Our main topic today was a
deconstruction of the Tuesday night speeches at the Republican National
Committee. Ann Romney’s speech was good, but at times it was a little too cute
and was not specific. It was almost like we were asked to trust her that Mitt
was a good guy. She does help humanize her husband, but we still did not feel
like we really got to know Mitt. Her target market was obviously married women,
particularly mothers. She definitely held those women who are leaning toward
the Republicans, but it is not clear that she was able to reach to swing voters
in this segment. We admit that there was no one in the group that fits this
demographic, but we plan to interview mothers and wives to see what they
thought. The speech was good PR for the campaign but probably did not undo the
damage inflicted by the Todd Akin comments.
Chris Christie probably became a
victim of high expectations. It was a mediocre speech that was overly negative,
more about himself than about the ticket, and tended to lack specifics. He did
a decent job in distinguishing between the Democrats and Republicans, but his emphasis
on telling the truth and indicating the need for sacrifice did not seem to
resonate with what we have seen in Mitt Romney. He dinged Obama for being too
sensitive to the polls, but Romney seems to be more sensitive to polls and
conservatives than Obama is to the polls and the liberals. We noted that Chris
Christie did not mention the unemployment rate as NJ is now higher in
unemployment than MI. We got back into the argument as to whether the President
of the Governor gets the blame/credit for the unemployment rate. Peter Eubanks
earlier found articles that supported the contention that governors are held
accountable for state unemployment while senators and the President are held
accountable for national unemployment. See
From what we have heard on the
Internet, conservatives were thrilled with Ann Romney, Artur Davis and Nikki
Haley but disappointed in Chris Christie. There was some concern about how the two talks did not mesh well with Ann
talking about love and Christie talking about respect, but we noted that the
two talks were originally scheduled on separate nights rather than
back-to-back. We wondered about the mystery guest speaker on Thursday night.
Our best guess is Clint Eastwood, but Tim Tebow and Sarah Palin are other
possibilities.
Projecting to the rest of the
week we anticipate that Paul Ryan will be speaking to the base, the base, the
base. One of us thought he would try to broaden that base. He will be providing
red meat to the audience, but we were divided whether he would attack Obama or
be more positive as he probably has ambitions beyond the Vice-Presidency. He
will probably try to introduce himself in a positive way, fashioning himself as
a serious policy person. It will be interesting if he follows Christie’s theme
of telling the truth and talking about sacrifice. Also, we feel that he will
mention Medicare but use the same line as Christie that they wish to save
Medicare for the younger generation. A generational divide appeared on Medicare
as the younger members stated that Romney wouldn’t touch the program for those
55 and over. The older members of the group wondered where the money was coming
from for those 55 and older and concerns about the children and grandchildren
of those 55 and older. We all thought Mitt Romney will try to provide a
positive vision, coming across as a technocrat and that we need to trust him.
He will obviously turn to the economy and jobs.
He will try to come across as a statesman and look the part.
Some of the major themes of the
speeches have been small businesses building it not the government. It has been
surprising that the Republicans have used that phrase, somewhat out of context,
but the Democrats have not used the liking to fire people nearly as much. The
Democrats tend to step on their message; while the Republicans, Todd Akin
excepted, tend to magnify their message. It will be interesting to see how well
Biden and Obama will respond to the Republicans. Biden is unlikely to become a
victim of high expectations. We all agreed that the Democrats are much more
likely to attack the Republicans next week than to highlight accomplishments.
With the conventions back-to-back this year, it will be difficult to tease out
the bumps from each convention. This year the Democrat convention will be followed
by the jobs report the day after the Obama speech. A bad report will hurt any
bump he could get from his speech; whereas a good report could help overcome a
lackluster performance. We disagreed on
the effect of this year’s 3-day convention on the duration of future
conventions. Some thought it would lead to 3-day conventions while others
thought they would remain at 4 days. We also talked briefly about David Brooks
strange biography of the real Romney. We tend to like David Brooks, but he may
need a long vacation to get some perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment