This week’s Iowa caucuses kicked off the “for-real” battle to choose the GOP nominee to defeat President Obama in November’s presidential election. Millions of dollars were spent by GOP hopefuls and their various PAC organizations to win support in the caucuses, and even more millions will be spent in the upcoming New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida primary elections.
It is reported those favoring Mitt Romney spent more than $3.3 million in Iowa on ads attacking former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich. It was effective because Gingrich entered the Iowa contest as a strong contender to be one of the top vote-getters. As it turned out, he ended up fourth behind Romney, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul.
The availability of money may indeed determine the GOP nominee to battle Obama — not the knowledge, character, vision, experience and leadership qualities of those seeking their party’s nomination.
If the availability of money is, indeed, the most critical factor in winning this nation’s — and perhaps the world’s — most important political office, it looks like Obama enjoys a huge advantage.
In the 2008 presidential election, Obama had more money than he and his advisers knew how to spend. The John McCain campaign almost ran out of money two or three times and had to make significant cutbacks in its efforts.
It is reported the Obama bank account is likely to top $1 billion this year, the largest of any political war chest in U.S. history. He also has a vast number of volunteers who worked for him in his first presidential bid, and many of these workers, plus thousands of new volunteers, have been recruited for this year’s battle.
Some months ago, with the nation’s high unemployment numbers (which really are understated due to millions of Americans having given up looking for jobs), the housing crisis, the ever-escalating national debt, the growing role of the federal government in our daily lives and many other discouraging factors, such as trying to pit class against class, many Republicans were optimistic about their election prospects. They thought Obama was vulnerable and that chances looked favorable for a Republican to move into the White House.
Now, only 10 months before the election, those who had been thinking this way are starting to sober up. If they haven’t, they should.
The 2012 presidential election will indeed be the most costly ever (and it is obvious what money can buy), and it will be a mean, rough-and-tumble, divisive campaign, which will not be good for the country.
A great deal will be at stake, as was true in the 2008 election, when Obama said he intended to make “fundamental changes” in this country. He has followed through on this pledge, and there is greater government control of this nation than at any time other than during World War II. Even then there were not the controls we have today on so many of our daily activities.
Obama will oversee a well-orchestrated campaign with unlimited fiscal support and he is likely to use his office to make “executive” decisions to help him win voter support.
No matter the economic conditions leading up to Election Day, Obama will lead a tough, take-no-prisoners campaign, and no matter who leads the GOP effort, it will be a tight race.
This being the case, it becomes more obvious Republicans strategists must make every effort to hold onto the GOP majority in the U.S. House and win enough elections to gain a majority in the U.S. Senate.
If Obama should win another four years in the White House, and if Democrats were able to hold on to the Senate and either win the House or narrow the Republican majority, there would be no stopping Obama’s efforts to “fundamentally” change this country and place it on a fast track to becoming a welfare and socialistic state.
He will stop at nothing to achieve his goals for the country. Look what he did this week in defying the U.S. Constitution by making several “recess appointments.” A president has the power to make recess appointments, but the Congress must actually be in recess. The Senate was not in recess, due to a strategy used in the past by both the GOP and Democrats, but Obama, in his usual arrogant manner, did what he wanted to do regardless of the Constitution or Congress.
Consider what he would be free to do if he was in the White House and Democrats controlled both the House and Senate.
With the strong possibility Obama could win re-election, it is imperative the GOP strengthen its efforts to hold onto the House and win control of the Senate. Otherwise, the consequences for this country and the freedom its citizens enjoy will be in jeopardy.