Comments on: GOP Wins in 2010 Could Lead to Big Losses in 2012

By: Mark Rosenthal

Mark Rosenthal — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:54:46 +0000

As one who does hardcore electoral statistics, I can tell you that Obama has the better hand of cards for 2012, no matter how you slice it. The economy was actually taking another hit in 1936 as FDR firmly whipped Alf Landon 60-40. In 1964, the economy was sputtering and the south was pissed off over the Civil Rights Act and still, LBJ won a massive landslide, 61-39 over Goldwater. At this point in the game in 1982, Reagan’s numbers were even a tick lower than Obama’s are now. And Reagan came back to win a 58-42 landslide in 1984. Bill Clinton’s numbers at this stage of the game in 1994 were under Obama’s, and his health care initiative had FAILED. The GOP of 1994 was also better organized than it is in 2010. And Clinton came back to trounce Bob Dole by 8 points in 1996. GWB43 does not fit the re-election pattern as well. His popularity numbers were soaring after 9-11 and yet his re-election was a lean win against John Kerry, who (many do not know this fact) got the highest percentage of a losing candidate fighting against an incumbent in the entire history of the Union. Winning percentage changes: FDR increased his PV% by 3 points in 1936 over 1932. Eisenhower increased his PV% by 2.2 points in 1956 over 1952. We cannot compare Nixon correctly, as he went from a 3 man race in 1968 to a two man race in 1972. Reagan increased his PV% by 8 points in 1984 over 1980. 1980 had a third party candidate (Anderson), who did get 6.6% of the PV ala Perot in 1996. Clinton, in 2 three-man races, increased his PV% by 6 points in 1996 over 1992. GWB43 increased his PV% by 3 points in 2004 over 2000. FACIT: Obama is poised to pick up between 3-5 points in 2012 and add 5 to 8 states to his column. Only 4 times in 114 years has an incumbent been turned out of office, and in 3 of those four occasions, the incumbent was a republican: Hoover in 1932 Ford in 1976 Carter in 1980 Bush 41 in 1992. In most cases, the incumbent was re-elected and only in the case of Woodrow Wilson was his re-election win leaner than his initial win. Many wish to compare Obama to Carter in the hope that he will also be a one term president, but statistically, the comparison to Ronald Reagan fits much better most of the time. The 1st amendment guarantees us all the right to as much propaganda as we want. But demographic and electoral statistics tell me that the probability of Obama winning a LARGER landslide in 2012 than he won in 2008 is extremely high. I did a complete statistical analysis to this in late 2007, here is the study.

By: handworn

handworn — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:38:49 +0000

Try hitting that “Return” button more often. This would have been much easier to read with paragraphs not quite so long.

By: GOP Wins in 2010 Could Lead to Big Losses in 2012 - Politics and Other Controversies - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:38:13 +0000

[...] [...]

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:28:02 +0000

Mr. Pavelyev is worried that we might end up with a more conservative Congress in 2012, but then Obama might win re-election in 2016.

Well, WHAT’S WRONG WITH THAT???

In 1996, Clinton won re-election–but Congress remained in control of the Republicans. Was divided government so bad? We got welfare reform passed. We got a balanced Federal budget for the first time in decades. The economy boomed.

If we can drive Congress sharply to the right, let Obama have his Presidency for a second term! If we don’t overreach like Gingrich did, a more conservative Congress will kill any more of Obama’s liberal schemes anyway–and the nation will do well.

I would take divided government over one party controlling everything. It seems that when one party controls everything, hubris and arrogance sets in and they go way beyond what the voters could tolerate.

By: jwbeeno

jwbeeno — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:39:56 +0000

Wow, that actually makes pretty good sense to me dude.

RT
http://www.online-privacy.at.tc

By: kogiks

kogiks — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:14:06 +0000

As a neutral observer from the Philippines, I hope that Americans don’t lose their perspective and keep faith with their present Democratic government. After eight years of really bad governance by the previous Republican leadership, the challenges that Americans are facing now are complex and enormous. Progress is indeed slow in unraveling the mess that the Bush-Cheney government has left behind but the overall trajectory is consistent and encouraging. More than ever Americans must come together in forthcoming state and city elections to ensure that the overall Democratic agenda is concluded. America has lost prestige around the world because of the missteps and arrogance of the Bush-Cheney government. This prestige is slowly being regained by the the election and progress of Barack Obama. He just needs to push a little harder with the support of all right thinking Americans which I believe are considerably more numerous than noisy tea party organizers.

