language of hope, creating a new collection of concerned powers keen on preventing others from acquiring nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.</p>
<p>The leadership transitions that are now taking place do not change the current global order, tempting as it may be to think so. Our age is characterised by fears of <a href="http://www.fundforpeace.org/global/?q=fsi-grid2012">“failed states”</a>, transnational networks of terrorism, porous borders that are being penetrated by those seeking asylum from vast belts of poverty and institutional failure, and the emerging powers, notably the <a href="http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/">BRICS</a> (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). </p>
<p>According to Joseph S. Nye Jr., we are witnessing a <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2068114,00.html">“power transition”</a> in the rise of a region that is in actual fact its recovery. China’s current leadership transition is evidence of this. It should be remembered that in 1750, “Asia”, that broadly defined expanse of product and populace, had half the world’s population and produced half the world’s product. </p>
<p>Now there is a conspicuous emphasis on the shift of power from West to East. This has caused concern in terms of how existing powers will react. As James F. Hoge, Jr., <a href="http://www.udel.edu/globalagenda/2005/student/readings/FA-Hoge-GlobalPowerShift.html">claimed</a>, the awareness of that power shift “has not yet been translated into preparedness. And therein lies the danger: that Western countries will repeat their past mistakes”.</p>
<p>Where powers decline and others rise, conflict is often irresistible unless managed. <a href="http://slantchev.ucsd.edu/courses/pdf/doran-power-cycle.pdf">US scholar Charles Doran</a> suggests that integrating China into the global system in a peaceful manner is the greatest challenge of the 21st century. </p>
<p>The strategic language from the United States to the emergence of various other powers has proven to be a motley mix – on the one hand welcoming the prospects of greater trade with such a power as China, but remaining concerned that its modernisation and muscle in various theatres will challenge Washington’s primacy. (Beware, for instance, the Taiwan Strait). This has led to the use of what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has termed <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2097973,00.html">“smart power”</a>, code for another way of making sure that the 21st century is as American as the 20th. The language being used, as is so often the case in international relations theory, has simply been brought out of cold storage for immediate adaptation. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17496/original/mqcsp3g3-1352681071.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Delegates at the 18th Communist Party Congress in China are set to elect their new president.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Diego Azubel</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A most conspicuous example of this is the <a href="http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2012/10/29/the-softer-side-of-americas-pivot/">“pivot” to the Asia Pacific</a>, involving an increased presence of US ships in the Pacific and relocation of forces to bases in Australia. Few familiar with its historical currency will forget that the term <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jun/19/usa.comment">“the geographical pivot of history”</a> came from Halford John Mackinder’s 1904 address to the Royal Geographical Society. There, the imaginative geographer spoke of the “World-Island” comprising Europe, Asia and Africa, islands such as Japan and the British Isles, and further outlying islands (the Americas and Australasia). The pivotal centre of global politics, argued Mackinder, lay in the heartland of the World-Island – the land mass comprising Eurasia, much of it dominated by Russia.</p>
<p>There is now a flurry of speculation that the chess pieces are being moved in the Asia-Pacific region, as seen in the enthusiastic and somewhat vacuous <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">white paper</a> released by the Gillard government on Australia’s role in Asia. </p>
<p>American power is diminishing but will remain superlative. But what we need now are not nostrums about a century that has yet to come, rather a regime of cooperation that will cope with such matters as climate disruption, non-proliferation and militant fundamentalism. Such objectives will include following through with Barack Obama’s <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7983963.stm">Prague Agenda</a> for a world without nuclear weapons, establishing ground rules on global market engagement, and dealing with international financial behaviour. </p>
<p>But as with so much, these challenges will simply be an echo of what has come before. Not the repetition of history, as Mark Twain would say, but its rhyming.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10654/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Binoy Kampmark does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>CHINA IN TRANSITION: As China goes through its secretive but widely anticipated leadership transition, the rest of the world is watching. This week, The Conversation takes an in depth look at the National…Binoy Kampmark, Lecturer in Global Studies, Social Science & Planning, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106722012-11-12T19:26:04Z2012-11-12T19:26:04ZThe same-sex marriage implications for Australia from the US election and abroad<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17510/original/z6th9qbn-1352689343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Gay marriage advocates in Australia would have watched last week's US elections results with interest.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dean Lewins</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The main stories coming out of the recent elections in the United States have of course been that Barack Obama won a second term, and which party controls the House and the Senate. </p>
<p>However, the election produced a number of other interesting outcomes, not least of which is the overwhelming support for marriage equality in the four states in which this issue was on the ballot paper. The states of Maine, Maryland and Washington asked voters whether same-sex marriage should be legalised, and in each case a majority <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/vote-on-maryland-same-sex-marriage-law-is-close/2012/11/07/35fcac54-282f-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html">voted in favour of marriage equality</a>. This is the first time that same-sex marriage has been endorsed by popular vote.</p>
<p>In <a href="http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/11/09/marriage-how/">Minnesota</a>, voters were presented with a proposal to amend the state constitution to define marriage as being only between a man and a woman. That initiative was defeated. Thus, at the recent election, every jurisdiction in the United States that considered same-sex marriage came down in favour of marriage equality.</p>
<p>And we should not ignore the fact that Barack Obama was given another term as President after <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/world/evolved-obama-backs-gay-marriage-20120510-1ydsj.html">pledging his support</a> for marriage equality, while Mitt Romney, who opposes gay marriage, was soundly defeated.</p>
<p>When these developments in the United States are considered in the context of changes happening in other countries, as well as within Australia, there is a sense that the momentum for change is turning into an unstoppable force.</p>
<p>For example, Spain’s Constitutional Court has just held that the gay marriage laws enacted in 2005, were <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-spain-gaymarriage-idUSBRE8A60CK20121107">constitutionally valid</a>: A decision welcomed by the 22,000 gay couples who were married in Spain in the last seven years.</p>
<p>In France, the government last week <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2229620/French-set-legalise-gay-marriage-despite-vocal-opposition-religious-leaders.html">approved a bill</a> that will allow same-sex couples to marry and adopt children, with the French parliament due to vote on it by the middle of next year.</p>
<p>The Scottish government announced in July that it will <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/25/scotland-legalise-same-sex-marriage">introduce legislation</a> to legalise same-sex marriage, and the British Prime Minister, David Cameron has <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9425174/We-will-legalise-gay-marriage-by-2015-says-David-Cameron.html">vowed to introduce legislation</a> opening up the institution of marriage to same-sex couples, before the next general election.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, in New Zealand, a bill to amend the Marriage Act to specifically allow same-sex couples to marry <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/newzealand/9506447/New-Zealands-parliament-votes-in-favour-of-gay-marriage-law.html">passed its first reading</a> in August, with 80 votes in favour, 40 votes against, and one abstention. The Prime Minister, John Key supports the legislation. It has been referred to a Select Committee which received over 20,000 public submissions, and is due to report back to Parliament by February 2013 regarding whether or not the Bill should be passed.</p>
<p>Closer to home, the recent elections in the ACT saw the Greens give their support to Labor to form government subject to a <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/liberal-sees-little-chance-of-act-win/story-e6frfku9-1226509161917">number of conditions</a>, including that the ACT government legislate for marriage equality. Of course, not being a state, any marriage law in the ACT can be overturned by federal parliament, in addition to being challenged in the High Court.</p>
<p>New South Wales may be one step closer to legalising same-sex marriage at a state level with the election last month of independent Alex Greenwich into the Lower House, in a by-election in the seat of Sydney. Greenwich, the former national convener of Australian Marriage Equality, <a href="http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/greenwich-passionate-about-many-issues-20121028-28ddb.html">has indicated</a> that he will introduce a bill for same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>Notwithstanding this progress on multiple fronts, we need to remember that the past few months have also seen the defeat of bills to legalise same-sex marriage at the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-19/same-sex-marriage-bill-voted-down/4270016">federal level</a> as well as in the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-27/tasmania-upper-house-votes-down-gay-marriage/4284538">Tasmanian Upper House</a>. However, the recent developments abroad, as well as in the ACT, suggest that the tide may be turning.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17516/original/rzxgznhw-1352689966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Obama, seen here at a LGBT-sponsored fundraiser, has expressed support for gay marriage.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Michael Nelson</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Legislating for same-sex marriage is supported by the Australian Human Rights Commission which in September issued a <a href="http://www.humanrights.gov.au/about/media/media_releases/2012/80_12.html">position paper</a>, stating that “the fundamental human rights principle of equality means that civil marriage should be available, without discrimination, to all couples, regardless of sex, sexual orientation or gender identity”.</p>
<p>The Commission rejects the idea that it is sufficient to provide gay couples with an inferior form of relationship recognition such as civil partnerships, noting that: “in the absence of a right to civil marriage for same-sex couples, a civil union scheme would continue to reinforce the different value placed on relationships between opposite-sex and same-sex couples”. This reflects the view that providing gay couples with only civil unions is tantamount to the discredited system of “separate but equal” encapsulated in the Jim Crow racial segregation laws of the United States. Or, as Justice Lafome of the Ontario Superior Court <a href="http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onscdc/doc/2002/2002canlii42749/2002canlii42749.html">said</a>, “any ‘alternative’ to marriage…simply offers the insult of formal equivalency without the promise of substantive equality”.</p>
<p>The rate at which countries and states are legislating for marriage equality shows no sign of slowing down anytime soon. If anything, the election results in the United States are likely to motivate advocates of same-sex marriage to increase their efforts, which may stimulate a flurry of reforms across many jurisdictions. Such moves would be in harmony with the fundamental human rights principles of equality and non-discrimination as articulated by the Australian Human Rights Commission, and consistent with the global trend in favour of marriage equality.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10672/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paula Gerber does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The main stories coming out of the recent elections in the United States have of course been that Barack Obama won a second term, and which party controls the House and the Senate. However, the election…Paula Gerber, Associate Professor, Human Rights Law, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106382012-11-12T03:51:22Z2012-11-12T03:51:22ZObama’s legacy could lie in the Middle East, but will he go for it?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17453/original/q8njjmzk-1352426965.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Iranian students demonstrate in Tehran to mark the 33rd anniversary of US Embassy takeover.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Abedin Taherkenareh</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The re-election of Barack Obama to a second term will have significant ramifications for an America struggling with economic and social difficulties. But will it have the same impact on residents of the Middle East? What will four more years of Obama mean for the chimera of peace in the region?</p>
<p>In their first term, presidents tend to have one eye constantly focused on winning a second term. That means pushing through their pet legislation early on and then keeping a steady hand on the tiller in the last year or so. But it’s when they do win that second term that they start to relax and get creative. It’s also when the “L word” crops up – legacy.</p>
<h2>Legacy politics</h2>
<p>A second-term president will start to think of how he will be remembered by history and inevitably develop the ambition of leaving the world a better place. For Ronald Reagan it was the defeat of communism. For George W. Bush it was the defeat of terrorism and the ousting of Saddam. For Bill Clinton it was keeping his trousers zipped and surviving impeachment.</p>
<p>The question is, what will Obama choose? America has plenty of problems at home, and it may well be that the president will place more focus there than in overseas adventures. Barring some sort of 9/11 type outrage, a major overseas military intervention seems unlikely.</p>
<p>The “bunny in the headlights” response from America over the Arab Spring and the ongoing Syrian apocalypse has been the most obvious demonstration of the domestic focus of Obama’s first term. In part two, it’s doubtful that he will be able to do much to address the instability in the fledgling democracies or sort out the mess in Damascus. And if he’s smart, he won’t even try. In all the metaphors of ships and reefs, Syria is like a mighty lighthouse blinking out a message that clearly says “keep away”. Plus it’s easy to blame the Russians and Chinese for not making progress.</p>
<h2>The Persian gambit</h2>
<p>So if Obama does want to create some sort of legacy in the Middle East, it is most likely going to be centred on Iran. Snipping the red wire on the nuclear doomsday device is the obvious thing, but a far nobler ambition would be bringing Tehran back into the community of nations so that everyone can live in peace and harmony.</p>
<p>It sounds implausible. But it’s already happening.</p>
<p>The Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/shock-report-valerie-jarrett-leading-secret-talks-with-iran/">reported last week</a> that secret negotiations between America and Iran had occurred in Bahrain. Not only that, but they had been going on for months. The jury is still out on the veracity of that story, but some sort of diplomatic approach would have been likely. The <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9523230/Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad-concedes-Iran-sanctions-hurting-economy.html">sanctions on Iran have hurt</a> the country badly, and it’s likely that economic concessions will be the preferred bargaining chips there. The beauty of secret negotiations is that the media pressure is removed and the parties don’t feel the need to paint themselves into a corner. The rapprochement of Libya in 2003 followed this pattern of hush-hush talks and economic dickering.</p>
<p>One milestone to co-operation will come in <a href="http://www.jpost.com/USPresidentialrace/Article.aspx?id=290848">June 2013 when Iran holds its own presidential elections</a>. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be stepping down, having served out his second term. Foreign policy in Iran is really controlled by the Supreme Leader and his various counsellors, but with Ahmadinejad out of the way, everyone can save face. A new president may be the sock puppet tasked with running a more conciliatory foreign policy. Lightening up on the “death to Israel” stuff and turning off the centrifuges will be steps along the way.</p>
<p>There is a time limit on negotiations though. If Iran keeps stonewalling, the hawks will be calling for more direct action. But both sides know that the use of force is out. Even Netanyahu’s own military commanders <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/benjamin-netanyahus-iran-plan-thwarted-by-defence-chiefs/story-fnb64oi6-1226511800845">shut him down</a> when he asked them to plan a strike. But if talks go on too long Iran will continue to implode economically. That’s bad for the ayatollahs because poor and hungry people get desperate. But it’s also bad for the West because it’s easy for the ayatollahs to direct some of the blame and hate outwards against the Zionists, Imperialists, Crusaders and so on, thus making reconciliation harder.</p>
<p>For Obama, the pieces are definitely there on the table. It’s just a matter of whether he wants to play the game.</p>
<h2>The Clinton factor</h2>
<p>Hilary Clinton’s <a href="http://www.thenewstribe.com/2012/11/08/changes-imminent-in-obamas-new-cabinet-hillary-clinton-likely-to-resign/">impending resignation</a> from the cabinet is one factor that could cause a significant change in American relations with the Middle East. Clinton, a staunch friend of Israel, got through a lot of business on behalf of her boss.</p>
<p>Under her, the relationship between Israel and America has never been closer and more productive, especially in terms of military and intelligence co-operation. But of course that closeness comes at the price of alienating the Arabs. Whoever succeeds Clinton will have the same tightrope to walk. Plus there is always the possibility that Hilary will crop up as a candidate for the White House <a href="http://www.lawyerherald.com/articles/2389/20121107/hilary-clinton-secretary-state-resigns-despite-obama.htm">herself in 2016</a>.</p>
<p>So in the next four years, as always, the Middle East will throw up a series of challenges to the American President, if only in the context of energy security. But when Obama takes the oath at his second inauguration in January, it is likely that the region will be consuming far less of his attention than that of his predecessor George W. Bush when he stood on the Capitol steps for his return to office in 2005.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10638/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mat Hardy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The re-election of Barack Obama to a second term will have significant ramifications for an America struggling with economic and social difficulties. But will it have the same impact on residents of the…Mat Hardy, Lecturer in Middle East Studies , Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105162012-11-12T00:16:32Z2012-11-12T00:16:32ZAustralia and Obama’s return<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17369/original/g8294m87-1352330246.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Now that Barack Obama has been re-elected for a second term, what are the implications for Australia?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>All the world has a stake America’s presidential election. Barack Obama has seen off a surprisingly strong showing from Republican candidate Mitt Romney and now has four final years in the executive office. </p>
