Maybe Obama can use climate change as a wedge issue against Romney
The fact is, Obama didn’t do as well in 2008 with voters in the $100,000-$200,000 range as he did with voters above $200,000, so that Quinnipiac figure is not as troubling as suggested. Still, Kraushaar is on to something—Romney holds a natural appeal for many upscale, suburban swing voters that John McCain lacked, and that he certainly lacked once he picked the Alaskan huntress as his running mate. Obama needs to worry about holding onto this demographic in states such as Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado and Pennsylvania (among other states) even as he works to limit his losses among working-class white voters with his more populist language. And what better way to do that than to remind these upscale voters that Romney has abandoned his formerly strong stance on addressing climate change for a morass of near-denialist statements? At the very least, it might force Romney to tack back to the center (i.e., scientific reality) on this issue, thus highlighting anew how far he has swung from his technocratic moorings. So keep an eye on this. It may just have been an off-the-cuff answer to a good question. But it may also be something that Chicago has up its sleeve.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I don’t see why not, every thing else that bho/team has flung at Mitt has backfired!
L
letget on April 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM
Wow, Obama really is in trouble…his internals must be worse than anyone ever thought…talking about Climate Change, that is so “Gore” of him…
This should be Mitt’s come back…”Climate change, how about an attitude change in Washington”.
right2bright on April 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM
Among other things, Romney should be pounding catchy energy facts into our brains from now until November, wrapping the EPA around Obama’s neck as well.
BuckeyeSam on April 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM
Yea, good luck with that.
Climate change legislation + down economy = political failure. Please try.
Meric1837 on April 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM
Have ya SEEN the polling on AGW?
thebrokenrattle on April 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM
…
Wow, they’re just grasping now.
The only crowd who still believes in “climate change” are the marks who pay for this idiot’s campaign.
teke184 on April 27, 2012 at 1:08 PM
’cause I’m sure everybody paying $5+ for gas by November will be right on board with the current regime’s energy policy.
CurtZHP on April 27, 2012 at 1:09 PM
Get us out of our forced commitments to buy wind energy.
Mitt, you are our only hope!
tomg51 on April 27, 2012 at 1:10 PM
ha ha ha! “Scientific reality” ha ha ha! I sure wish Richard Feynman was still around.
perries on April 27, 2012 at 1:10 PM
Romney response: “I’m for climate change. I’m for the kind of change in climate that will change Obama’s yearround climate from that of Washington, D.C., to that of Hawaii.”
BuckeyeSam on April 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM
Obama just cannot run on his record.
His strategy seems to be in part not to run as the incumbent who has a (poor) record, but rather the challenger.
albill on April 27, 2012 at 1:12 PM
We need to realize what Obama’s real aim is here. He wants to eliminate farting cows to encourage dog eating as an acceptable alternative. Don’t be fooled by the ridiculous nonsense concerning global warming/climate change/climate disruption/climate stagnation.
NotCoach on April 27, 2012 at 1:12 PM
Mitten’s did push for cap&tax and he has made plenty of anti-coal statements over the years….but this really seems like an attack that should come from a PAC, not directly from Obama.
Buckshot Bill on April 27, 2012 at 1:12 PM
What are they contending? Yes, climate change is happening, always has happened since the time Earth has had a climate, and it will continue to change until the sun explodes. If they are contending something other than that, they chose not to make it at all clear.
Buddahpundit on April 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM
That’s because Obama and Romney are so much alike, standing so close together, that anything Obama flings at Romney splashes onto Obama as well.
FloatingRock on April 27, 2012 at 1:14 PM
What I’d tell the Obama campaign …
Keep shoring up your base because – that’s gonna pay off for you since you’re smarter than the GOP establishment – who’ve pretty much shi* all over their base.
Help the GOP establishment with its continued efforts to “depress” the base by outlining how closely Willard McDole’s policies and opinions mimick Obama’s.
HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 1:14 PM
Well “doggate” didn’t work…
right2bright on April 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM
Yes, wealthy white suburbanites will be the key demography in these elections and Obama’s team has reasons to be nervous about them.
This writer’s suggestion isn’t very good though, as those voters don’t worry this much about global warming.
The voters to whom global warming is a wedge issue are latte liberals in places like Cambridge, Manhattan or Boulder, not swing voters in suburban Philly or Fairfax County.
joana on April 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
These numbnuts really think climate change matters to the still-unemployed executives in Bucks County, PA? They think that’s the issue that got them to vote for Obama in 2008?
rockmom on April 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM
“Let me ask you, Mr. President, how much carbon does a grilled dog add to the atmosphere?
Hello?
Dog got your tongue?”
-Rombo at first debate
Bishop on April 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM
@joana – exactly right. Arlington, VA amd Seattle liberals may care about climate change, but stressed-out, broke suburbanites in PA and NJ sure as hell don’t.
Thanks to Obama, I was out of work for nearly three years and when I finally got a job I took a 30% pay cut and have to commute 100 miles a day. I spend over $300 a month now just on gas. Yeah, I really give a crap about climate change.
rockmom on April 27, 2012 at 1:19 PM
Oh, please, please PLEASE try that one. Not only will it backfire on you, but on the whole AGW “movement” as well.