By: ottovbvs

ottovbvs — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 16:20:04 +0000

………There’s a lot of sense in this but I think the writer is being over optimistic about Republican chances next year…….Sure they are probably going to pick up some house seats but the Obama admin has already signalled it’s going to make a big effort next year and will probably a introduce an immigration reform bill that will be deeply schismatic in Republican circles, and there’s also the benefits of incumbency which are not a mirage……At best the Republicans pick up a few house seats which will paradoxically have the effect of strengthening the Democratic caucus because the losses are going to be blue dogs but could lose several senate seats since no less than 9 Republican senators are retiring………and contrary to this comment

“7 james ramsdell // Nov 15, 2009 at 6:36 am

I think you’re being too optimistic about the chances of the economy ” roaring” back so soon. ”

…….Once economic recovery gathers steam it can be surprisingly rapid…..at least that has been my experience in the last five economic downturns……..it wouldn’t surprise me at all to see 5% growth in next years first half and unemployment falling sharply by the late summer of 2010……Essentially Republican hopes for revival all center on a failure of the US economy to recover so they are essentially betting against this country’s economic resilience………suppose this turns out to be a wrong bet……what’s plan B?

By: james ramsdell

james ramsdell — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 11:36:48 +0000

I think you’re being too optimistic about the chances of the economy ” roaring” back so soon. Unless enough conservatives are put into Congress in ‘10 to repeal the stimulus bill, the only jobs that are going to be created by it are public sector jobs. The private sector will be suffering for years because of the destructive policies of the Obama/Pelosi regime.

By: Daniel99

Daniel99 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 06:02:21 +0000

You do not seem to recall that many libertarians and conservatives did not support McCain and some even voted for Obama. The McCain-Feinberg law was anathema to many, and, indeed, its major effect was to increase the the influence on elections of rich leftists like Soros and cheaters like ACORN.
Also remember that the Democratic Party made a strong effort to recruit presentable candidates who ran almost as conservatives, the so called Blue Dogs and it was mostly these who wrested seats previously held by Republicans. They will soon have to explain why they voted for the unpopular leftist bills served up by Pelosi and Reed, which mainly rewarded Democrat supporters like tort lawyers and union leaders.
The guy that beat Hoffman (assuming he did so) ran far to the right of the Republican candidate, was a vet, an opponent of gun control, a family man etc.
And almost all prominent entertainers (and the press as well but it is rapidly becoming irrelevant) pushed for Obama; who boasted of his bipartisan attitudes and his hope to cleanse the political stable, which instead he has wallowed in.
His foreign policy is promoting chaos in the world, while his domestic policies seem aimed at minimizing employment particularly among the young and among blacks. That these groups will love him in 2012 is far from clear unless he changes his ways very soon. Those that remain ignorant and get their politics from entertainers might do so, but lots of them, seeing the consequences of their folly in 2008 may just lose interest.
Republicans who run as mushy pseudo-democrats will, in my opinion turn off more voters than those who stand for conservative values like those of Reagan. Reagan won reelection in a landslide. The first Bush failed do so in part because he was too willing to go along with the Democrats.
No doubt winning in 2012 and even 2010 will not be easy, but making use of the energy possessed by the tea party movement can be the winning factor.

By: FuzzyLogic

FuzzyLogic — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:08:02 +0000

I don’t think it will be that bad in 2012 regardless for a few reasons.

1) Obama ran as an amorphous candidate, long on style, short on substance. In 2012, he has to run on his record. Hopenchange and post-partisan unity was a one-time deal.

2) The coalition that elected him – blacks, youth, suburbanites – won’t be there. The suburbanites are gone thanks to the health care debacle and record deficits. The black vote will still be there, but my guess is that the turnout to elect the first black president was much larger than the turnout to re-elect him will be. As for the youth, will they be as excited about the 51 year old politician as they were about the hip, gauzy 47 year old candidate? Plus, the youth vote is going to be more offset by some seriously PO’d seniors.

3) Bear in mind that even in the most perfect circumstances ever for a Democrat (a poor McCain campaign, unpopular incumbent, economic collapse, in-the-tank media, historic candidacy, etc), Obama still only garnered 53% of the vote. Want to bet that more than 3 out of 100 people have either changed their minds about this guy or will stay home next time?