<p>The most immediate consequence of this for Australia is that it can enjoy the benefits of continuity. Significant amounts of time are lost as an outgoing president enters a
<a href="http://www.politico.com//news/stories/1112/83353.html">“lame duck”</a> phase and the new administration begins a steep learning curve. This has been avoided. PM Julia Gillard has an <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gillard-in-obamas-closest-dozen/story-fn59niix-1226513645026">excellent relationship</a> with President Obama, and she does not have to spend time waiting for and then developing a relationship with a new president. </p>
<p>Obama does not intend to make any drastic changes to his policy settings. The high value placed on the alliance with Australia will continue. The advantages – of support, intelligence and equipment as well as political access – will persist, but so will the downsides. Australia will continue to have to manage the knock-on effects of being so closely linked to the US. This includes the risk of being drawn into conflicts that could otherwise have been avoided, or fuelling the lingering perception that Australia is a <a href="https://theconversation.com/asian-century-white-paper-talks-the-talk-can-australia-walk-the-walk-9902">reluctant Asian power</a>. </p>
<p>American foreign policy will continue to be shaped by <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/us/politics/back-to-bargaining-table-with-fiscal-cliff-dead-ahead.html?_r=0">fiscal austerity</a>. The alliance has been an astonishingly good deal for Australia for a very long time and it should come as no surprise that, when faced with grim economic times at home, the US asks its allies to carry a greater burden. Given how well Australia has fared in recent years, and how loudly the government has crowed about it, Australia must expect that Washington will seek a greater contribution to the alliance in coming years.</p>
<p>The main foreign policy focus of the first Obama administration has been the <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42448.pdf">“rebalancing”</a> of its global efforts away from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and toward Asia. The Asian focus has three priorities: that China’s rise aligns with America’s interests; that the US remains the region’s pre-eminent power; and that the existing foundations of the region’s order remain in place. Australia is <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/dear-mr-president-we-beg-to-differ-over-the-future-of-asia-20111115-1nh36.html">tied</a> to America’s vision of Asia and it should be grateful that Romney was not elected as he promised to challenge China much more explicitly. </p>
<p>Yet even with Obama’s more measured diplomacy, it seems increasingly unlikely that China’s and America’s approach to Asia are compatible. The next four years will see more friction among Asia’s major powers than in the past. This friction will result from both minor disputes as well as the bigger contest about how the region’s international relations should be arranged. Australia is tied to the US in this bigger contest and managing the consequences of this will be a pre-eminent challenge for Australian diplomacy. </p>
<p>As both Romney and Obama emphasised in the campaign, America’s foreign policy will be fundamentally shaped by the state of the American economy. In particular the most important item in Obama’s in-tray will be <a href="http://www.politico.com//news/stories/1112/83459.html">striking a budget deal</a> with Congress that prevents the automatic cuts to spending and taxation that will throw the US back into recession. If he fails then the implications for Australia and the world will be immense.</p>
<p>Most obviously it would tip the world economy into a “triple dip” recession with flow on consequences for Australia’s economy. The huge cuts in defence spending would also significantly influence America’s military capacity in Asia. This would destabilise the region and put even greater pressure on Australia to increase its defence spending. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17462/original/3vyqwcrt-1352431350.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">PM Julia Gillard calls President Obama to congratulate him on his re-election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Auspic</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The problem is that the campaign further revealed the huge divisions within the US that created the political gridlock behind the budget problems. Obama’s victory in both the Electoral College and popular vote should help but given that he now has a reduced share of the popular vote he does not have much leverage to force a reluctant Congress to compromise. Indeed, Romney may have been better placed to deal with the Republican-dominated House. The cliff remains are very real prospect. </p>
<p>America has retained the services of President Obama. For Australia, there are distinct advantages in this choice: continuing good relations, excellent access in Washington, a more predictable regional policy and no time lost in administration transition. However, just because the alliance with the US is strong and Canberra’s standing in the US is high, it does not follow that this is an unmitigated good for Australia. The nature of our relationship with the US brings risks – risks that so far we have been able to manage – but which we tend to pretend do not exist. </p>
<p>Along with welcoming a second Obama administration, Australians would do well to begin to think much more carefully about the challenges that our close relationship with America will bring in the coming four years.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10516/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>In 2012 Nick Bisley was a Visiting Fellow at the East West Center in Washington DC.</span></em></p>All the world has a stake America’s presidential election. Barack Obama has seen off a surprisingly strong showing from Republican candidate Mitt Romney and now has four final years in the executive office…Nick Bisley, Professor, Program Convenor, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106392012-11-11T21:11:20Z2012-11-11T21:11:20ZForeign affairs: what can we expect from Obama’s second term?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17446/original/t62dsyvj-1352423964.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">President Barack Obama, pictured here with Chinese President Hu Jintao, will continue to 'pivot' to Asia.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Alex Wong</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Sitting in New York, in the aftermath of an American election dominated by a domestic agenda, it is easy to lose sight of both the pressing external problems that the US continues to face, and the impact its decisions often have on a wary international community. </p>
<p>It used to be the case that that the bipartisan character of US foreign policy was so embedded that Americans could justifiably claim that “politics stopped at the water’s edge”. The president would consult the opposing party on foreign policy issues and act in accordance with a broad conception of national interest without recourse to electoral considerations. </p>
<p>Those days are long gone. Foreign policy has become as politicised as any other dimension of policy – and with it the differences in foreign policy between parties more evident.</p>
<h2>The expectations game</h2>
<p>Since the election of George W. Bush, foreigners have increasingly recognised this growing wedge. Certainly, with a few notable exceptions, large swathes of policymakers and the general public abroad will be relieved, if not elated, by President Obama’s re-election. While recent opinion polls have suggested that Obama’s popularity abroad has declined, it nonetheless remains the case that if foreigners were allowed to vote in America’s elections, Al Gore and John Kerry – like President Obama - would have been elected in a landslide. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, the hefty weight of expectations sits on President Obama’s shoulders. Within hours of the election, British Prime Minister David Cameron made comments suggesting that he anticipated the president being receptive to a more muscular and interventionist approach in Syria; a spokesman for Pope Benedict expressed the hope he would promote liberty and justice abroad; and a variety of leaders, including United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and French President Francois Hollande, encouraged a greater emphasis on climate change.</p>
<p>Shackled by such expectations, what can we realistically expect from a second Obama administration in terms of its foreign policy? </p>
<p>Will we simply see more of the same or will there be notable departures from its prior course, as the administration brings in new staff and retools for the next four years? The answer has two components.</p>
<h2>Softly softly</h2>
<p>The first part focuses on the general tone the administration adopts and the manner by which it pursues its foreign policy. President Obama’s recognition that the US cannot control outcomes, and can only lead if others choose to follow it, was a hallmark of the Obama administration and is likely to carry over in his second term. </p>
<p>In stark contrast to his predecessor, Obama has consistently adopted both a more multilateral approach and a humbler tone. His comments to American audiences stress the exemplary, indeed unique qualities of the United States, and its capacity for global leadership. But his speeches to foreign audiences are striking in their lack of arrogance – a tendency that formed the basis for candidate Romney’s electoral claim that Obama’s visits abroad early in his first term constituted little more than “an apology tour”. </p>
<p>The roots of this approach stems from the president’s keen recognition that America currently suffers from an “esteem deficit” among both allies and enemies alike – and as a result, a profound wavering in its influence. As he said in his victory speech in Chicago, “We want to pass on a country that’s safe and respected and admired around the world.” </p>
<p>This goal of restoring America’s lost reputation has been a major reason why President Obama has invested so much time, effort and resources in multilateral diplomacy, engaging energetically in organisations such as the United Nations and the World Bank – institutions that George Bush either openly disparaged or tried to dominate. These efforts have come at a price: there has been effective “push back” on numerous US initiatives, with significant grumbling from the American public as a result. </p>
<p>Yet this more patient approach to foreign policy is likely to continue in his second term. Certainly, the oft-rumoured replacement of the very successful Hilary Clinton with John Kerry as Secretary of State suggests as such. </p>
<p>What may change here is the behaviour of some foreign leaders who thought they could outlast the president. Iran, for example, will top the list of issues he has to address. Its leadership, knowing that sanctions will remain in effect, will have to adjust their tactics in view of its continued debilitating effects on their economy. The same is true for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose support for Obama’s more patient approach on the same issue has been transparently faint. </p>
<p>In sum, President Obama’s recognition that the US cannot control outcomes, and can only lead if others choose to follow it, was a hallmark of the Obama administration and is likely to carry over in his second term.</p>
<h2>New threats</h2>
<p>The second answer to the question of whether US foreign policy will change concerns the key issues that the president will hope to address – as opposed to those unanticipated ones he will be forced to address. Obama’s re-election ensures that the wind down in Afghanistan, America’s longest and largely forgotten war, will continue. Iran, as said, will top the agenda. </p>
<p>Yet when asked in a presidential debate about the greatest threat facing the US, the president’s response was immediate, predictable and succinct – terrorism. No doubt this played to his political strengths both as the commander-in-chief who bought down Osama Bin Laden, and to the continued security concerns of the American public fed on a steady diet of news about thwarted terrorist plots. </p>
<p>But in another way the answer was surprising for its lack of imagination. Indeed, in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy that ravaged the American East Coast, it will be surprising if the president does not renew his efforts to conclude a global agreement on climate change, emboldened by renewed public opinion at home. </p>
<p>While national security concerns – nuclear proliferation, energy security and terrorism – will remain firmly on his foreign policy agenda, they will likely be augmented by human security concerns that now threaten the safety of security of Americans in new ways.</p>
<h2>The China pivot</h2>
<p>The elephant in the room, and the big question for the next four years, will be America’s relationship with China. These foreign policy choices will be enmeshed in the president’s continued “pivot” towards Asia.</p>
<p>Issues such as any proposed Syrian intervention may firmly pull the President back towards NATO and Europe. But the abiding issue, the most important one of his second term, will be whether America will attempt to create an equivalent organisation in Asia, or to rely on a web of bilateral agreements in addressing China’s increasing global importance. </p>
<p>The answer to this question, in the years ahead, may ultimately be regarded as the <em>sine qua non</em> of president Obama’s second term.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10639/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Reich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Sitting in New York, in the aftermath of an American election dominated by a domestic agenda, it is easy to lose sight of both the pressing external problems that the US continues to face, and the impact…Simon Reich, Professor in Division of Global Affairs, Rutgers UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106212012-11-09T03:39:28Z2012-11-09T03:39:28ZTea Party goes cold as US voters reject the far right<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17447/original/385mkbgn-1352424759.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=308%2C475%2C3222%2C2362&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The party may be over for right-wing republicans.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">sobyrne99</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Tea Party Movement appeared to have become a major force in American politics in the <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2010_Elections/vote-2010-elections-tea-party-winners-losers/story?id=12023076#.UJxWG2_MikM">2010 mid-term elections</a>, sweeping 87 new Republicans into the lower house, biting into the Democrats’ lead in the senate, and monstering mainstream Republicans into pushing the party further to the right.</p>
<p>Just two years later, the results are starkly different, with Tea Party-aligned candidates causing <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/us/politics/todd-akin-provokes-ire-with-legitimate-rape-comment.html">considerable embarrassment</a>, dragging down the Republican vote and costing it eminently winnable Senate seats — and perhaps even the presidency.</p>
<p>The most epic failure was in Indiana, where six-term Senator <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/richard-lugar-loses-primary-nomination-to-conservative-challenger-richard-mourdock/2012/05/08/gIQANcJjBU_story.html">Richard Lugar</a>, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and an internationally respected expert on nuclear disarmament, lost the Republican primary election in May. The successful challenger, Richard Mourdock, mounted a well financed campaign with support from the Tea Party movement, the National Rifle Association and such arch-conservative lobby groups as the Club for Growth, Red State and FreedomWorks. Mourdock also came armed with endorsements from Tea Party favourites Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann.</p>
<p>Lugar had been enormously popular with voters in general elections, winning at least two-thirds of the vote in 1988, 1994 and 2000. In 2006, the Democrats didn’t stand a candidate against him, with Lugar recording 87% of the vote against his Libertarian challenger.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17450/original/85z832c8-1352425191.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Republican stalwart Richard Lugar, seen here with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in 2001, was defeated by Tea Party sponsored Richard Mourdock.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">DPA/Wolfgang Kumm</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Although Lugar received a 77% lifetime conservative rating from the American Conservative Union — and 100% in more recent years — he was nevertheless painted as too liberal and accommodating. Among other sins, he had voted to confirm Obama’s two Supreme Court nominees, supported the auto industry bailout and indicated sympathy for immigration law reform.</p>
<p>In contrast, Mourdock argued that “the time for being collegial is past, it’s time for confrontation”. He subsequently became infamous for his <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20054737">debate comment</a> that “even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen”. Although Mitt Romney easily won Indiana with more than 54% of the vote, Mourdock registered only 44% (barely half Lugar’s last tally) in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/07/us/politics/indiana-senate-race.html?_r=0">losing a very safe Republican Senate seat</a> to Democrat Joe Donnelly.</p>
<p>This phenomenon was repeated in other critical seats, with conservative voters having to split their votes to support Romney for president, but shun the Tea Party radicals on the lower part of the ticket.</p>
<p>In Missouri, Tea Party Republican Todd Aikin — also highly controversial for his “legitimate rape” remarks — was soundly <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/11/06/akin-mccaskill-missouri-senate/1687873/">beaten by Senator Claire McCaskill</a>, who retained her seat despite struggling badly in earlier polls. Mitt Romney won Missouri with about 54% of the vote, but only 39% could stomach Aikin.</p>
<p>In North Dakota, another staunchly Republican state carried by Romney with nearly 59% of the vote, Tea Party Republican Rick Berg <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/heidi-heitkamp-election-results-2012_n_2049748.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012">lost to Democrat Heidi Heitkamp</a>. As a state legislator in 2007, Berg co-sponsored a bill to make it a serious felony to get an abortion, even for victims of rape or incest. However, it was a bigger source of controversy during the campaign that he persisted in referring to Heitkamp as “Heidi-Ho” and repeatedly mentioned that she is “childless”. Similarly, in the Florida and Ohio Senate races, Tea Party Republicans fell significantly below Romney’s tally in losing to incumbent Democrats in states that the GOP thought it could win.</p>
<p>The impact of the Tea Party was felt in other Republican losses as well, if less directly. In Maine, moderate three-term Republican <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/maine-sen-olympia-snowe-to-retire-in-blow-to-gop/2012/02/28/gIQAkzWkgR_blog.html">Senator Olympia Snowe suddenly announced her retirement</a>, explaining that politics had become too divisive and her party too right-wing. Snowe got nearly 75% of the vote in 2006, and would likely have done so again. However, the vote of her successor as Republican candidate fell to 31%, with former Governor Angus King enticed into the race as a liberal independent when Snowe withdrew. King is certain to vote with the Democrats in the Senate.</p>