Bob's Kid on April 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM
Right, because most people really want to pay more for energy, and basically everything, to save the planet from what might happen next century. That’s why Cap’N Tax passed with such widespread popular support. Oh, wait.
If King Obama wants to make climate change an issue he needs to have something better to offer than Kyoto and IPCC and Cap’N Tax “solutions” to the “problem”. Because nothing proposed will “solve” the “problem”. But all proposals will hobble an already badly struggling US economy. So go ahead and try to make it an issue King O.
Romney is wise about this he will simply reply that all of Obama’s proposed “solutions” to the “problem” will not solve the “problem” but will cripple the US economy and make everything much more expensive. And that it is at this time a matter of priorities, whatever the “problem” is. Then he talks about building more nuclear power plants.
farsighted on April 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM
The “Changers” were going to vote for this stool anyway, who gives fluke.
Rio Linda Refugee on April 27, 2012 at 1:22 PM
I feel sorry for 0bama. It is going to be very hard for him to campaign against Romney;
Everything that he could try to use as a wedge issue against a regular Republican, he can’t use against Mitt, because Mitt has been on the same side as 0bama, at one time or another.
LegendHasIt on April 27, 2012 at 1:24 PM
This is one of the few things Romney has really going for him in the upcoming election. Obama will have to be careful with the political grenades he throws, because they’ll be exploding uncomfortably close to his precious patootie.
MelonCollie on April 27, 2012 at 1:26 PM
There’s been a veritable blizzard of insanely idiotic ideas for the Obama campaign coming out of the media lately.
What’s up with that? Are they just being their natural moonbat selves, or have they finally realized this guy needs to go?
logis on April 27, 2012 at 1:29 PM
Wow, they have really lost it. Face facts, Dems. The 3 biggest issues voters will make their decision on this November is unemployment, the economy and debt. If Obamacare is left intact, add healthcare to the list. Have they seen how Obama polls on these issues?
TheLastBrainLeft on April 27, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Oblahblah will be running against the republicans and it will work because so many only vote down party lines regardless of who the candidate is and how badly he has performed.
Rio Linda Refugee on April 27, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Global warming is such a crucial issue at this time that we should all, to every extent possible, reduce our carbon footprint by, for example, limit non-essential trips a jet liners.
Oh, wait.
Madrid, Africa, Martha’s Vineyard x2, Hawaii x2, date nights in New York and Chicago, fund raisers, and so on and so on.
AcidReflux on April 27, 2012 at 1:33 PM
Yes, and his campaign is imploding. They have nothing to work with and every crude attack they make blows up in their faces. Did you notice they already are trying the “Obama killed Osama” theme, but that isn’t going to help them either.
Its all about J O B S. Its the economy and we aren’t stupid. Go ahead Zero, use the climate and we will spank you with it. Be sure to read the CRU emails, and all the NASA releases.
dogsoldier on April 27, 2012 at 1:34 PM
I don’t know what the official BO campaign slogan will be, but certainly the unofficial one is:
Never give a sucker an even break
perries on April 27, 2012 at 1:37 PM
They are either testing the waters, seeing how the Romney campaign will respond to minor attacks, or….
I figure the Dems don’t like Obama any more than the Repubs like Romney. And I’m not just talking about conservatives, many Rinos seem to prefer Christie or Daniels to Romney. Maybe the Dems are hoping that Obama loses, so they can run Bayh or Clinton in 2016; while the Rove wing of the GOP is hoping for a Romney loss to let Jeb Bush run in 2016.
Both sides might be trying to “out-suck” the other. Kind of like the little league episode of South Park.
Buckshot Bill on April 27, 2012 at 1:37 PM
Economy, jobs, gasoline prices. Mitt needs to keep turning every question back to that, whether it’s climate or contraceptives, or whatever else lame BS they try to distract with.
juliesa on April 27, 2012 at 1:39 PM
These are the people who could afford to buy a volt. How well did that do? Prius drivers are probably already a lost cause
.
Fighton03 on April 27, 2012 at 1:40 PM
Yes, Obama, by all means talk up Climate Change and Green Jobs some more. It worked so well for Spain.
theCork on April 27, 2012 at 1:44 PM
God I love you!
upinak on April 27, 2012 at 1:45 PM
Yes, let’s talk about the climate change scam no one really believes in or cares about any longer. Then we can talk about Solyndra, EPA crucifixions, Keystone, $4.00 gas, causing electricity prices to “necessarily soar”, the Jihad against coal, cancelling and preventing oil and gas leases, the Chevy Volt…
RadClown on April 27, 2012 at 2:03 PM
Good idea. Run with it.
forest on April 27, 2012 at 2:11 PM
The problem with Obama using climate change as a wedge issue against Romney– well, the problem with Obama using any issue against Romney– is that Obama now has a track record by which he’ll be judged on every issue:
2008
“…this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal…”
vs.
2010
Sea levels higher than in 2008. The trend line hasn’t changed a bit. Maybe the Romney strategy is right: Obama’s just in over his head. Or soon will be.
de rigueur on April 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM
sorry, 2010 = 2012
de rigueur on April 27, 2012 at 2:56 PM
Sad. Whatever Obama tries, he seems doomed to be disappointed in the American people.
Aardvark on April 27, 2012 at 3:13 PM