No October Surprise

Boo! the ghosts of Octobers past.

In predicting a Romney win, I am assuming no event will arise to reverse the current momentum. I am betting against a proverbial October surprise.

Time alone makes that less likely. The one October surprise I most expected, an Israeli bombing of Iran, is surely not going to happen before the election now. If the Israelis had calculated that they had to do it before the election, they would have done it well before, so that as much dust as possible could settle before voting in the US. They do not want to help Obama get re-elected. If they have waited this long, it makes sense to wait just a bit longer. If Obama wins, they can go as early as November 7. If Romney wins, they may not have to go.

Obama does not have the option of a “Wag the Dog” adventure to rally the nation behind him. He can’t suddenly go into Syria, for example. The US is too war-weary. Anything that looked like voluntary involvement on Obama’s part would work against him.

What else might happen? A terrorist attack? If so, this works in Romney’s favour, not Obama’s. Obama has staked his reputation too plainly on getting Bin Laden, with the implication that he is the conqueror of Al Qaeda. He has to at least look better than Bush post-9/11 on this score. This is the obvious explanation for the administration’s denial for two weeks that the Benghazi attack was an act of terrorism.

An economic collapse in Europe or China? Again, works for Romney, against Obama, as Romney is the guy who’s supposed to know economics.

Some sudden peace gesture by Chavez, Ahmadinejad, or Kim? This has actually been rumoured. But it would be hard to predict how this would play. It would have to be something substantial not to look like a stall. But if substantial, it would look as though they were seeking to influence an American election, or even as if they were working with Obama. Since they are America’s enemies, this does not necessarily reflect on Obama favourably. Probably the reverse.

That leaves some personal scandal. Here again, the possibilities favour Romney. He seems to be a genuinely straight-up guy in terms of his personal life. Not drinking eliminates a lot of opportunities for scandal. A former leader of his church, still married to his high school sweetheart. This could all be a hypocritical sham, sure. But he’s the son of a famous man; he grew up in the public spotlight. What are the chances he could have maintained such a sham for so long?

On Obama’s side, by contrast, his early life is obscure, so that it is possible to imagine something troubling there that we do not yet know. In fact, there are many rumours about this—not just the bagatelle about his birth certificate. If the reader has not seen them, I am not going to repeat them.

If, however, the Romney campaign has anything on Obama, they probably won’t release it. If they are winning anyway, as they seem to be, there is no point in doing so. And any slinging of mud holds risks—the chance of a backfire is fairly high.

Nice try, Donald Trump. Nice Try, Gloria Allred.

Israel's October Surprise

This writer is saying the same things I have been saying here:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/when-israel-strikes-iran-in-october/

Hard to believe there's no fire behind all the smoke about an imminent Israeli strike on Iran.

The Coming October Surprise

There is definitely chatter going on about Obama dropping Biden as VP candidate in favour of Hillary Clinton.

Here's what I think is behind it.

Israel believes Iran is very close to having a nuclear weapon. Their calculation is to strike now, if they think Obama is going to be reelected, or wait, if they think a new administration might be more favourable to Israel.

The polls now favour Obama.

Therefore, the Israelis are likely to strike at least before January. Indeed, the calculus may suggest striking as soon as they are reasonably certain of an Obama win. That would probably be September or October. Just in time for an “October surprise.”

If they strike, there is likely to be a muscular response from Iran. This will dominate the news for a time; Israeli sources are talking about a month-long war.

Whether or not Obama was a good bet to win before this point, this will probably make him a shoo-in. Nobody can blame him for the carnage, and the natural tendency will be to rally round the Commander in Chief. This also takes the public focus off economics, Obama's weak spot, and puts it on foreign affairs, where he seems to have done a decent job. Or rather, Hillary Clinton seems to have done a decent job.

This development, if it comes, will leave the Republican ticket flat-footed, as its expertise is entirely on domestic economic matters. The Ryan pick cemented that, and struck me as risky in part for this reason.

At this point, Obama doing anything is perhaps a case of spiking the ball, but it does make sense to highlight the foreign policy side by taking on Clinton as VP candidate, giving the Democratic ticket the image of the team who are most likely to be able to handle the foreign crisis. That is not quite so clear with Obama-Biden—Romney and Ryan just might pip them in perceived competence even so. It is Clinton who has been the face of US foreign policy. Presumably, Obama has or soon will have advance warning from the Israelis at least that they are seriously considering an attack.

If he does decide to swap Biden for Clinton, I think it will be an indication that the balloon is going up.

Some say Clinton is unlikely to want the job. However, if she wanted the Secretaryship of State, she might also go for the Vice Presidency in these circumstances. If she wants to succeed Obama as president, then, win or lose, this puts her in a somewhat better position, by eliminating Biden as a rival in 2016. If she does not want to succeed Obama as president, then this is a good way to cap off her political career. Rockefeller made the same decision.