<p>In Massachusetts, <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/01/republican_scott_brown_wins_ke.html">Scott Brown</a> shocked the Democratic Party to its core by winning the seat made vacant in 2009 by the death of Senator Teddy Kennedy. This heralded the arrival of the Tea Party as a major force and foreshadowed the major gains to come in 2010. In office, and then seeking re-election in a liberal state, Brown has taken a more moderate stance than most fellow Tea Partiers. Brown exceeded Romney’s vote tally in Massachusetts by 8%, but Elizabeth Warren <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Democrat-Warren-wins-Senate-seat-in-Mass-4012185.php">recaptured the seat</a> for the Democrats.</p>
<p>In the Wisconsin Senate race, Democratic Rep <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/07/politics/wisconsin-tammy-baldwin-senate/index.html">Tammy Baldwin</a> — a strong liberal and the first openly gay candidate from a major party — defeated Tommy Thompson, a former Governor and Secretary of Health and Human Services under President George W Bush. A mainstream Republican, Thompson faced a bruising primary battle from Tea Party-supported challengers, depleting his campaign of critical funds and energy.</p>
<p>Likewise, a number of Tea Party stalwarts in the House of Representative lost or suffered reduced margins of victory. Congressional Tea Party Caucus founder and erstwhile presidential candidate <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/11/07/michelle-bachmann-squeaks-by-in-minnesota/">Michelle Bachmann</a> squeaked back into office in Wisconsin after a tough challenge from businessman Jim Graves, and she will surely face another serious challenge in 2014 now that she is regarded as vulnerable.</p>
<p>Illinois Rep Joe Walsh is a Tea Party warrior and self-described “Congressional Enemy No 1”, who was elected in the 2010 tidal wave. He is perhaps most famous for shouting “Quit lying!” during President Obama’s address on the debt ceiling to a joint sitting of Congress. Walsh’s recent campaign was heavily funded by FreedomWorks and other Tea Party-aligned groups, but he nevertheless was beaten by nearly ten points by Democrat <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-usa-campaign-illinois-duckworth-idUSBRE8A60RN20121107">Tammy Duckworth</a>, a former Black Hawk helicopter pilot who lost both legs to a rocket attack in Iraq. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83476.html">Allen West</a> — a very high profile Tea Party standard bearer, and a rare African-American in this movement — narrowly lost to a political newcomer in Florida, despite leading in the pre-election polls.</p>
<p>History is not likely to be on the Tea Party’s side. If
“demography is destiny”, as Auguste Comte once said, the American electorate is rapidly moving away from the Tea Party, which is heavily comprised of ageing white men without college degrees. Obama got the votes of only 40% of this demographic, but he was able to win comfortably because he received 55% of the vote from women, more than 60% of young voters, more than 90% of Black voters, and more than 70% of Latino and Jewish voters — and the proportion of Blacks, Asians and Latinos is steadily growing.</p>
<p>The Tea Party movement remains unrepentant, accepting no blame for the disappointing election results. Indeed, according to the <a href="http://www.teaparty.org/">TeaParty.org</a> website, the root of the problem was that Romney and the Republicans played it too safe, were not confrontational enough, and, in conjunction with a tame and co-opted media, refused to highlight President Obama’s “record of crimes, fraud and treachery”.</p>
<p>Americans have made plain their distaste for the hyper-partisanship and gridlock in Washington, while so many pressing issues of national and international importance fail to be addressed. The Tea Party Movement has pitched the Republican Party to the extreme right while there is a long history of Americans preferring their politicians to govern from the centre. Apart from pursuing all-or-nothing policies verging on nihilism, and selecting candidates that even many Republican voters can’t support, the Tea Partiers have seriously harmed the Republican movement by discouraging potentially excellent, moderate candidates from standing, because they are wary of the expense and the exposure to attacks from the right during the primary campaign process.</p>
<p>As the one-time moderate Republican Mitt Romney recently learned to his cost, it is difficult to credibly return to the middle after so much time has been spent tacking sharply to the right.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10621/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Weisbrot does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Tea Party Movement appeared to have become a major force in American politics in the 2010 mid-term elections, sweeping 87 new Republicans into the lower house, biting into the Democrats’ lead in the…David Weisbrot, Emeritus Professor of Law and Honorary Professor of Medicine , University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106192012-11-09T00:34:17Z2012-11-09T00:34:17ZRace to the White House: Joe Siracusa, Stephanie Brookes<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17413/original/m8wzzk3v-1352356234.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Obama gets four more years in office.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Uwe Anspach</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The race to the White House is over, and Barack Obama has won. </p>
<p>Every week for two months, we’ve been talking to Australia’s top US experts on the ins and outs of the 2012 US presidential campaign as part of our podcast series.</p>
<p>In this final instalment, we pull apart Obama’s election win with RMIT’s Joseph Siracusa and Stephanie Younane Brookes of the University of Melbourne.</p>
<p>We hope you’ve enjoyed the ride.</p>
<iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F66584533&auto_play=false&show_artwork=false&color=ff7700"></iframe>
<p><em>Podcast produced by Felicity James.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10619/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The race to the White House is over, and Barack Obama has won. Every week for two months, we’ve been talking to Australia’s top US experts on the ins and outs of the 2012 US presidential campaign as part…Joseph Siracusa, Professor in Human Security and International Diplomacy, RMIT UniversityStephanie Brookes, Lecturer, School of Journalism, Australian and Indigenous Studies, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106062012-11-08T19:44:33Z2012-11-08T19:44:33Z‘Four more years’: that Obama tweet and the politics of intimacy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17387/original/ncqvct4y-1352338757.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=60%2C167%2C392%2C259&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Obama's victory tweet set Twitter records.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">@BarackObama</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been quite a year for tweeters. First we had the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-01/the-twitter-olympics/4167938">Twitter Olympics</a>. Now, Barack Obama’s first impulse, on hearing of his re-election as President of the United States, was to tweet out <a href="https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/266030802482126848">thanks</a> to the American electorate. The tweet that followed - a <a href="https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/266031293945503744">joyous declaration</a> of “four more years!”, together with a photograph of the first couple embracing - set records for the most shares and retweets ever.</p>
<p>Back in 2010, the US Library of Congress <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/technology/15twitter.html">announced</a> it was compiling a Twitter Archive. The pithy, 140-character thoughts of millions would, so the argument went, constitute an invaluable resource for historians of the future. Yesterday’s tweets from team Obama are sure to have pride of place in the collection. </p>
<p>This is because they encapsulate two important ideas. The first is that social media is a driving force in changing the nature of political communication; what it is, and where it happens. The second is that these changes have been afoot since the 1930s, and have gathered global pace over the past quarter of a century.</p>
<p>The Michelle/Barack hug is a testament to what UK scholar James Stanyer <a href="http://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745644769">calls</a> the deepening “intimization” of politics.</p>
<p>It’s easy to think that Obama takes naturally to social media, alongside talk shows and the like, because he is simply a funny guy who can <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsWpvkLCvu4">just about dance</a> and is at ease with himself and his world. Stanyer, on the other hand, argues that all of this only matters because media politics compels politicians to spend more and more time telling the public about their homes, their families and even their sex lives.</p>
<p>Obama, in this sense, expresses a trend. And “the hug” isn’t a random picture. It is an image that is only possible because of a number of shifts in media politics that have been rumbling for some time.</p>
<p>Why was “the hug” one of the first images that the world saw of the re-elected President, and why has it been so widely shared? To find answers, we can look at how media have affected campaigning since the 1930s.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/obama-unemployment-rate-fdr_n_2088102.html">Much has been made</a> of the fact that Obama has been the first president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt to be re-elected with US unemployment being as high as it is. The two men share something else; they have both been credited with grasping new media resources to establish intimate relationships with the electorate.</p>
<p>After Campaign 2008, <a href="http://www.journalism.org/node/12772">American researchers</a> who compared Obama and John McCain’s social media strategies concluded that the former had a far better grasp on how social media works. Team McCain saw Facebook and Twitter as simply another means of getting information out to voters. Team Obama understood that media is about striking up relationships.</p>
<p>According to media historian David Ryfe, Roosevelt managed the same trick in the 1930s. Roosevelt’s famous <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/fireside.php">“Fireside Chats”</a> used radio’s unique capacity to create the impression that the speaker is speaking to you to reassure Americans that the President cared and could fix things, even as the Depression bit hard.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17395/original/fqrp97kp-1352345269.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Franklin D. Roosevelt having a fireside chat in Washington DC, 28 April 1935.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wikimedia Commons</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By the 1940s, sociologists were finding that the public had developed considerable social investment in paying attention to political messages. In their study of “opinion leaders” in the late 1940s, Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarsfeld discovered that knowing about and sharing media content had become a vital source of social status for people who otherwise had little or none. Being able to update friends on the latest developments in political campaigns was a source of peer group kudos. Social media sharing is a clear continuation of this dynamic.</p>
<p>In the 1960s, attention turned to television. Much is made of the famous <a href="http://www.museum.tv/eotvsection.php?entrycode=kennedy-nixon">Kennedy/Nixon debate</a>. But Stanyer argues that the defining aspect of Kennedy’s media policy was his willingness to literally let the media into his home. This began a trend across OECD nations, where more and more time is spent looking at leaders’ houses, their spouses, their children, their birthdays and their holidays. The casual intimacy of the Michelle/Barack hug makes perfect sense within this history.</p>
<p>So, the “change” wrought by social media over American politics is no change at all. Of course Obama would turn to Twitter first on hearing of his victory, and of course one of the first things he would do is tweet a picture of him hugging the First Lady.
Many US Presidents have found success by using media to enchant and energise voters with intimate moments. Taking to the phones to personally thank campaign volunteers, walking out on to the victory stage with your family, taking a moment to warn your daughters that re-election does not mean a second dog, and inviting the world to share a picture are all part of the same dynamic; the relentless intimization of media politics.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10606/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andy Ruddock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s been quite a year for tweeters. First we had the Twitter Olympics. Now, Barack Obama’s first impulse, on hearing of his re-election as President of the United States, was to tweet out thanks to the…Andy Ruddock, Senior Lecturer, Research Unit in Media Studies, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104542012-11-08T02:15:16Z2012-11-08T02:15:16Z‘That’s what politics can be’ – US winners and losers speak<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17356/original/c5gyt368-1352282752.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">President Obama cut through the campaign spin in delivering his acceptance speech in Chicago:</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Tannen Maury</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the standout characteristics of the 2012 campaign was the candidates’ conspiracy of tedium. </p>
<p>Barack Obama’s <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/11/07/obamas-victory-speech-behind-the-return-of-the-presidents-rhetoric/">research</a> had shown him that voters are deeply suspicious of his rhetorical brilliance (even while they enjoy it). His Republican challenger Mitt Romney generally prefers to keep things straight and narrow, you suspect, so a low-calorie campaign was always going to play to his instincts.</p>
<p>But the acceptance and concession speeches marked the moment when these strictures fell away.</p>
<p>Obama gave a 21-minute <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9660463/Barack-Obamas-victory-speech-in-full.html">speech</a> that brought his audience to silence, then to bursts of unforced applause — but perhaps none of those turns of unforgettable mastery he used to deliver so regularly. The most impressive section was the walk-on, where he had the sense to let his audience dance to Stevie Wonder’s “Signed, Sealed, Delivered” for a good two minutes before he grabbed their attention.</p>
<p>Romney <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/nov/07/mitt-romneys-concession-speech-video">spoke</a> for less than five minutes, half of it acknowledging the people around him. The last half, though, was a positive, engaging account of Romney’s political philosophy – he is clearly a more impressive figure than his campaign allowed him to be.</p>
<p>A few initial observations point to the way the candidates were both trying to achieve something different from all their in-campaign rhetoric.</p>
<p>Taking a bit of time to go back over the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/07/barack-obama-speech-full-text">transcript</a> shows how Obama used unmistakable echoes of other great rhetoric through the sections of his speech. His universal anecdotes were back in force, the odes to hope, Martin Luther King’s bumpy road to the Promised Land, even <a href="http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/on-the-homefront/culture/music/the-battle-hymn-of-the-republic/the-battle-hymn-of-the.html">The Battle Hymn of the Republic</a> gets an airing:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I have seen this spirit at work in America. I’ve seen it in the family business whose owners would rather cut their own pay than lay off their neighbours and in the workers who would rather cut back their hours than see a friend lose a job. I’ve seen it in the soldiers who re-enlist after losing a limb and in those Seals who charged up the stairs into darkness and danger because they knew there was a buddy behind them watching their back. (Cheers, applause.) I’ve seen it on the shores of New Jersey and New York, where leaders from every party and level of government have swept aside their differences to help a community rebuild from the wreckage of a terrible storm. (Cheers, applause.)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I don’t see how we can share Obama’s stated faith “that for the United States of America, the best is yet to come”. I certainly do not share his faith in the USA as a broker for peace while its <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/06/world/asia/pakistan-drones-election-op-ed/index.html">drones</a> kill ever-larger numbers in Central Asia – Obama, you will recall, is the first-ever Nobel Peace Prize winner to dedicate his <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/10/obama-nobel-peace-prize-a_n_386837.html">acceptance speech</a> to a defence of warfare and warriors. But we can share his relief that the campaign is finally over, hoping the months ahead offer Washington a new chance to loosen the partisan gridlock on government.</p>
<p>Romney also campaigned for bringing Washington’s parties together. His concession speech was at its most impressive when he bequeathed that brokering role to the entire country:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The nation, as you know, is at a critical point. At a time like this, we can’t risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people’s work. And we citizens also have to rise to the occasion.</p>
<p>We look to our teachers and professors, we count on you not just to teach, but to inspire our children with a passion for learning and discovery. We look to our pastors and priests and rabbis and counsellors of all kinds to testify of the enduring principles upon which our society is built: honesty, charity, integrity and family. </p>
<p>We look to our parents, for in the final analysis everything depends on the success of our homes. We look to job creators of all kinds. We’re counting on you to invest, to hire, to step forward. And we look to Democrats and Republicans in government at all levels to put the people before the politics.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17357/original/cxw78k2f-1352283179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mitt Romney conceded the election in a speech with class.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/CJ Gunther</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Romney asserted his pride in the values he had taken to the electorate, but he was extremely warm and generous towards the victor and his campaign. Romney’s version of the (now-traditional) loser’s call for America to unite behind the winner was more credible than most.</p>
<p>Obama, for his part, was courteous towards the defeated campaign, then went on to suggest that he will try to incorporate Romney into government decision-making in the coming weeks.</p>
<p>Do we read life imitating art imitating life here? In the final series of <em>The West Wing</em>, the newly elected president Matt Santos (a character loosely based on Obama, before he really became Obama) offers the Secretary of State post to Arnold Vinick, the Republican candidate he has just defeated. And now Hillary Clinton is stepping down…</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10454/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Clark does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>One of the standout characteristics of the 2012 campaign was the candidates’ conspiracy of tedium. Barack Obama’s research had shown him that voters are deeply suspicious of his rhetorical brilliance (even…Tom Clark, Senior Lecturer in Communication, Victoria UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105632012-11-07T22:50:56Z2012-11-07T22:50:56ZObama forges winning coalition as GOP faces electoral irrelevance<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17365/original/6p68z9ht-1352325062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Newly re-elected President Barack Obama reaped the benefits of a broad demographic appeal, and an increasingly irrelevant opposition.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After an expensive, unenlightening, and interminable campaign, Barack Obama overcame a weak economy, high unemployment, and a lacklustre performance in his first debate with Mitt Romney, and was re-elected as President of the United States. </p>
