- Kentucky city called socialist for buying gas station, undercutting competitor fuel prices
- Israel hits five mosques, sports complex in overnight Gaza strikes
- Hillary Clinton dogged for refusing reporters’ questions on book tour
- EPA tweet baffles: ‘I’m now a C-List celebrity in Kim Kardashian: Hollywood’ iPhone game
- Australian P.M. Abbott: MH17 evidence tampered with on ‘industrial scale’
- Rep. Luis Gutierrez tells Hispanics to vote and ‘punish those’ who oppose amnesty
- Country singer Tim McGraw not sorry for slapping female fan: ‘Things happen’
- Iraq vet cited for owning 14 therapeutic pet ducks
- White House takes credit for drop in unaccompanied children at border
- International crises be damned, Obama’s fundraising trip must go on
TAUBE: Romney can still win wild-card states
Only few days left before critical election
Question of the Day
Many respected public opinion firms, with the notable exception of Gallup, currently are calling this year’s presidential election a dead heat. Depending on who you believe — and whether or not you trust polling data as an accurate indicator — either President Obama or Gov. Mitt Romney is ahead or behind by a couple of percentage points. Meanwhile, the Electoral College count is shaping up to be one of the closest in U.S. election history.
With the numbers so tight at this point, political analysts are trying to identify results in certain states as potential “winner-take-all” scenarios. The conventional wisdom has been that Ohio and Florida will decide the presidency yet again. But smaller wild-card states such as New Hampshire, Nevada and Colorado could be the key to victory.
In a tight election, every vote — and elector — counts. If Mr. Romney wins Ohio and Florida, he would win the overall popular vote in all likelihood. However, if he loses virtually all the other battleground states to Mr. Obama, the cumulative total could enable the president to narrowly win a second term.
There have been only four presidential elections in which the winner of the popular vote was not the winner of the all-important Electoral College. Here’s the short list: 1824 (John Quincy Adams-Andrew Jackson), 1876 (Rutherford B. Hayes-Samuel J. Tilden), 1888 (Benjamin Harrison-Grover Cleveland), and 2000 (George W. Bush-Al Gore). If Mr. Romney wants to avoid adding his name to a future trivia question, he needs to focus on winning these smaller wild-card states.
A three-pronged strategy could help Mr. Romney accomplish this goal.
First, Mr. Romney needs to promote libertarian principles on things such as small government, lower personal and corporate income taxes, and proper management of the taxpayers’ money. Mr. Obama’s weak economic record, which includes disgraceful government bailouts of the auto and financial industries, staggering unemployment numbers and a costly health care plan, is an easy target for the Republican presidential candidate. By standing up for Americans and respecting fiscal conservatism, Mr. Romney can easily counter this tax-and-spend, liberal president. More importantly, he would win over most of the wild-card states by appealing to their libertarian economic streaks.
Second, Mr. Romney needs to support moderate social issues such as family values and faith. While some battleground states aren’t socially conservative by nature, few of their residents would flat-out reject proposals that support the rights of families and religious freedom. These inherent values are the cornerstone of American democracy, and many voters don’t believe that Mr. Obama has properly represented them in office. This gives Mr. Romney a golden opportunity to take control of these issues. At the same time, it hopefully would end any remaining doubts in the wild-card states that a Mormon can be the standard-bearer for Judeo-Christian values. They can, and he will.
Third, Mr. Romney needs to emphasize that his White House would defend democracy, promote liberty and keep the peace. In particular, the latter point was a regular theme in the third presidential debate, and it seemed to curry favor with undecided voters. Some of the wild-card states are fiercely independent and would prefer to balance U.S. military objectives with peacekeeping efforts. One of Mr. Romney’s strengths is the ability to discern the needs of Americans and ensure that they are properly met. He and his senior officials understand the current political climate and made the necessary shift in political messaging. Hence, a Romney administration would fight the war on terrorism as well as support peace and good government throughout the world.
The final week of this year’s presidential election campaign is a tumultuous one. Besides the critical task of putting volunteers on the ground to get out the vote, Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama also have to deal with the devastating effects of Hurricane Sandy. The final days of a political campaign are never easy for either presidential candidate or for their hard-working staffers.
Still, if Mr. Romney wants to win, he has to change the hearts and minds of the wild-card states in the next week. He has the work ethic and ability to get the job done. For America’s sake, he needs to do it — and fast.
Michael Taube is a former speechwriter for Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
TWT Video Picks
U.S. appetite for drugs begets violence migrants are fleeing
Get Breaking Alerts
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- Jewish woman booted from JetBlue flight over fight with Palestinian
- YOUNG: A sinking presidency, deeper after November?
- PRUDEN: A deadly enemy within exacerbating immigration crisis
- Edward Snowden to work with Russia on anti-spy technology
- MERRY: Handicaps in Hillary's way
- U.S. scrambles as violence escalates in Israel-Hamas conflict
- Humanists seek support from Congress on military chaplains
- Rep. Jared Polis' anti-fracking crusade riles Colorado
- Big milestone for Britain's little prince