In a thoughtful piece on how Obama should run his 2012 re-election campaign, Ed Kilgore makes this observation:
Moreover, Obama has a moral obligation to remind voters that the presidential election is not, as a simple matter of fact, a referendum, but a decision for and against two candidates, two parties, two philosophies, two agendas, two prospective Supreme Courts, two prospective foreign policies, two views of economic inequality, two attitudes towards the very wealthy and the very poor, and two concepts of the very purpose of government. Americans unhappy with life in the United States who vote against Obama next November will not simply be registering their unhappiness with the status quo, but will be voting for policies ranging from the abandonment of reproductive rights and progressive taxation to the proposition that anyone rich enough to be regarded as a “job creator” should be exempt from accountability to the public for much of anything.
This is, philosophically, what it all boils down to. The Grover Norquist Republican party vs. people who believe anything else. The Republican base has been purging itself of ideological impure Repblicans like the conservative 2nd coming of Mao. The Republican Party’s cultural revolution, if implemented according to their stated beliefs would, in all likelihood, bring about the pseudo-apocalyptic downfall of America that they prophesize so gleefully should Barack Obama win a second term.
Obama has to go for truth and in that case it means negative. He has to call a spade a spade and not mince words with the American electorate about how Republican policies would negative impact their lives in all kinds of ways.