<p>Although his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/07/us/politics/obamas-diverse-base-of-support.html">margin of victory</a> was smaller than in 2008, it was substantial. He garnered 303 electoral votes (excluding Florida, which, at the time of writing, remains a toss-up) and about a 2% advantage in the popular vote.</p>
<p>Obama won by building on the coalition he knitted together in 2008. About 45% of his supporters were not white. Almost all African-Americans who cast ballots supported him. Latinos, who now constitute 9% of eligible voters in the United States, chose him over Romney by about two to one. </p>
<p>Less enthusiastic than four years ago, young people nonetheless turned out for the president. And women, who comprise about 54% of the electorate, contributed to what may well be the biggest gender gap in the history of American elections.</p>
<p>Mitt Romney turned out to be a weak, gaffe-prone opponent, relying principally on vague “he had his chance, let’s try someone else” arguments. Appealing to the right-wing base of the Republican Party during the primaries, Governor Romney took positions that came back to haunt him. He advocated massive tax cuts for wealthy Americans; supported “self-deportation” for illegal immigrants, most of whom are Latinos; opposed the federal government bailout of the automobile industry, a popular policy in the “must win” state of Ohio. He endorsed an agenda that would roll back reproductive rights for women, and chose a hard line, anti-abortion zealot as his running-mate. Romney moved to the middle in October, but it was too little and too late.</p>
<p>By all accounts, the president’s handling of <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-sandy-could-be-the-october-surprise-of-the-2012-presidential-election-10425">Hurricane Sandy</a>, which devastated parts of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut a few days before the election, helped him consolidate and extend the microscopic lead in battleground states he had re-established following his performance in the second and third debates. </p>
<p>Americans gave him high marks for leadership. When Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey – and keynote speaker at the Republican presidential convention – <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9647477/Superstorm-Sandy-Barack-Obama-and-Chris-Christies-unlikely-relationship.html">lavished praise</a> on the president, he gained credibility as well as a politician who could cross party lines to get things done. And some voters noticed that Governor Romney had advocated returning responsibility for natural disasters to the states or privatising the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA).</p>
<p>Even before he takes the oath of office in January, President Obama will have to work with the House of Representatives and the Senate (whose composition was virtually unchanged by the election) to keep the United States from falling over “the fiscal cliff.” </p>
<p>Unless Congress acts quickly, across the board cuts to defence and domestic appropriations will be implemented in 2013, a result of the automatic sequestration provisions of the <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.365:">Budget Control Act of 2011</a>, which will be triggered if $1.2 trillion is not cut from the federal budget. These cuts, most economists agree, will result in a spike in unemployment and push the United States into recession.</p>
<p>Republicans may well feel greater pressure to compromise on a package that includes tax increases and reductions in expenditures. If a “grand bargain” is not struck, the stock market will, in all likelihood, take a nose dive. And the president will blame the Republicans for putting politics ahead of the welfare of the nation. He will do so as well, in 2013, if Congress fails to pass comprehensive immigration reform.</p>
<p>The GOP is likely to take stock in the wake of Romney’s defeat. No doubt, some Tea Party members will claim that a “real” conservative, like Paul Ryan, would have won the election. More moderate Republicans (for example Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida) are sure to counter by insisting that party leaders take note of demographic trends. </p>
<p>In the first decade of the new millennium, <a href="http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf">according to the U.S. Census Bureau</a>, the African-American population rose 12.3%, the Latino community grew by 43%, and whites increased by only 5.7%. If Republicans fail to reach beyond white males, evangelical Christians and senior citizens and the GOP remains “the party of no”, it will remain a permanent minority party for many elections to come.</p>
<p>For the Democrats, the passage of the <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.3962:">Affordable Health Care Act</a> marks the completion of the New Deal agenda. Buoyed, perhaps, by an economic recovery (that could produce 12 million jobs during Obama’s second term), the president may be able to draw on a reservoir of public support for his policies. </p>
<p>But, alas, it is quite possible that even he does not know what they will be.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10563/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glenn Altschuler does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After an expensive, unenlightening, and interminable campaign, Barack Obama overcame a weak economy, high unemployment, and a lacklustre performance in his first debate with Mitt Romney, and was re-elected…Glenn Altschuler, Vice President for University Relations, Cornell UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105532012-11-07T19:52:42Z2012-11-07T19:52:42ZThe revenge of the 47%<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17352/original/z53q58sr-1352268898.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mitt Romney had everything in his favour heading into the election, but still managed to lose.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Matt Campbell</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>This was Mitt Romney’s last best chance to be president of the United States of America.</p>
<p>Romney had a relatively easy primary contest. All the other Republican candidates shot themselves in the foot by either being philanders, dullards or unhinged partisans. Although the conservative base of the GOP desperately wanted someone – anyone – besides Romney, he was the last candidate standing. </p>
<p>Then, in the general election, Romney had most things working in his favour. Key structural features were all working with him. Since 2007, the US economy has only grown 1.75%. Unemployment remains stubbornly high at 7.9%. It has been repeated innumerable times this election that, since the Great Depression, no US president has been re-elected with unemployment this high. American servicemen are still regularly being killed in Afghanistan and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-the-us-set-to-jump-off-a-fiscal-cliff-9551">“fiscal cliff”</a> is looming. Not surprisingly, all the polling from the major news agencies report that most Americans believe that the country is on the wrong track.</p>
<h2>How could he have possibly lost?</h2>
<p>Apologists for Romney will say that this presidential election’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-sandy-could-be-the-october-surprise-of-the-2012-presidential-election-10425">“October Surprise”</a> was Hurricane Sandy, which favoured the incumbent. They will say that Romney was closing on President Barack Obama before the hurricane caused the campaign it shutdown for a crucial 48 hours. Romney’s friends, such as New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, did not help matters by heaping praise on the president’s response to the freak storm.</p>
<p>This version of history is extremely favourable to Romney. The truth is that he was behind before the hurricane and remained behind afterwards. </p>
<p>Romney lost because he was a weak candidate. In a stronger field, he probably would not have made it out of the Republican primaries. Romney ran on three pillars: as an experienced businessman; as the former governor of Massachusetts; and as a conservative family man. It could be argued that each of these was a greater weakness than strength. </p>
<p>Romney’s business experience was supposed to be his greatest asset. However, his time at Bain Capital also made him an easy political target. For sure, he was responsible for hiring people, but he was also responsible for firing people. The people he tended to hire were finance people. The people his company laid off tended to be lower skilled workers. These workers are the exact people he needed to convince to vote for him.</p>
<p>Indeed, with unemployment at 7.9%, many Americans recognise Romney as the boss who recently fired them. It was also easy for Romney’s political opponents to associate Romney’s business experience with the worse excesses of Wall Street and outsourcing of jobs to China. As such, the businessman theme failed to achieve as much traction as campaign strategists probably would have wished.</p>
<p>Romney also drew heavily upon his experience as Governor of Massachusetts, particularly during the presidential debates. This is understandable as it was his only real political experience. Once again, however, this experience worked against as much as for him. </p>
<p>When Romney entered the governorship, he balanced the budget by increasing taxes and decreasing expenditure. When running for the presidency, he said he would never raise taxes to balance the books. He also introduced a comprehensive health care program, which is very similar to “Obamacare” he later riled against in the presidential campaign. He assumed relatively progressive social positions on gay rights and abortion, but later called himself a “severe conservative” in the Republicans primaries. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17346/original/jry63dp7-1352268009.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Republican supporters are left disappointed with another four years out of the White House.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Michael Ivins</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Politicians regularly shift their positions. Few have attempted it to such an extent as Mitt Romney – from the relatively progressive positions of his governorship, to the conservative positions of the primaries to the middle for the general election. </p>
<p>Finally, Romney ran heavily as a stable, conservative family man. Yet, this picture also reminded many Americans that <a href="https://theconversation.com/should-we-be-worried-about-a-mormon-president-10448">Romney is a Mormon</a>. There remains a great deal of prejudice against Mormons in the United States. Many evangelicals disbelieve that they are even true Christians. Many of the left also hold negative views of Mormonism after the church played a prominent role striking down marriage equality acts across the country, including overturning laws in California. Politically, Romney’s religion worked against him on both his right and left flanks.</p>
<h2>What next for Romney?</h2>
<p>There has been speculation that Romney may run again in 2016. This narrative follows that he has gotten so close that he can almost taste the White House. There is no precedent for this. Dole didn’t run in 2000. Gore didn’t run in 2004. Kerry didn’t run in 2008. McCain didn’t run this time. </p>
<p>While holding this in mind, it is too early to write Mitt Romney’s political obituary. I don’t think we have seen the last of him.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10553/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adam Lockyer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>This was Mitt Romney’s last best chance to be president of the United States of America. Romney had a relatively easy primary contest. All the other Republican candidates shot themselves in the foot by…Adam Lockyer, Lecturer in US Politics and Foreign Policy, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105172012-11-07T19:52:32Z2012-11-07T19:52:32ZForward for four more years: how Obama won his second term<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17355/original/fsz3tsjg-1352282024.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The next four years in office for Barack Obama (and VP Joe Biden) will define his presidency and historical standing.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Barack Obama’s re-election won’t generate the same exuberance as 2008. The lofty rhetoric of “Hope” and “Change” has been replaced by the much more sombre message of “Forward”.</p>
<p>And while four years ago the senator from Illinois vowed to change the way Washington works, most Americans won’t be holding their breath this time around after the bitter partisanship that has plagued US politics. But the President’s victory on Tuesday over Republican challenger Mitt Romney is important for a much more tangible reason: it means the preservation and implementation of the most far-reaching domestic policy accomplishments of any president since at least Lyndon Johnson.</p>
<p>Despite complaints that he’s failed to live up to expectations Obama has had an extremely eventful and productive first term in office. And, for better or worse, Republicans campaigned on a promise to repeal two of his biggest pieces of legislation: <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/10/04/romneys-nuanced-debate-attack-on-dodd-frank/">The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform</a> and the <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81728.html">Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act</a>. Overseeing the implementation of the latter will by a central task of Obama’s second term and the law will almost certainly become the defining legacy of his presidency. It’s an enormous achievement for the progresive cause.</p>
<p>Given the striking ideological divide between the two parties the outcome of this election was extremely consequential, in large part because of the major reforms proposed by the Romney/Ryan campaign. But at this point, we’re probably less interested in those sorts of counterfactuals and more curious as to what the second half of the Obama presidency will look like.</p>
<p>It’s likely that the biggest political moment for the president will occur within the next several months. Unable to find significant common ground on a comprehensive budget deal, the President and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives have continually kicked the can down the road. But time is quickly running out. On January 1 the extension of the Bush tax cuts and payroll tax cuts is set to expire at the same time that large-scale cuts to discretionary spending-primarily military spending-go into effect.</p>
<p>Obama is naturally drawn to compromise and may well try to do whatever possible to reach a grand bargain in the coming months. On the other hand, the terms of the fiscal cliff provides the President with some leverage. Once tax rates go up any budget deal could then be framed as cutting taxes instead of raising them. Democrats would automatically have the higher taxes on the upper class they’ve been calling for and then could subsequently reduce taxes for everyone else. Many liberals want Obama to make full use of this advantage and take an especially hardline approach in negotiations.</p>
<p>How Obama plays his hand will influence historical judgements of his presidential temperament and also be critical in shaping the long-term fiscal path of the country.</p>
<p>Other large-scale changes will be harder to come by. Unlike the first two years of his term, Obama won’t have the advantage of large Democratic majorities in Congress. As such, new legislation will be hard fought and more often then not narrow in scope.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17353/original/wjw89mt5-1352269497.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Barack Obama supporters at a party in Los Angeles celebrate news of the president’s re-election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Paul Buck</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Significant reform is most likely on immigration. There’s agreement between the two parties on some of the key issues and Republican leaders realise that they need to take a softer tone in order to regain credibility with Latino voters. While there’s been no serious talks between the two parties recently I wouldn’t be surprised to see a deal reached sometime in the next four years. </p>
<p>Two years ago the country voiced their clear displeasure with the President and his party in the 2010 midterm elections. Yesterday, they offered a fairly firm re-endorsment of the man they elected to turn the country around. And as an added bonus, Obama will reap the political benefits of presiding over an improving - if still fragile - economy. </p>
<p>No, this doesn’t have quite the same feel as 2008, but it’s probably just as important.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10517/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Freedman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Barack Obama’s re-election won’t generate the same exuberance as 2008. The lofty rhetoric of “Hope” and “Change” has been replaced by the much more sombre message of “Forward”. And while four years ago…Luke Freedman, US Election Analyst, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105052012-11-07T05:06:50Z2012-11-07T05:06:50ZObama wins on the economy and the auto bailout<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17318/original/sw8d935b-1352254976.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">America has spoken: Barack Obama has won a second term as president.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Steve Pope</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Barack Obama has won a second term as President of the United States. For months we were told this would be a close election. The received wisdom was a spluttering economy would play badly for the incumbent.</p>
<p>In the end the President’s concerted campaign to label the Republican candidate Mitt Romney as an elitist corporate vampire who would do more to benefit the wealthy than return jobs and wealth to the middle-class has been successful. Obama also managed to convince a majority of voters in key states that there is some light at the end of the economic tunnel.</p>
<p>Mitt Romney’s pitch for votes centred around winning the key state of Florida and then breaking down President Obama’s strength in the mid-western states of Wisconsin, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada and particularly Ohio. </p>
<p>As an alternative strategy - based on concerns in the last days of the campaign that he could not win these key Western states - the Romney camp also targeted the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota. At the time of writing all of the three Democrat leaning states were called early for President Obama.</p>
<p>At this stage Florida is leaning ever so slightly towards the Democratic candidate. In the other Western battleground states President Obama has clearly won Wisconsin and has a handy lead in Iowa, Colorado and most importantly Ohio. These states appear to be lost to the Republican challenger and it is these wins that will lead to President Obama being returned to the White House.</p>
<p>One of the key issues to come out of the exit polls was voters’ perception of the economy. While the economy was regarded by voters as the central issue which determined their vote, their views of how the economy was going and who was responsible for the ongoing difficulties varied significantly.</p>
<p>Exit polls showed that four out of ten people believed that the <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/exit-polls-voters-improving-economy/story?id=17656990">economy was getting better</a>, whereas three out of ten thought it was getting worse. Clearly the extent to which voters thought the economy was improving and the recent drop in the unemployment rate below 8% was evidence of a move forward rather than a step backwards influenced their continued support for the president.</p>
<p>Perhaps even more important, the exit polls showed that more people <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83422.html">blamed the Bush Administration</a> for America’s current economic woes than blamed President Obama. According to the exit polls, 50% of voters believed that America’s economic situation was the result of Bush Administration policies while only 40% blamed the sitting President. </p>
<p>Romney’s key hope in seeking to become president was based on the assumption that voters would have short memories and see Obama’s significant increases in government spending as the most significant cause of the economy’s troubles. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=742&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=742&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17332/original/89pn2h9f-1352263626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=742&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A woman reacts to news of President Obama’s re-election at his campaign party in Chicago.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This strategy does not appear to have worked as well with voters. At the same time, while voters were clearly worried about the size of the federal government deficit, they appear more worried about what a Romney presidency would do in stripping jobs and opportunity from the middle class.</p>
<p>In Ohio, for example, Romney suffered from the fact that the state’s economy has been boosted by the auto industry bailout instrumented by the Obama Administration. Exit polls <a href="http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/06/exit-polling-indicates-auto-rescue-was-a-big-hit-in-ohio/">suggest</a> that six out of ten voters in the state supported the bailout whilst only a third opposed it. </p>
<p>This policy has been partially responsible for the state’s unemployment rate being below the national average at 7%. This lower level of unemployment and Romney’s opposition to the bailout and the fears which workers in the state had about the former Massachusetts governor’s reputation for downsizing businesses have all aided the President in this state.</p>
<p>Another crucial factor which seems to have stalled Romney’s momentum in the last days of the campaign was the President’s <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/05/nov-4-did-hurricane-sandy-blow-romney-off-course/">handling of Hurricane Sandy</a>. </p>
<p>Approximately two-thirds of voters in exit polls suggested that the President’s handling of the crisis affected their vote. At a time when the Romney challenge was gaining some traction, the focus on the President’s handling of Sandy <a href="http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2012/11/06/obama%E2%80%99s-handling-of-hurricane-sandy-%E2%80%9Cimportant%E2%80%9D-to-41-percent-of-voters/">was influential</a> in solidifying support for the president.</p>
<p>America - and the world - now has four more years of an Obama presidency. And while he has won this battle, a long fight with a hostile Congress over America’s tenuous fiscal position looms. There is a long way to go yet for the president.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10505/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Sharman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Barack Obama has won a second term as President of the United States. For months we were told this would be a close election. The received wisdom was a spluttering economy would play badly for the incumbent…Nick Sharman, Subject Co-ordinator and Lecturer, Media and Communications, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105362012-11-06T23:45:47Z2012-11-06T23:45:47ZThink the US electoral system is flawed? Check out Australia’s …<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17286/original/r9nrmwy8-1352094572.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Follow the money: the US may not be perfect, but Australian campaign finance laws need tightening.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Erik S. Lesser</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the run-up to today’s presidential election, President Barack Obama received just over <a href="http://www.fec.gov/disclosurep/pnational.do">$632 million in candidate contributions</a>. Want to know who from? These direct, individual donations (known as “hard money” in the US) <a href="http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2012/12G/C00431445/B_PURPOSE_C00431445.html">ranged from</a> $2,500 from Sharolyn Farmer in Stone Mountain, Georgia, to $5 from Ivan Smith in Seattle, Washington. </p>
<p>Want to know how he spent it? Well, overall he spent about $49.5 million on TV ads, $5 million on online advertising and $427,000 on phone calls and SMS to voters, <a href="http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2012/12G/C00431445/B_PURPOSE_C00431445.html">among other things</a>. </p>
<p>But if you want to get specific, that included $17,435 worth of spots on Denver’s KMGH TV station during Dancing with the Stars between 23 and 29 October, for example, and $52,500 worth of spots during The Simpsons and NFL games on Fox31 Colorado <a href="http://politicaladsleuth.com/political-files/dma/751/">between 29 October and 4 November</a>. </p>
<p>Want to know what Romney was up to, or which Political Action Committees (PACs) spent money on behalf of which candidates (“soft money”) and where? Too easy — just visit the US Federal <a href="http://www.fec.gov">Election Commission website</a> or check out the reports compiled by the <a href="http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/outside-spending/states/">Sunlight Foundation</a> from publicly available records. </p>
<p>Now let’s try the same thing with Australian federal election campaigning. </p>
<p>Around 12 months after the 2013 federal election, we’ll find out how much our parties raised in donations and where these donations came from, but only for amounts more than $12,100. We’ll never know how much the parties spent, or where, because the current electoral laws don’t require this reporting. And what’s more, the Australian Electoral Commission will give any party that wins more than 4% of the vote $2.42 for each first preference vote they earn, with no questions asked and no receipts for actual expenditure required.</p>
<p>The US is often portrayed as the Wild West of political campaigning — a place where candidates and parties can do, say and spend anything to get themselves elected. But my recent analysis of electoral regulation in America, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand suggests that the loosest regulatory environment for political campaigning can actually be found much closer to home, right here in Australia. </p>
<p>We’ve been so busy watching Obama and Romney slug it out in history’s <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/02/news/economy/campaign_finance/index.htm">first billion dollar campaign</a> that we’ve overlooked the question of electoral reform in our own backyard. As a result, we’re heading into the 2013 federal election with a set of campaign rules that parties and candidates overseas could only dream about.</p>
<p>Take political donations, for example. In the US and Canada individual donations to parties and candidates are capped; the Canadian cap is a flat CAD$1200 while in the USA the amounts range from US$2500 for candidates up to $30,800 for national party committees, subject to an overall biennial cap of $117,000. Campaigners in both countries have to declare all donations over $200 to their respective electoral commissions on a quarterly basis, with the USA requiring additional reports 12 days before an election and 30 days after. </p>
<p>Since the 2010 <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/magazine/how-much-has-citizens-united-changed-the-political-game.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0">Citizens United</a> ruling, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G_hD6z9Cj3s">Political Action Committees</a> can accept much larger donations from corporations, but they too have to register with the electoral commission and abide by the same reporting requirements. </p>
<p>The UK does not impose donation caps, but candidates and parties have to lodge quarterly reports of donations in non-election years and weekly reports during the official campaign period. Only New Zealand mirrors Australia in having a system of uncapped donations where reporting requirements are limited to a single, annual return detailing donations over NZ$15,000 and AUD$12,100 respectively. Importantly, however, the individual branches of Australia’s large, national parties count as separate entities for reporting purposes, which means a donor can potentially donate up to $96,000 to Labor, the Liberals or the Greens before this has to be publicly acknowledged. </p>
<p>The picture is no less murky when considering campaign spending. In an effort to limit the spending arms race which characterises US elections, Canada, the UK and New Zealand have all introduced campaign caps which limit the total amount of money parties and candidates can spend on running for office. They have each also paired this with mandatory, public reporting of expenditure. At the UK’s 2010 General Election, for example, this meant national parties could spend no more than £18 million overall, and they had to lodge reports showing how this was being spent in close to real time. </p>
<p>Thanks to a cultural quirk that equates political spending with free speech, the USA does not cap campaign spending. However, it does require quarterly reporting by candidates, parties and PACs of expenditure on travel, printing, advertising, direct mail, equipment, staff wages and much more, which means that campaign spending is at least reasonably transparent. TV stations and other media outlets are also required to make available their records on who booked and paid for advertising, which is how we know about President Obama’s prime time ad-buys in Denver and elsewhere.</p>
<p>By contrast, there is no limit to how much Australian political parties may spend, and no requirement for them to tell us anything about this spending. Individual candidates are supposed to report their campaign expenditure, but the <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=em/political%20funding/index.htm">Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM)</a> has noted that the vast majority of candidates indicate “nil” spending as funds are usually centrally controlled and disbursed by party headquarters. This means that the Australian electorate has no way of knowing how much money parties really spend campaigning for office, nor how they target this to reach specific electorates and audiences. </p>
<p>These few examples show that Australia’s campaign rules are notably looser than those internationally; that’s even before we consider parties’ exemption from the <a href="http://www.privacy.gov.au/law/act">Privacy Act 1988</a> and the misleading conduct provisions of the <a href="http://www.consumerlaw.gov.au/content/Content.aspx?doc=the_acl/legislation.htm">Trade Practices Act 1974</a>. So does anyone see this as a problem?</p>
<p>Between 2008 and 2009, the federal government released a <a href="http://www.dpmc.gov.au/consultation/elect_reform/">pair of Green Papers</a> on electoral reform, and these issues were <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=em/political%20funding/index.htm">also considered by JSCEM in 2011</a>. That report contained a series of recommendations for immediate reform, but it seems that they’ve been lost in the tumult of the past parliamentary year. That’s probably not surprising, given how much parties on all sides of politics benefit from the current arrangements. </p>
<p>But electoral reform is something we should be giving more thought to as we head into our own election season in 2013. Are we comfortable having some of the loosest electoral laws in the democratic world? Or do we have a right to know more about how Australian campaigns are fought and won? </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10536/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer Rayner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the run-up to today’s presidential election, President Barack Obama received just over $632 million in candidate contributions. Want to know who from? These direct, individual donations (known as “hard…Jennifer Rayner, Doctoral Candidate, Australian Politics, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104572012-11-06T19:44:17Z2012-11-06T19:44:17ZThe insider: what’s really happening inside the campaigns on election day<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17296/original/ynp8dx9s-1352166193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The stage is set for the Romney/Ryan election night event in Boston, Massachusetts.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Matt Campbell</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is now election day in the United States. You can compare being on an American political campaign on this final frenetic day to spawning salmon giving their all to leap waterfalls before they die. </p>
<p>Media coverage tends to focus on what the candidates and their senior advisers are doing. This typically means photo opportunities outside polling stations or subway stops, and these might shake out a few extra votes. But all they can really do at this point is to wait for news from the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-getting-out-the-vote-might-decide-the-us-election-9925">“get out the vote”</a> (GOTV) operation, and that is where the real story is unfolding.</p>
<p>A friend of mine could tell you about the successful Republican congressional campaign he worked on. On election day, the campaign manager picked up a senile woman from a retirement home and drove her to the polls. Passing as her relative, he helped her to vote for the “right” candidate. Every extra vote counts.</p>
<p>American political consultants will tell you that every campaign has three resources at its disposal: people, money, and time. When election day dawns, campaign staff know that there are only about 12 hours left to make a difference. </p>
<p>Teams of volunteers, usually students for the field work and pensioners for the GOTV phone calls, are already in place. Campaigns have the right to check that polling places begin the day with a clean count, and their volunteers remain outside of the polling areas to distribute literature and to take a headcount of voters. Campaign headquarters check-in with volunteers frequently to compare turnout in friendly vs. unfriendly precincts, and to make determinations about whether volunteers need to be moved around to more competitive precincts. Although official results are not available until after polls close, the campaign number crunchers already have a pretty good idea by lunchtime whether it will be sweet or painful night.</p>
<p>Still, the entire election day effort remains focused on GOTV. Likely friendly voters will have already been contacted by the campaign, sometimes in the form of multiple pre-recorded “robo-calls”, and anyone who says they plan to vote but has not done so yet will receive very generous offers of transportation and assistance.</p>
<p>I have voted in-person in three American states, all with completely different voting technologies and levels of privacy, and every experience has been a smooth one. Every time I served outside of a polling place, the experience was similarly drama-free. Confrontations of any kind between opposing volunteers are exceedingly rare. Everyone is just too busy trying to coax out those last few votes from a complacent system that provides no incentives to wait in a queue, and no penalties for simply ignoring the election entirely.</p>
<p>Over the weekend, I emailed a friend who is currently volunteering in Iowa as an attorney for the Obama campaign with the brief of preventing voter disenfranchisement at polling stations. He has also been a candidate for office himself, and he described the total immersion in the moment as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You can tell the difference between a winning and a losing campaign based on what the volunteer turnout is like and other metrics of enthusiasm, but on election day, it does not matter. Everything is going into it, no matter what. If anything, a winning campaign is far more nerve-wrecking. If you’re already losing, there is nothing to lose, so you can do and try anything. On a winning campaign, the stress is enormous. You do not want to be the person that somehow screws it all up and costs your candidate the election.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=765&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=765&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=765&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=962&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=962&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17245/original/f5fz6m9s-1352073707.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=962&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Teams of volunteers hit the phones to “get out the vote” ahead of Tuesday’s election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Michael Nelson</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Eventually the polls close, and if campaigns are lucky they will still have people at each precinct to stay for the tabulation. I did this in 2006, trying to drive on the freeway as I read over my mobile phone the precinct vote for each race and ballot measure to campaign headquarters. I had a couple of close calls on that sleet-lashed autumn night, but I finally made it to the big rally in the end.</p>
<p>The campaign victory parties represent the culmination of hours or years of effort. They are open to the public and held in large meeting spaces, usually hotel ballrooms, but sometimes rented restaurants. They might have cash bars, but most do not offer food: there is no point in undersupplying hors d’oeuvres to college kids who have not eaten all day. There is a stage surrounded by placards, and in the back are giant TV screens set up so that the faithful can follow the race. But these are annoyingly muted, along with the up-tempo pop music on the house system, whenever some functionary sees fit to make an early speech. In recent years, the political junkies now simply huddle in corners with laptops, phones and tablets to compare notes about other races around the country, while the local activists crowd the dais to listen to community leaders.</p>
<p>Most Americans like to back winners rather than go all in for game underdogs, and we tend not to be tribal enthusiasts. At sporting events, fans expecting a lopsided defeat for their team head for the exits early to avoid traffic.</p>
<p>Likewise, you can tell whether a campaign has a shot by the size of the party it is attracting. On my first election night in Boston, in 1994, the hotel ballroom for Senator Ted Kennedy’s victory party was far larger than the adjoining room for the Democratic nominee for governor who was losing by more than 2-1 in the polls. Even tables full of cookies by the front door were not deterring the rush of university students and labor union volunteers from Kennedy’s overcrowded celebration. In Pueblo, Colorado (just visited by both VP candidates) in 2010, the Democratic election party emptied out as soon as it became clear that the local incumbent congressman would lose, and only a few hardy souls stayed around to watch their senate candidate edge to victory. </p>
<p>So, as you watch correspondents report “live from Romney/Obama campaign headquarters” (which is really a hotel somewhere nearby) you will be able to learn more about the state of the race by watching the crowd behind them.</p>
<p>In 1996, election night was quite different. The Massachusetts Democratic Party had adopted a Coordinated Campaign model, which seems to be used now by Democrats in many states, and there was a single election night event for the presidential, senate, and congressional campaigns. The big name in the room was John Kerry, who won a hard fought senate reelection against the popular Republican governor just mentioned, and his staff, with whom I had recently interned for a year, ran the “main event” of the evening’s victory. Clinton-Gore operatives nonetheless remained at the far back of the ballroom smoking celebratory cigars and taking down addresses to send inauguration tickets to student volunteers who had worked on GOTV.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17251/original/z74c59g4-1352077853.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Nearly a quarter of a million people gathered on election night in 2008 to celebrate Barack Obama’s victory in Grant Park, Chicago.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Kamil Krzaczynski</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Ultimately GOTV is everything on election day, and increasingly during weeks of early voting. The necessity of spending all of the campaign’s resources simply getting supporters to the polls is perhaps why the campaigns do not spend more time educating the public about the issues involved. The barrage of negative TV ads to which voters have been subjected for months are frequently intended not to get persuadable voters to change their mind, but to drive down enthusiasm for the opponent so that some supporters simply stay home. </p>
