2012 election a `50-50 proposition' for Obama, top pollster says

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-la-pn-peter-hart-2012-obama-romney-20120511,0,4157284.story

By Paul West

12:37 p.m. CDT, May 12, 2012

WASHINGTON -- Few strategists watch American politics with greater sophistication than Peter D. Hart. In addition to his work for Democratic candidates, the Washington-based pollster has been conducting opinion surveys for NBC News and the Wall Street Journal since 1989. He’s one of the rare individuals in politics whose judgment is respected by insiders in both parties. So, when he has something to say, he’s well worth paying attention to.

Hart has just sent out his preview of the 2012 election, now less than six months away. His assessment may come as a rude surprise to those in his party who are feeling bullish about President Obama’s chances.

“This election is no better than a 50-50 proposition for the president,” concludes Hart, basing that on his polling, focus-group discussions and personal conversations with professional pols.

Like others who have been watching the campaign up close, he perceives an electorate that is “wanting wholesale change for the fourth election in a row.” Comparing 2012 to 1992 -- the last time a president was unseated -- he notes that economic confidence, as measured by the latest University of Michigan Consumer Confidence Index, is at 76. It was 77 when the first president Bush was headed for defeat.

[cali]

1. I get a sick feeling from reading that.

but that's my (unsophisticated) take on it.

[Mutiny In Heaven]

4. Seriously, don't worry.

I fully expect Allan Lichtman's non-mathematic methodology to have predicted the winner again.

[EFerrari]

9. Me, too, especially after seeing an article last week

that tried to claim central FLORIDA was crucial to the contest.

I wanted to vomit.

[Mutiny In Heaven]

2. I can't help but think

That the specifics of economic statistics are irrelevant in many respects this time around.

He mentions 1992, but that was after 12 years of more or less the same administration; when things dipped, it was squarely on Bush, he'd been there or thereabouts since 1980. He also happened to be facing a once in a lifetime politician in Bill Clinton.

There has been poll after poll which shows the majority do not blame Obama for the economy as much as they do the previous incumbent. As long as the message is right, the specifics of the economy are going to be much less important than people think.

[Dawson Leery]

15. 60% fault Bush for the current economic troubles.

35% fault Obama.

If there was anyone who came close to Clinton in terms of presentation, it would be Jon Huntsman.
Romney is a caricature onto himself.

[onehandle]

3. Hope he's wrong. 50-50 = GOP Win. nt

[jaysunb]

5. This quote says it all...

The German shepherd election is one in which the dog (the electorate) looks at an intruder (the officeholders) and barks and growls with great ferocity but in the end, rarely attacks or does much damage. By contrast the Doberman attacks with the intent to do bodily harm,” writes Hart. “The question to be resolved is whether the voters will just bark or attack.”

[liberal N proud]

6. They are setting up to steal it

Make the claim that the polls are close, it's a dead heat and they are 50 - 50, is the setup to make a GOP plausable enough that it cannot be questioned.

[EFerrari]

8. You beat me. n/t

[Dawson Leery]

14. +1

[EFerrari]

7. The Republican base hates RMoney.

He's the BushCo candidate.

The math is easy.

[Mutiny In Heaven]

10. Not convinced that they REALLY want him.

They might 'back' him, but I don't know...what better suits them going forward, Romney beating Obama and opening up gaping wounds among black and gay voters or, say, Jeb coming forward as a reformed 'moderate' in 2016?

I don't doubt the political smarts of the Bush brain trust, and it would seem to me backing Romney and his flat earth positions aren't going to serve the Republicans especially well with demographics and opinions changing as quickly as they are.

[oldhippydude]

11. the PTB may not be crazy for him... but he would be a figurehead anyway..

Grover has already stated that they only need him to sign bills.. under Willard's administration the real power would be some right wing cabal probably in the cabinet, ala Cheney..

whether they kept him for more than one term, before running somebody else, would largely depend on how obedient he is to the right wingers, and banksters..

on that matter of demographics.. i agree, that how ever they have attempted to neutralize, at least for this election cycle, with those draconian voter ID laws.. also the hacking of voting machines, and other electorial mischief remains a real issue..

[Mutiny In Heaven]

13. I can just see them playing the long game

They know that it bodes ill for the future having a Teabag congress and a crusty old man in the WH at this time. The best way for their get-rich fiscal conservatism to prosper is to modernise. I think Romney is this year's Dole, albeit one who will come closer due to the nature of the country as it is.

Long term, the GOP can't hope to keep afloat if they don't overhaul their brand. The Bushes will know this, they need to put a new face on conservatism, they need to appeal to homosexuals and minorities a heck of a lot more than they do now.

[EFerrari]

12. Let's not mistake the Bush oligarchy with the Republicans.

Although the latter is loyal, the former is much more powerful in our elections, imo anyway.