WhatsappIt’s the economy, stupid. It was that focus, more than anything else, that probably enabled Bill Clinton to win the race for the White House. Clinton was a relatively unknown governor from a small state. But George H. Bush, who presided over one of the most successful wars in modern history, the Persian Gulf War, turned out to be an out-of-touch President in dealing with economic matters.
Bush flip-flopped on his “no new taxes” pledge, and alienated middle-of-the-roaders who felt that he was out of touch with their problems. Clinton, an excellent actor, who learned the art from the likes of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, chose critical times to communicate that he felt the pain of Americans. Although he did not have all of the answers, people were looking for a change. Ross Perot was therefore an appealing candidate too, as Perot was a confident billionaire with clear policy goals that he claimed would fix the economy. Clinton did not win in a landslide, but Bush lost in a big way.
Today’s Biden-led White House is similar in terms of how out of touch it is from the hurting population. Jimmy Carter was similarly out of touch. They both lost their reelection bids. Biden will probably be forced out of the White House by his own party or by Jill. The big question will be once the Democrats lose the House in the mid-term elections. Will that lead to a realignment in terms of the massive federal spending? If not, the economy will continue to tank. But if a major curb on spending transpires, the American economy has a chance of recovering.
Either way, the “President who is out of touch” issue will not go away any time soon. The Republicans need to make sure that they nominate a candidate that will connect with the American population’s economic hardships. The key to rescuing the situation are steep cuts in federal spending. Who will the best candidate be for that? That should be at the crux of the Republican primaries.