<p>It is well worth considering what election day in America would look like if we had the same voting requirements that Australians do.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10457/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Malet worked or interned for several Democratic officeholders and campaigns between 1994 and 2006.</span></em></p>It is now election day in the United States. You can compare being on an American political campaign on this final frenetic day to spawning salmon giving their all to leap waterfalls before they die. Media…David Malet, Lecturer in International Relations, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104632012-11-05T19:48:30Z2012-11-05T19:48:30ZThe ‘empty chair’ election: those who turn up will decide<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17246/original/58h6m3c2-1352075041.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Face off: finally Americans will go to the polls to decide between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney for president.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Jim Lo Scalzo</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>While <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rnc-2012-clint-eastwoods-speech-to-the-republican-convention-in-tampa-full-text/2012/08/30/4247043c-f314-11e1-a612-3cfc842a6d89_story.html">haranguing an empty chair</a> at the Republican National Convention, Clint Eastwood stumbled upon the central metaphor of the 2012 election. The election has been, on the whole, about people who were not there, the ones who didn’t show up and the ones who were kept away.</p>
<p>Though not present, these people – candidates, voters, and citizens – defined the race. Whether scapegoats or saviours, their absences shaped the field, set the issues, and moved the polls. Collectively they made 2012 an election in absentia.</p>
<p>This empty-chair election began not with Eastwood but with the GOP primaries. As Republicans surveyed the vast but insubstantial field of candidates, many wondered: “where is everyone?” Early 2011 polls had five different Republicans <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/03/12/120312fa_fact_lizza">leading the field</a> – Sarah Palin, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, and Donald Trump – none of who entered the race.</p>
<p>The GOP base then cycled through every candidate in the running, from <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/poll-cain-leads-gop-race/246599/">a pizza mogul</a> to a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/gingrich-pledges-moon-colony-during-presidency/2012/01/25/gIQAmQxiRQ_blog.html">moon-colony enthusiast</a> to a former senator who <a href="http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/08/10/7332224-santorum-gets-metaphysical-on-gay-marriage?lite">compared</a> gay people to paper towels. Then they returned their attention to those <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_12/kristol_still_pining_for_more034340.php">who weren’t there</a> – the governors and senators and up-and-comers who failed to throw their hats in the ring: the A-team warming the bench.</p>
<p>Pundits and partisans spent the spring pining for a <a href="http://theweek.com/article/index/224407/brokered-conventions-a-guide-to-political-pundits-dream-scenario">brokered convention</a>, where one of these absent white knights would rescue the party from a Romney-shaped disaster. Once Governor Romney clinched the nomination, however, those fantasies faded. The GOP consolidated around the only viable candidate who had bothered to show up.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, a glaring absence triggered a fight that shaped much of the general election. In mid-February, Republican representatives convened <a href="http://oversight.house.gov/hearing/lines-crossed-separation-of-church-and-state-has-the-obama-administration-trampled-on-freedom-of-religion-and-freedom-of-conscience/">a hearing</a> on the Obama administration’s contraceptive coverage mandate. The GOP was hoping to launch a battle over religious freedom, an attempt to draw evangelical and conservative Catholic voters to the polls in November. But the issue quickly mutated when two Democratic representatives <a href="http://articles.cnn.com/2012-02-16/politics/politics_women-lawmakers-hearing_1_issa-carolyn-maloney-health-insurance?_s=PM:POLITICS">asked</a>: “where are the women?”</p>
<p>Not only had Republicans failed to invite women to a hearing on contraceptive coverage, they turned away the women Democrats had invited. One who had been excluded: <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/contraception-controversy-continues-meet-witness-sandra-fluke/">Sandra Fluke</a>, a Georgetown law student who would come to symbolize the “war on women” after conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/29/rush-limbaugh-sandra-fluke-slut_n_1311640.html">slurred her</a> as a “slut”. Time and again over the course of the campaign, Republican candidates talked about <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/02/foster-friess-in-my-day-gals-put-aspirin-between-their-114730.html">contraception</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/us/politics/todd-akin-controversy-may-hurt-republican-chances.html?pagewanted=all">abortion</a>, even <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/richard-mourdock-abortion_n_2007482.html">rape</a>, in ways that made the women involved invisible. By continuing to erase women from these debates, the GOP ensured the “war on women” narrative would prove remarkably durable.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=680&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=680&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=680&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=855&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=855&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17247/original/x7sgyr8h-1352075343.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=855&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Clint Eastwood’s infamous empty chair skit at the Republican National Convention has been symbolic of the entire presidential campaign.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The economic debate also came to be defined by people not in the room: the 47%. In the usually quiet weeks between the conventions and debates, a tape <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/full-transcript-mitt-romney-secret-video">surfaced</a> from a fundraiser Romney held in May. Speaking to well-heeled donors, Romney assailed the sort of Americans who don’t attend $50,000-a-plate dinners: low-income citizens without a federal income tax liability. Over the soft clinking of silverware on china, Romney dismissed these absent Americans as people who would “never take personal responsibility and care for their lives”.</p>
<p>How someone talks about the people who are not there – in this case, vilifying them as parasitic leeches on the body politic – can be revealing. For a time the voting public found it decisively so. Obama’s narrow lead <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-47-percent-comments-poll-government-dependent-obama-2012-9">widened</a> to a comfortable five- to six-point margin over Romney.</p>
<p>That was, until Obama decided to use the Clint Eastwood-empty chair debate as a model. While it was entertaining to see an empty chair best the doddering movie actor, the act didn’t translate well to a presidential debate. Mitt Romney brought his A-game to a debate Barack Obama <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/frank-rich-obamas-ambien-esque-performance.html">barely attended</a>. Momentum, and the lead, <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/20121010_Romney__buoyed_by_polls__battles_for_Ohio.html">quickly swung</a> to Romney for the first time in the yearlong race. If half of winning is just showing up, Romney met that threshold and Obama didn’t.</p>
<p>The race has since settled to a near-tie, with Obama holding just enough of a lead in just enough of the swing states to be considered the favourite by most observers. But in a race so agonisingly close, the outcome hinges on turnout: who gets their supporters to the polls when it matters. For a campaign that has been defined by those who didn’t show up, it’s fitting that the election will come down to the voters who do.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10463/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Hemmer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While haranguing an empty chair at the Republican National Convention, Clint Eastwood stumbled upon the central metaphor of the 2012 election. The election has been, on the whole, about people who were…Nicole Hemmer, Visiting Assistant Professor at University of Miami & Research Associate, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104372012-11-04T19:34:04Z2012-11-04T19:34:04ZMitt Romney’s ill-fated last stand<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17222/original/jpt6vg8r-1351865482.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Slogans such as "Real Change On Day One" have featured heavily during Mitt Romney's presidential campaign.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In these last days of the United States presidential election, the images from the campaign trail document the confusion of the Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan campaign. The unclear Republican message is no match for the slick, seasoned Barack Obama marketing machine.</p>
<h2>The Republican bluff</h2>
<p>Republican supporters claim the Romney-Ryan ticket is in a strong position. The campaign has made some seemingly assertive moves. Pro-Republican interest groups have spent heavily on advertising the Democrat-leaning states of <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/republicans-spending-more-but-obama-advertising-more-20121026">Michigan</a> ($US14.5 million), <a href="http://www.politicspa.com/update-prez-pa-ad-spending-scorecard/43589/">Pennsylvania</a> ($US13.3 million), and <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/republicans-spending-more-but-obama-advertising-more-20121026">Wisconsin</a> ($US5 million and counting). Campaign aides have cited this advertising spend as evidence of their confidence. </p>
<p>Recent campaign stops have been called <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20177380">“Victory Rallies”</a>, some five days prior to the start of voting. A few days ago Romney appeared behind the presumptuously written placard “Real Change On Day One”, referring to his assumed future term as President. </p>
<h2>A flip and a flop</h2>
<p>None of this changes the fundamentally reactive and consequently confused nature of the 2012 Republican presidential campaign. The “Victory Rally” title is being used in conjunction with the title <a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20121101/NEWS09/121101018?nclick_check=1">“Real Recovery Road Rally”</a>. It was also used, apparently by accident, during the poorly executed <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/the-making-of-romneys-storm-relief-event">Republican storm relief event</a>.</p>
<p>The Romney-Ryan message has been ever-changing and frequently contradictory to their own former position. This gives the candidates a big problem. Staying “on message” means retracting former statements, denying long-held beliefs and generally looking dishonest. This is most obvious in the part of their campaign that seems to have been the least considered: its visual image. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/battle-of-the-placards/">notable Republican campaign placards</a> are a case in point. Romney’s lectern placards when speaking in Ohio months ago displayed the message “Middle Class Tax Relief”. More recently his Ohio lecterns have changed to, among other things, “Farmers For Mitt”. While there are certainly some farmers who could be considered middle class, the shift in their target audience is clear: from urbanites with double incomes and investment properties to Mr and Mrs Rural America. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=357&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=357&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=357&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17225/original/86k42dhq-1351901826.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mitt Romney’s campaign bus: going everywhere and nowhere.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">flickr/TNRS</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a more blatant turnaround, in June in Washington, Romney stood behind a lectern placard that read “Repeal And Replace Obamacare”. A few months later he spoke in Florida behind a placard bearing the statement “Protect and Strengthen Medicare”. Such contradictions may have gone unnoticed before digital photography and the internet. As things stand, every photograph documenting these policy reversals by the Romney-Ryan campaign provides further evidence of what Obama has pithily named <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/oct/19/obama-romnesia-romney-women">“Romnesia”</a>.</p>
<h2>Three memes to bind them</h2>
<p>This highlights another front on which the Democrats’ campaign has been particularly successful, in part aided by Republican own goals: social media. The <a href="http://www.quickmeme.com/Romnesia/?upcoming">“Romnesia”</a> and <a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/binders-full-of-women">“Binders Full of Women”</a> memes have been significant factors in the visual communication of this year’s election. Spoof videos, such as <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTCRwi71_ns">“Mitt Romney Style”</a>, a witty swipe at Romney in the style of Korean pop sensation PSY’s Gangnam Style, have also achieved millions of views. </p>
<p>What have pro-Romney supporters come up with to rival these memes? A woeful collection of communist-referencing and sometimes racist images. Each of these attempts at satire commit the cardinal sin of aspiring memes: they are not funny. Funny videos on the Internet are unlikely to encourage people to vote. However, the effect of millions of Internet users laughing at a candidate looking like a fool should not be underestimated.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17224/original/z45gmjxm-1351900675.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An example of a “Romnesia” meme that has gone viral.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">quickmeme.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A lacklustre last stand</h2>
<p>In the days before the polls open, the details of the final pro-Republican ads to be aired before and on election day are starting to emerge. The assortment of last-ditch efforts at winning over voters include appealing to African American voters in Ohio (<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/super-pac-ad-buy-urges-african-americans-ohio-210436263--politics.html">“Because Lincoln Freed The Slaves”</a>) as well as Cuban Americans in Florida (by <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/obama-hugo-chavez-mitt-romney_n_2055927.html?utm_hp_ref=election-2012-blog">equating Obama with Fidel Castro and Che Guevara</a>). </p>
<p>Another panicked efforts at recruiting voters uses Donald Trump’s voiceover in pro-Romney-Ryan radio advertisements, despite his <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/donald-trump-mitt-romney_n_2050866.html?utm_hp_ref=election-2012-blog">awkward past relationship</a> with the campaign. These recently released ads are in keeping with the tone set by the controversial Romney-Ryan <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum-romneys-jeep-to-china-lie-earns-brutal-headlines-in-ohio/2012/10/30/6ca63574-227e-11e2-ac85-e669876c6a24_blog.html">“Jeep To China” ad</a> which started to air earlier this week. Although the messages are vastly different, the theme of playing on local fears and relying on untruths runs throughout each. As I read about and watch these advertisements, one question keeps recurring: how low will the Romney-Ryan campaign go? </p>
<h2>The final countdown</h2>
<p>As the polls predict a neck-and-neck race for the popular vote, and an Electoral College vote slightly in favour of the Obama-Biden ticket, the visual story shows a clear winner. While the Obama-Biden ticket remains typically on-message, the Romney-Ryan effort reads like a litany of campaign sins. It remains to be seen whether the worst is yet to come in Romney’s last stand. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10437/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Katherine Hepworth does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In these last days of the United States presidential election, the images from the campaign trail document the confusion of the Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan campaign. The unclear Republican message is no match…Katherine Hepworth, Lecturer, Faculty of Design, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104792012-11-01T23:59:13Z2012-11-01T23:59:13ZRace to the White House: Tim Lynch, Nick Bisley<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17167/original/9xsmzb93-1351741315.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Streets are covered by debris caused by Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey. How will it affect the presidential race?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Michael Reynolds</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Welcome to part nine of our Race to the White House podcast series.</p>
<p>Each week we’ll be talking to Australia’s top US experts on the ins and outs of the 2012 US presidential campaign.</p>
<p>This week, we ask whether Hurricane Sandy was the October Surprise, with University of Melbourne Senior Lecturer in American Politics, Timothy Lynch, and La Trobe Professor of International Relations, Nick Bisley.</p>
<iframe width="100%" height="166" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F65608034&show_artwork=true"></iframe>
<p><em>Podcast produced by Rachel Baxendale.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10479/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Welcome to part nine of our Race to the White House podcast series. Each week we’ll be talking to Australia’s top US experts on the ins and outs of the 2012 US presidential campaign. This week, we ask…Nick Bisley, Professor, Program Convenor, La Trobe UniversityTimothy J. Lynch, Associate Professor in Political Science, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104482012-11-01T19:30:53Z2012-11-01T19:30:53ZShould we be worried about a Mormon President?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17135/original/4mhzq5wr-1351682963.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mitt Romney stands to become the first Mormon President, but his religion has barely rated a mention in the campaign.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Win McNamee</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>There is a long and dishonourable tradition of religious prejudice in American presidential elections. </p>
<p>Catholics running for office have borne the brunt. Democratic candidate Al Smith <a href="http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/10/when-a-catholic-terrified-the-heartland/">was subjected</a> to vicious anti-Catholic attacks when he ran in 1928: the fact that he was the son of Irish immigrants and an opponent of prohibition didn’t help his cause. John Kennedy in 1960 was similarly accused of being under the thumb of the Vatican, forcing him to give <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16920600">a speech</a> to the Ministerial Association in Houston affirming his allegiance to the American nation.</p>
<p>With just a few days to the election, we are yet to see anything like this sort of vitriol directed towards Mitt Romney. Much of the analysis suggests that, whatever the outcome on Tuesday, Romney’s Mormonism will be a negligible factor. A sign of our enlightened attitudes? Perhaps more a sign of our ignorance. No less than 32% of voters, according to an <a href="http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/2012-romney-mormonism-obamas-religion.aspx">August poll</a>, are unaware that Romney is a Mormon.</p>
