Can you imagine a Boeing or a Microsoft hiring a president with no private sector or managerial experience? I can’t, yet the American electorate thought it a good idea to elect such a person, Barack Obama, to lead the world’s largest economy – “an amateur” in the words of Bill Clinton.
From Solyndra to Fast and Furious to Benghazi, Obama’s domestic and foreign policies have been abysmal failures.
Now he wants a second term. What will that look like? Best case: a stagnant economy, high unemployment, trillion-dollar annual deficits, $8/gallon gasoline, more taxes and regulations, bigger federal government, millions more dropping into poverty, millions more on food stamps. Likely: Add a deep recession in 2013. Worst case: an economic collapse in 2014.
His opponent, Mitt Romney, turned around numerous companies, the Salt Lake City Olympics and the state of Massachusetts working with an 87 percent Democratic legislature. Now he wants to achieve the greatest turnaround in the history of the world – the United States of America.
Who is better qualified to achieve this turnaround? The amateur who cannot run on his record or the one who has a turnaround record second to none? The answer is obvious. Yet Washington voters will likely vote for the amateur. And they will reap what they sow.