THOMAS L. FRIEDMANI CAN remember bad presidential campaigns in good times and good campaigns in bad times, but it is hard to recall a worse campaign in a worse time. Mitt Romney's campaign has been about nothing, and President Obama's has been about Romney. I'm sure Obama's attacks on Romney's career at Bain Capital have hurt Romney, but they also seem to have hurt Obama — diverting him from offering a big optimistic message that says: here is the world we're living in; here's why my past policies were relevant; here's where we're going next; and here's why it will work. The president is punching so below his weight. It's like watching Tiger Woods playing Putt-Putt or Babe Ruth bunting. Obama is better than this. In his interview with Charlie Rose for CBS News last Sunday, President Obama acknowledged that one of the biggest mistakes of his first term “was thinking that this job was just about getting the policy right. ... That's important. But the nature of this office is also to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism, especially during tough times." I'd agree. Looking back, it always felt to me that Obama's nomination was a hugely important radical act — the culmination of the civil rights movement. But his election happened because a majority of Americans thought he was the best man to do something else: revive, renew and rebuild America for the 21st century. Yet he never consistently explained himself in those terms. His policies — like health care, saving the auto industry, raising mileage standards and “Race to the Top" in education — were discrete initiatives in the right direction, but each was fought separately, often in Congressional cloakrooms, and never synthesized into a whole that voters could fully appreciate or be inspired to get out of their chairs to support. His campaign today is the same. Is there an integrated set of policies, and a narrative, that could animate, inspire and tie together an Obama second term? I think there is. (I first explored this theme in a recent book I co-authored with Michael Mandelbaum.) And it's this: America should be for the 21st-century world what Cape Canaveral was for America in the 1960s. Cape Canaveral was the launching pad for our one national moon shot. It was a hugely inspiring project that drove scientific research, innovation, education and manufacturing. But we're not going to have a national moon shot again. Instead, Obama should aspire to make America the launching pad where everyone everywhere should want to come to launch their own moon shot, their own start-up, their own social movement. We can't stimulate or tax-cut our way to growth. We have to invent our way there. The majority of new jobs every year are created by start-ups. The days when Ford or G.E. came to town with 10,000 jobs are over. Their factories are much more automated today, and their products are made in global supply chains. Instead, we need 2,000 people in every town each starting something that employs five people. We need everyone starting something! Therefore, we should aspire to be the world's best launching pad because our work force is so productive; our markets the freest and most trusted; our infrastructure and Internet bandwidth the most advanced; our openness to foreign talent second to none; our funding for basic research the most generous; our rule of law, patent protection and investment-friendly tax code the envy of the world; our education system unrivaled; our currency and interest rates the most stable; our environment the most pristine; our health care system the most efficient; and our energy supplies the most secure, clean and cost-effective. No, we are not all those things today — but building America into this launching pad for more start-ups is precisely what an Obama second term should be about, so more Americans can thrive in a world we invented. If we can make America the best place to dream something, design something, start something, collaborate with others on something and manufacture something — in an age in which every link in that chain can now be done in so many more places — our workers and innovators will do just fine. But a narrative is not just a business plan. It has to be infused with values, and, in our case, the most obvious is “sustainability," which doesn't simply mean “green" or “no growth." It means behaving responsibly in the market and with Mother Nature so we can have growth that lasts. What “freedom" was for our parents' generation, “sustainability" has to be for ours. If we do not bring sustainable values to our banking systems and ecosystems, we are going to end up more “unfree" than if the communists had won the cold war — because without sustainable practices, repeated crises in the market and Mother Nature will impose more limitations on our way life than anything the Soviets ever could have. Weave it together and you have a narrative worthy of America in the 21st century, one that ties together the new world in which we're living with our traditional strengths and a set of policies for enhancing them. Others will have different ideas. Bring 'em on! Campaigns are a time for arguments — but arguments about the right things.