<p>Another reason for the silence about Mormonism might be the assumption of an easy Obama victory. But with the polls tightening in the last few weeks, some have begun to ask: should we be worried about a Mormon President? </p>
<p>Those who are point to several things. The first, to be blunt, is the weirdness factor. New York Times columnist <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/maureendowd/index.html">Maureen Dowd</a> often lampoons Latter Day Saint (LDS) church practices, from baptising the dead, including Holocaust victims, to the famous “magic underwear” worn to protect against evil spirits. Oh, and Mormons believe that the Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri. </p>
<p>Now, we have no proof that Romney wears said “magic underwear”, or has ever participated in retrospective baptisms. But he was a high-ranking church figure: bishop of a congregation in Boston from 1981 to 1986, and then a “stake president” responsible for some 4000 members. </p>
<p>More troubling perhaps is the suspicion that President Mitt might take orders from Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City. An <a href="http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/election2012/6370/mitt_romney%E2%80%99s_best-known_mormon_critic_tells_it_all._one_last_time.__%7C_election_2012_%7C">interview</a> with Judy Dushku, a member of Bishop Romney’s congregation in Boston, has fuelled this. Referring to Romney’s pro-choice stance on abortion while Governor of Massachusetts, Dushku claims that Romney told her: “in Salt Lake, they told me it was okay to take that position in a liberal state”. </p>
<p>Of course, America has never had a Mormon President before (though several have tried). But the record of the Utah legislature is not encouraging. As D. Michael Quinn <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/10/mormon-politicians-lds-church-romney">argues</a> in a recent Vanity Fair article, many legislators there pay close attention to the wishes of the governing body of the LDS, the First Presidency. Quinn writes that in 2008, the LDS Church’s Deseret News announced:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Before each general session [of the Utah Legislature], GOP and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate sit down separately with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Special Affairs Committee, a group made up of Church general authorities, Church public relations officials, and their lobbyists, to discuss any item on the minds of both legislators and Church leaders.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Romney has at various times affirmed his independence. In 2007, he channelled John Kennedy when he <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=3961048&page=1#.UJECu2fuqSo">told</a> the American public: “if I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest”. </p>
<p>For its part, the LDS publicly advises its faithful to choose the best candidate, regardless of party affiliation.</p>
<p>Defenders of Romney also point to the number of Democrat Mormons. In fact, the highest-ranking Mormon in American politics is Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader, and a Democrat. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=862&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=862&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=862&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1083&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1083&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17136/original/m2wgcjz7-1351684604.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1083&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Former President John F. Kennedy faced persecution for his Roman Catholic beliefs.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Finally, the history of Mormon voting also <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/04/a_mormon_frontlash_for_romney/">suggests</a> something less than a tightly-controlled political machine. Utah voted four times for Franklin Roosevelt, despite then-LDS leader Heber J. Grant denouncing him as a socialist.</p>
<p>In the end, the notion of a direct line between Salt Lake City and a Romney Oval Office seems ludicrous. Why would the First Presidency need to call? President Romney is unlikely to do much that would upset the LDS. Whether on social issues, taxes or the role of government, 2012-version Romney is back in the fold.</p>
<p>The pity is that Romney has largely avoided the issue as there might have been a positive narrative to craft. As Stephanie Mencimer <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/10/mormon-experience-may-shape-romneys-disaster-policy">argues</a> in Mother Jones, Mormons have responded with admirable energy and solidarity to natural disasters in Utah. As the east coast cleans up after Hurricane Sandy, this might have been an appealing message. But in failing to speak, candidate Romney has left many wondering, once again, what sort of president he might be.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10448/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Verhoeven does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is a long and dishonourable tradition of religious prejudice in American presidential elections. Catholics running for office have borne the brunt. Democratic candidate Al Smith was subjected to…Tim Verhoeven, Lecturer in Modern History, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/99252012-10-31T20:06:10Z2012-10-31T20:06:10ZHow ‘getting out the vote’ might decide the US election<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17081/original/3pstnr7f-1351595800.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Volunteers work the phones to "get out the vote" for the Romney/Ryan campaign in Virginia.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Hurricane Sandy will leave more than physical destruction in its wake. Arriving just days before the US presidential election, the storm could have a political fallout as well.</p>
<p>Sandy has affected the key battleground states of Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and may complicate matters by shutting down early voting, at least for a few days. Turning out early voters was a key aspect of Obama’s ground game. It is unclear whether voters who would have voted early in those states will turn out on election day or simply stay home. Generally, inclement weather or obstacles to voting benefit Republican candidates and decrease turnout among racial/ethnic voters, who are key to Obama’s electoral success.</p>
<p>But how important is “getting out the vote” in the US?</p>
<p>When I present my research on get-out-the-vote efforts, audience members (mostly youth) often ask, “Why should we care about voting? It doesn’t really matter anyway.” </p>
<p>My answer is to point out the significant time, resources, and political capital that has been spent, just over the past few years, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-right-to-vote-the-right-way-how-voter-id-laws-hurt-the-poor-9245">passing laws</a> that restrict voter registration efforts and establish voter identification requirements in the United States – laws that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates will <a href="http://www.brennancenter.org/content/section/category/voter_id">disenfranchise the 11%</a> of the eligible voters that do not have a government-issued photo ID. That percentage is higher among the elderly, the poor, voters of colour, and those with disabilities. </p>
<p>What America needs is a movement to expand political participation, rather than restricting it. In 2008, <a href="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html">56.8%</a> of the voting age population turned out to vote, which is closer to what can be expected in Burundi or Congo than France or Australia. Given the 2008 US voting age population was about <a href="http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/elections/voting-age_population_and_voter_participation.html">230 million</a>, that leaves over 99 million Americans who were eligible to vote but chose not to go to the polls.</p>
<p>More than a decade of experimental research in political science has shown that getting these voters to the polls requires direct get-out-the-vote contact. My recent book, <a href="http://yalepress.yale.edu/book.asp?isbn=9780300166781">Mobilizing Inclusion</a>, demonstrates that door-to-door canvassing and live phone banks are quite effective in turning out low-propensity racial/ethnic voters. Two-call phone banks - those that call back voters that express a commitment to voting in the first call - can have a double-digit effect on turnout. In low-propensity voting communities, this can have a significant impact on the shape of the electorate, often making the difference in terms of winners and losers. In other words, if you invite these voters to vote, they will, and they will make a difference.</p>
<p>Yet despite this strong evidence, most US political campaigns do not target these voters. Much has been made recently about the significant ground campaigns being employed by both presidential campaigns. <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/obamas-edge-the-ground-game-that-could-put-him-over-the-top/264031/">In 2008</a>, Barack Obama set records, and altered political common knowledge, by investing heavily in organising offices around the country. </p>
<p>In 2012, the Republican National Committee (RNC) is expected to spend <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/republican-committee-seeks-to-match-obama-ground-game/">significant resources</a>, including $22 million in September 2012 alone, to pay for ground-game activities in battleground states, including staffing, phone calls, polling, targeting, voter registration efforts, and other data efforts. It is unlikely, however, that the RNC’s estimated 600 paid staff members and thousands of volunteers will be able to contact the 99 million American voters that need to be asked to turn out. It’s also unlikely that their focus will be on low-propensity, racial/ethnic voters.</p>
<p>These are the same voters that are most likely to be negatively affected by the new voter ID laws. These laws are not new. Historically, U.S. states have used a variety of tactics, including voter roll purges, poll taxes, and the white man’s primary, to keep eligible racial/ethnic voters from voting. If voting doesn’t matter, why would the states continue to bother to pass restrictive laws to limit eligible voters’ access to the ballot?</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17086/original/pnkjmbbv-1351637776.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Voters queue to cast their ballots in early voting in Washington, D.C.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Jim Lo Scalzo</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What many Americans do not know is that, internationally, these laws place the United States alongside countries the U.S. often frames as “bad actors”, those that are not “true” democracies. In Resolution 46/137, the UN General Assembly affirmed that: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The systematic denial or abridgement of the right to vote on grounds of race or colour is a gross violation of human rights and an affront to the conscience and dignity of mankind, and … the right to participate in a political system based on common and equal citizenship and universal franchise is essential for the exercise of the principle of periodic and genuine elections. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>American electoral observers often criticise foreign governments for implementing precisely these types of electoral restrictions because they limit the exercise of a “common and equal citizenship”. These restrictions on the American franchise are especially problematic given that the United States has some of the <a href="http://www.idea.int/vt/">lowest voting rates</a> of any advanced, industrialised country. </p>
<p>For America’s democratic institutions to be legitimate, the electorate needs to reflect the population. Instead, states around the country have passed the <a href="http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voting_law_changes_in_2012/">restrictive voting laws</a> noted above; laws that will restrict ballot access for an estimated five million Americans.</p>
<p>Clearly, this approach to voting leaves out the voices of a significant portion of America’s eligible voters. It’s time to reframe political participation in the United States, and start inviting these Americans in, one voter by one.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/9925/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lisa García Bedolla does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Hurricane Sandy will leave more than physical destruction in its wake. Arriving just days before the US presidential election, the storm could have a political fallout as well. Sandy has affected the key…Lisa García Bedolla, Associate Professor in Social and Cultural Studies, University of California, BerkeleyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/97472012-10-30T19:07:42Z2012-10-30T19:07:42ZA Romney presidency: the implications for Europe<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16758/original/fhd4kqgy-1350876070.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C74%2C3315%2C2117&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mitt Romney outside 10 Downing Street during his gaffe-plagued trip to Europe earlier this year.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Neil Munns</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>There is less than a week to go in the US presidential race, and the candidates are coming agonisingly close in various battleground states. Imagining Mitt Romney in the White House might turn a few Democrat stomachs, but what of those outside the United States, notably in the European Union?</p>
<p>Given the lingering eurozone crisis, the question is playing on the minds of European leaders ahead of the November 6 elections. They have proven to be, at stages, puzzled by the vagueness of the GOP nominee. For one, none of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19415294">his eight actions</a> he proclaimed he would do within the first 100 days of being in the White House mention Europe, other than an ceremonial act of reassurance to “traditional allies”. Romney has <a href="http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/08/mitt_romneys_remarks_at_virginia_military_institute">promised to press</a> NATO members to pour more money into the military kitty – 2% of GDP, to be exact. Otherwise, this election has been assiduously devoted to all matters domestic, wavering only at certain points, the attacks on the US consulate in Libya on September 11 being one such exception.</p>
<p>Attitudes to Romney from the European side have been mixed. If one is to believe Harvey Weinstein, British Prime Minister David Cameron would <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/mitt-romney/9546490/Cameron-claimed-Britain-is-united-against-Mitt-Romney.html">prefer an Obama administration</a> any day. Romney’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/romneyshambles-how-not-to-win-foreign-friends-and-influence-important-people-8507">stumbling tour of Britain</a> during the London Olympics was nothing short of disastrous. It was intended to link his experience as a successful organiser of the Salt Lake City Winter Games in 2002 to his potential as a powerful business executive. Instead, his remarks about the security failings of the games led to conclusions that he was “Mitt the Twit”, a provincial, error-prone fool.</p>
<p>His visit to Gdansk and Warsaw had its photo moments, and again, were timed to <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/commentary-on-romney-s-visit-to-europe-a-846382.html">drum up the Polish-American vote</a>, which is not inconsiderable in such states as Pennsylvania and Ohio. That said, <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/">recent figures</a> from the Pew Global Attitudes Survey place Obama’s popularity in Poland at 50%. Since the end of the Cold War, American presidents have been keen to highlight the role played by Poland in drawing back the Iron Curtain, eccentrically calling it part of “new” Europe. For his trouble, former Polish president Lech Walesa gave Romney <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/mitts-travelogue-meeting-lech-walesa-and-greetings-from-polich-ron-paul-supporters/">his endorsement</a>. Amongst his own party, Romney’s trip <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/mitt-romneys-foreign-trip-didnt-go-well-does-it-matter/2012/07/30/gJQA5rudLX_blog.html">was considered</a> an act of “borderline lunacy”, more so given that “not a single vote” would be cast on the subject.</p>
<p>Commentary of Romney’s world view from the European quarter has been negative. Der Spiegel <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/commentary-on-romney-s-visit-to-europe-a-846382.html">has found</a> his views “more reminiscent of 1982 than 2012”, bitten by a new Cold War freeze. Russia, in the Romney defense book, is the great foe, a theme he reiterated in his Virginia Military Institute <a href="http://www.mittromney.com/blog/foreign-policy-address-virginia-military-institute">address</a> on October 8. In Europe, “Putin’s Russia casts a long shadow over young democracies”. Countries such as the Czech Republic were being abandoned by the Obama administration’s decision to adopt a “phrased adaptive approach to missile defense”. </p>
<p>Romney’s <a href="http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/10/american-century-strategy-secure-americas-enduring-interests-and-ideals">white paper on foreign policy</a> is hardly more illuminating beyond the usual neo-conservative bromides: American exceptionalism, the need for robust US leadership, increased military spending. The words of Eliot Cohen, in his foreword to the paper, are typical. “The American choice is not, therefore, whether [the US] should lead: it is how to lead wisely,” Cohen wrote.</p>
<p>Clearly, the centre-right brains trust of the Republican Party, previously heavy with the presence of such luminaries as Henry Kissinger, Brent Scowcroft and Jeanne Kirkpatrick, is now threadbare in articulating a position on Europe.</p>
<p>Economically, where Romney has been hoping to make some strides against Obama, a trans-Atlantic vision of sorts has materialised. The mantra here is open markets, and the open market place is something the former Massachusetts Governor has reiterated with almost tedious certainty. While proving skimpy on security details with his European allies, apart from wanting them to pull more military weight, Romney has been pushing for a trans-Atlantic free trade agreement. On other points, Romney is proving exceedingly unhelpful, using the eurozone crisis as an example of what to avoid in the US. Fantasies of insulating the American market from European stagnation have been dished to the American electorate, a view at odds with the “open markets” credo to begin with. European welfare models are to be shunned – disaster lies that way.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=761&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=956&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=956&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/16765/original/b632gst3-1350878582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=956&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How will a Mitt Romney presidency affect America’s relations with Merkel’s Germany and Cameron’s Britain?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Olivier Hoslet</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Earlier in the year, at the New Hampshire primary debate, Romney lamented how “we are increasingly becoming like Europe. Europe is not working in Europe. It will never work here.” On CBS’s Face the Nation, he <a href="http://transatlantic-magazine.com/2012-presidential-elections-america-and-europe-is-mitt-romneys-europe-bashing-a-campaign-strategy/">fobbed off suggestions</a> of financial assistance to the ailing eurozone, suggesting that the US was “not going to send checks to Europe”. In Charlotte, North Carolina, Romney emphatically told his audience that Obama “is not going to remind anyone of Greece, because he has put us on the road to become more like Greece”.</p>
<p>Romney is on record as <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/09/romney-to-europe-drop-dead/">rejecting a more extensive US involvement</a> in such organisations as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, suggesting how averse he is to the idea of financial rescue packages. There would be no “TARP-like program to try and save U.S. banks that have Italian debt, foreign banks doing business in the U.S. that have Italian debt, or European debt.”</p>
<p>It is fair to suggest that a Romney presidency, unless it becomes Romnesiac in shifting and forgetting its various positions, will be reluctant to open the US check book for a financially unstable Europe. Such a stance will be foolish, given the fact that the consequences of the free market often lead to the need, at some point, of government corrections.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/9747/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Binoy Kampmark does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is less than a week to go in the US presidential race, and the candidates are coming agonisingly close in various battleground states. Imagining Mitt Romney in the White House might turn a few Democrat…Binoy Kampmark, Lecturer in Global Studies, Social Science & Planning, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104252012-10-30T04:54:01Z2012-10-30T04:54:01ZWhy Sandy could be the ‘October Surprise’ of the 2012 presidential election<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17060/original/cnbqdhjn-1351570831.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">As New York City firefighters look over two houses struck by trees in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, both Republicans and Democrats worry about the impact on voter turnout.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Justin Lane</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On November 4, 1979 when Jimmy Carter’s presidency depended on gaining the <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/carter-hostage-crisis/">freedom of the US hostages</a> held by Iranian student militants, he was unable to achieve this goal even when it looked like the Iranians were ready to yield.</p>
<p>Ronald Reagan pounced on this failure and Carter lost. A few months later the hostages were released after Reagan assumed the presidency. In 1992 George Bush fresh from victory in “Desert Storm” enjoyed a 95% approval rating. But by October 19 the US was in a mild recession and upstart Bill Clinton was driven by the famous words: “it’s the economy stupid”. Bush was finished.</p>
<p>US political legend holds that there will be an incident, a surprise in late October in a presidential election year, which will separate the candidates at a point where one moves so far ahead that he wins by more votes than anyone anticipates. Is <a href="https://theconversation.com/hurricane-sandy-the-new-normal-10408">Hurricane Sandy</a> the 2012 October surprise for Obama?</p>
<p>Given the close race, it will take a deciding deed or moment for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney to pull away in the last dash to victory. There is no doubt Sandy is a political storm and not just a weather event.</p>
<p>The memory of the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 is still clear to American voters. The inability of George W. Bush to lead in that crisis sealed the fate of the Republican Party candidate, no matter who it was going to be. Now, Mr Obama is facing his October event. In almost any other election, this event would be an inconvenience for voters and not the deciding moment for the President or his challenger. But this year is different.</p>
<p>Obama has looked lost on the key domestic issue of the economy. Romney, in spite of major gaffes such as his comments on the <a href="https://theconversation.com/mitts-47-gaffe-the-romney-shambles-rolls-on-9669">47%</a> and a disastrous <a href="http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDkQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fworld%2F2012%2Fjul%2F26%2Fmitt-romney-gaffes-uk-visit&ei=2lePUKT8HY2higefg4HgBw&usg=AFQjCNFhemMlyzp4ZM8AoS7ZnTW8QsHVqQ">London trip</a> has hammered the President on the issue of jobs. There is little doubt that Romney held his own in the debates. Now a real crisis has hit the nation. What will this October surprise yield?</p>
<p>First, both candidates have to get out their voters. Obama’s team is worried that city-dwelling Democrats will be evacuated or polling places moved at the last moment, suppressing the lower-income Democratic base votes, especially among inner-city Hispanics and Blacks. As Katrina showed, low-income voters have too many life support issues like food and shelter to worry about, well ahead of trying to find a new voting place. Romney’s team worried about his auto dependent suburban and rural voters who may not be able to travel to the polls due to road outages and blockages. Many bridges have washed away in the folds accompanying the storm.</p>
<p>Second, who looks and acts presidential? This is the reason Obama is at the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-election/obama-returns-to-washington-to-handle-storm-response-bill-clinton-and-romney-campaign/article4719263/">US emergency headquarters</a> looking like he is in charge. He is not going to repeat <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11627394/ns/us_news-katrina_the_long_road_back/t/video-shows-bush-got-explicit-katrina-warning/#.UI9Y3W_MikM">George W’s performance</a>. Romney is reminding everyone he did a good job running snow storm disasters in Massachusetts and trying to show how open he is to the needs of all Americans.</p>
<p>Nature has handed both candidates a perfect opportunity to look good. One has to look better to the electorate as they choose someone who will take America through the big fiscal storms ahead.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10425/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ed Blakely does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>On November 4, 1979 when Jimmy Carter’s presidency depended on gaining the freedom of the US hostages held by Iranian student militants, he was unable to achieve this goal even when it looked like the…Ed Blakely, Honorary Professor in Urban Policy & disaster recovery expert, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103412012-10-29T19:16:02Z2012-10-29T19:16:02ZA guide to the must-win states for Obama and Romney<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17013/original/yzxnjm8w-1351490589.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mitt Romney campaigns in the crucial swing state of Ohio, one of a number of states which will decide the presidency.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With eight days until the US presidential election, Mitt Romney seems to have a <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html">very slight edge</a> in the national polls. However, <a href="http://electoral-vote.com/">every</a> <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html">respectable</a> <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/">poll</a> <a href="http://election.princeton.edu/">aggregator</a>, along with all the <a href="http://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/politics/us-presidential-election/2012-us-presidential-race-e212304268">betting</a> and <a href="http://www.intrade.com/">futures</a> markets, give Barack Obama a higher probability of winning the election. </p>
<p>This is because the president is not elected by a simple majority of the popular vote, but by the more complicated machinery of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/electoral-college-system-gears-up-again-amidst-rumblings-of-reform-9964">Electoral College</a>. To win the election, a candidate must win 270 Electoral College votes. Currently, Obama seems to have a more realistic chance of getting those votes.</p>
<p>Most states reliably vote the same way from election to election, whether they be Democratic like California and New York or Republican like Texas and Georgia. The candidates will not even campaign in these deep “blue” and “red” states despite their huge populations and electoral college votes. Instead, all their attention is on the nine “swing states” that will determine the election. Here is a form guide to the states and the voters who will decide the next president.</p>
<p><strong>COLORADO: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 9 electoral votes.</strong> Colorado, America’s <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/obesity-rate-by-state_n_1774356.html">least obese state</a>, is perhaps the <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/co/colorado_romney_vs_obama-2023.html">closest</a> of all the swing states, and it is a microcosm of America’s so-called “culture war”. While Colorado Springs is a major institutional centre of both the <a href="http://www.usafa.af.mil/">military</a> and <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4287106">evangelical activism</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-wells/boulders-progressives-ret_b_347229.html">Boulder</a> and <a href="http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20050221/NEWS/102210014">Aspen</a> have long been associated with progressive counter-culture. Denver and its suburbs are closely divided. Colorado may be decided by who gets the better turnout on the day.</p>
<p><strong>FLORIDA: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 29 electoral votes.</strong> Romney gained a <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html">narrow lead</a> there after the first debate and he never lost it. Romney should win Florida, the largest swing state, and he cannot win the presidency without it. Florida’s economy is based largely on the housing market, which was utterly devastated in 2008 and has been the last part of the economy to show any signs of recovery. Voters there are more receptive to Romney’s message that the slow recovery is unacceptable.</p>
<p><strong>IOWA: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 6 electoral votes.</strong> Iowa is synonymous in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097351/">popular culture</a> with rural life despite its increasingly diverse economy and urbanised population. Among followers of American politics, it is known for its <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/whats-a-caucus-and-why-jan-3-iowa-caucuses-are-important-in-2012/">outsized importance</a> in party nominations and its status as a <a href="http://farm.ewg.org/region.php?fips=19000">major beneficiary</a> of agricultural subsidies. The latter could work in Obama’s favour, as Iowa was a major recipient of the <a href="http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/politics/blogs/biden-vs-ryan-what-is-green-pork">“green pork”</a> derided by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, and Obama <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/08/14/wind-energy-tax-credit-more-hot-air-or-key-job-creator">has not let the state forget it</a>. Despite its socially conservative reputation, Iowa was an Obama stronghold in both the 2008 primaries and presidential election, and Obama enjoys a <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ia/iowa_romney_vs_obama-1922.html">small but robust lead</a> there now. </p>
<p><strong>NEVADA: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 6 electoral votes.</strong> Nevada has the <a href="http://www.foxreno.com/news/news/state-regional/nevadas-broader-jobless-rate-remains-above-20-perc/nSpSM/">worst unemployment rate</a> in the country, a <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/03/politics/nevada-mormons/index.html">considerable</a> Mormon population, and it was a primary bulwark for Mitt Romney when he was in danger of losing all momentum to Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich. The state may seem like natural Romney territory, but it has <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nv/nevada_romney_vs_obama-1908.html">consistently favoured</a> Obama by a small but stubborn margin. The likely reasons are the <a href="http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2012/10/04/demographic-change-and-partisan-gain-in-nevada/">Latino vote</a>, which is around 15% of the electorate, and the political power of <a href="http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/sep/24/some-labor-unions-question-dividends-helping-elect/">organised labor</a> in the state, especially the Teachers’ Union and Culinary Services Union. However, Romney is <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/25/us/politics/reids-machine-aims-to-push-obama-to-victory-in-nevada.html?pagewanted=all">not giving up</a> on Nevada. <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/">FiveThirtyEight.com</a> considers it the second-most valuable state in terms of campaign return on investment, while the <a href="http://election.princeton.edu/">Princeton Electoral Consortium</a> calls it the most valuable.</p>
<p><strong>NEW HAMPSHIRE: 2008 Obama, 2004 Kerry, 4 electoral votes.</strong> The smallest swing state gives the third-best return on campaign investment, according to <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/">FiveThirtyEight.com</a>. Because of its small population, the <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nh/new_hampshire_romney_vs_obama-2030.html">2% lead</a> Obama currently holds there does not seem out of reach to Romney. New Hampshire has a strong <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/freedom-50-states-index-personal-and-economic-freedom">libertarian</a> reputation, and is the home of the <a href="http://freestateproject.org/">“Free State Project”</a> which encourages libertarian-minded people to move there en masse. This could actually hurt Romney on election day if libertarians decide to vote for <a href="http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2012/10/25/presidential_election_may_be_in_gary.htm">Gary Johnson</a> or even write in <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/new-hampshire-primary-ron-paul-supporters-threaten-mass-write-campaign-november-393738">Ron Paul</a>.</p>
<p><strong>NORTH CAROLINA: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 15 electoral votes.</strong> This state was a surprise pick-up for Obama in 2008, a feat he seems <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nc/north_carolina_romney_vs_obama-1784.html">unlikely to repeat</a>. However, Obama is still campaigning in the state, appealing to the same coalition of minorities and college-educated workers in the <a>“research triangle”</a> who carried the state for him last time. North Carolina remains a <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/north-carolina-voters-banned-gay-marriage-civil-unions-011158194.html">conservative place</a> with an umemployment rate above 9%, and Obama’s continued campaign presence there <a href="http://www.redstate.com/2012/10/24/obamas-hubris-will-be-his-undoing/">infuriates conservative commentators</a> desperate for evidence of solid gains for Romney in the Electoral College.</p>
<p><strong>OHIO: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 18 electoral votes.</strong> Ohio is the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/ohio-the-bulls-eye-state-obama-romney-aim-full-arsenals-at-vital-electoral-prize/2012/10/27/45322d26-2054-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_story.html">mother of all swing states</a> due to its size, closeness, and totemic status as the state which every successful candidate has won since 1960 (and which no successful Republican has ever failed to win). According to FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver, the cliches about Ohio’s importance are not always true, <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/oct-22-ohio-has-50-50-chance-of-deciding-election/">but this year they are</a>. According to the Washington Post, Obama and Biden have held a combined 20 events in the state since the convention, while Romney and Ryan have combined for 46. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17009/original/qq4xd32c-1351488109.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Obama makes his pitch to voters in Virginia, another key battleground state.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Shawn Thew</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Romney has <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html#polls">never led</a> in Ohio, which could be the ultimate foundation of an Obama victory. Ohio did not move as far in favour of Romney as other states after the first debate. A possible reason is that Ohio voters had already seen so much of Romney, while many voters across the country were effectively seeing him for the first time during the debate. Ohio, a major manufacturing state, has had a <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/obama-takes-credit-for-ohios-economic-recovery/">quicker economic recovery</a> than much of the country. The <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/10/24/auto_bailout_could_be_key_for_obama_in_ohio_115910.html">auto bailout</a> was popular there; Romney’s suggestion to <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-detroit-op-ed-2008-jumps-york-times-162603273--election.html">“let Detroit go bankrupt”</a> was not. </p>
<p><strong>VIRGINIA: 2008 Obama, 2004 Bush, 13 electoral votes.</strong> In 2008, Virginia was another major incursion for Obama into Southern territory that had been staunchly Republican since the 1970s. Unlike North Carolina, Virginia did not move decisively back into the red column, and it remains <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/va/virginia_romney_vs_obama-1774.html">tied</a>. Virginia could go either way this time, but in the long run it could prove to be one of the Republican Party’s most spectacular own goals. George W. Bush’s <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45135375/ns/politics/t/federal-hiring-proves-be-recession-proof/#.UI4lNW_Mj94">massive expansion</a> of homeland security-related government agencies put thousands of additional college-educated government employees in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, where they enjoy relative job security and lean Democratic. </p>
<p><strong>WISCONSIN: 2008 Obama, 2004 Kerry, 10 electoral votes.</strong> Like other upper Midwestern states, Wisconsin is <a href="http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2011/03/01/what_in_the_hell_is_going_on_i/">politically divided</a> between relatively liberal cities and conservative rural areas. The state was believed to be safe Obama territory until a bitter gubernatorial recall campaign this year which saw Republican Governor Scott Walker <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57447954-503544/scott-walker-wins-wisconsin-recall-election/">re-elected</a> on a platform of reducing collective bargaining rights for state employees. While many Walker supporters may still <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/despite-scott-walkers-win-obama-outpolls-romney-in-wisconsin/2012/06/05/gJQA0y3MHV_blog.html">vote for Obama</a>, the fight strengthened conservative campaign infrastructure in the state. Romney’s selection of Wisconsin native Paul Ryan may <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81305.html">also help</a> Romney there. Obama retains a <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/wi/wisconsin_romney_vs_obama-1871.html">slight lead</a> in Wisconsin, but Republicans see it as an achievable target.</p>
<p>The overall picture suggests that Romney leads in two swing states, Obama leads in five and two are tied. Even if Romney won the two tied states (Colorado and Virginia) he would still be 13 electoral votes short of victory. Romney needs to win more states where Obama leads, and it is almost impossible to see him getting there without Ohio, hence the fact that it has become the epicentre of the campaign. </p>
<p>The New York Times provides an <a href="http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/electoral-map">addictive tool</a> for exploring different election scenarios. For now it looks like Obama has the edge, but his campaign is unlikely to be sleeping comfortably on a handful of 2% leads.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10341/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>With eight days until the US presidential election, Mitt Romney seems to have a very slight edge in the national polls. However, every respectable poll aggregator, along with all the betting and futures…David Smith, Lecturer in American Politics and Foreign Policy, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.