Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Weekend Happy Thoughts/Column - "Obama's a Lock in 2012"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 10:45 PM
Original message
Weekend Happy Thoughts/Column - "Obama's a Lock in 2012"
Obama's a Lock in 2012

Sure, things look grim for the Dems this fall. But the base will rally, the economy will turn up, and the GOP will shoot itself in the foot—ensuring the president a second term.




Arnold Schwarzenegger made headlines this week by declaring that “Obama will get a second term in office,” especially if Republicans win the House. You’ve got to hand it to the grand Teuton. Even when he says something blindingly obvious, he makes news.
Of course Barack Obama is likely to be reelected. For starters, American presidents usually get reelected. In the last 75 years, incumbents have lost a grand total of three times: in 1976, 1980, and 1992. And what did Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George H.W. Bush all have in common? They had serious primary challenges within their own party (from Ronald Reagan, Ted Kennedy, and Pat Buchanan, respectively). The last president who lost reelection without a major primary challenge was Herbert Hoover in 1932.

A president who isn’t challenged in his own party can usually count on a decent turnout from his party’s base. (If party activists aren’t alienated enough to throw up a primary challenger in the spring, you can usually drag them to the polls in the fall.) A president without a primary challenger also has the space to move to the center to neutralize political weaknesses: That’s what Reagan did in 1984, when he toned down the Cold War rhetoric that was frightening moderates; it’s what Bill Clinton did when he signed welfare reform in 1996; and it’s what George W. Bush did when he signed a prescription-drug bill in 2004.

I doubt Obama will move as sharply to the center over the next two years as did Clinton, but he can do so to neutralize key weaknesses if he wants, because there is zero prospect that he’ll be seriously challenged in the primaries. No challenger would have any chance of stealing the black vote, of course, and even among white lefties, for all their grumbling, Obama has no national rival. In 1996, Clinton was petrified about a primary challenge from Jesse Jackson. But there’s only one Democratic pol who could keep Obama up at night, and she’s safely tucked away at the State Department.

The second reason Obama will likely win reelection is, oddly, the economy. Historically, when voters evaluate a president for reelection, they judge the economy not against some abstract standard but against the economy he inherited. That’s why Franklin Roosevelt could win 48 states in 1936 with the U.S. still mired in depression, and Ronald Reagan could win 49 in 1984, even though unemployment on Election Day was still 7.5 percent. Obama doesn’t need the economy to be booming in 2012 to win reelection, he just needs voters to feel that it is better than it was when he took office and heading in the right direction. If that’s the case, and most economists seem to think it will be, Republicans won’t get very far by harping on the deficit. In 1984, you may remember, a presidential candidate told voters to ignore the nation’s nascent economic recovery and focus instead of the country’s swelling debt. His name was Walter Mondale.

Finally, Obama’s third big advantage is his opposition: the GOP. The party has had great success in mobilizing older white conservatives, who weren’t particularly fond of Obama in the first place, and in a midterm like this one, in which younger and minority voters don’t turn out, their rage will loom large. But this very short-term success is preventing the GOP from grappling with its deeper problems attracting the Hispanic and “Millennial” generation voters who tilted heavily to the Democrats in 2008 and will comprise an even larger share of the electorate in 2012. As Schwarzenegger suggests, a GOP victory this fall will likely exacerbate the problem. With the Tea Party shaping the congressional GOP, the party’s immigration views will further alienate Hispanics.

The Tea Partiers will also put pressure on the party to attack popular government spending, as the Gingrich Republicans did after 1994. It’s worth remembering how Bill Clinton clobbered Bob Dole in 1996: He tied him to Gingrich’s assault on spending on education and health care. Obama could do something similar in 2012, proving that while Americans hate government in theory, in practice they demand it, especially in bad economic times. It’s hard to recognize it now, with the economy in the tank and Democrats running for cover, but take a step back and you can see that we’re still probably in the early stages of an era of Democratic dominance. It’s going to be a while before another Republican wins the White House, and when they do, I bet they have less in common with Sarah Palin than with Arnold himself.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-10-06/why-obama-will-win-a-second-term/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
angee_is_mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. thx 4 da late night positivity
Kick and recommend!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. But, if he wins re-election by turning into Bill Clinton, is that WORTH anything?
There's no reason we should ever have to settle for enforced centrism as the most acceptable leftward point in American politics(especially when, in effect, it's actually enforced somewhat right-of-centrism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. It is ALWAYS worth it to have a Democrat in the White House. The alternative is a Republican.
Does anyone with a functioning brain stem think a Republican in the White House would be preferable? People making the "they're all the same" argument are just not living in reality. Democrats may not be as good as a hypothetical Democrat or Green Party candidate or whatever, but they are always better then a real, current time (not Ike or Nixon's historical "Republicanism") Republican. No doubt. For Gawd's sake, if nothing else, think of the friggin Supreme Court.

Never forget this meme - "Gore is practically the same as Bush. Really. What's the worst that could happen?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. We never NEED to settle for as little as we settled for after 1996 again
That's what I'm saying. The OP is basically calling on the party to reduce itself to Clintonism again.

There are some things it will NEVER again be acceptable for a Democratic president to do:

these include

1)Any MORE cuts in social services.

2)Any MORE punitive policies imposed on the poor(besides which, nobody who hated people on welfare ever VOTED Democratic anyway).

3)Any MORE "free trade" deals.

4)Any MORE Middle Eastern wars.

If those things are done, nothing can possibly make up for them.

The party gave up trying to get Congress back for the rest of Clinton's era after losing it in 1994. Moving to the center means doing that again(especially since Obama was never that FAR from the center).

The days of "the lesser evil" have to end if this party is to have any reason to exist. There's no excuse for doing anything else to stick it to the base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. The OP even says that he doesn't think Obama will go as far to the center as
Clinton did - and I don't think he will either.

Frankly, Obama looks to be headed more to the left. This was the first week Elizabeth Warren was in for the economic briefings to the President (I'm not sure if she is in all of them or just some but she is in there now). The new NSC chief sounds like he is closer to where the "base" is.

Donilon to Replace Jones as National Security Adviser
By DAVID E. SANGER

-snip-
As deputy national security adviser, Mr. Donilon has urged what he calls a “rebalancing” of American foreign policy to rapidly disengage American forces in Iraq and to focus more on China, Iran and other emerging challenges. In the Afghanistan-Pakistan review, he argued that the United States could not engage in what he termed “endless war,” and has strongly defended Mr. Obama’s decision to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan next summer.


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/donilon-to-replace-jones-as-national-security-adviser/?hp


It is OK to allow yourself a moment of optimism. It really is. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I'm willing to be optimistic. I just don't want there to be a nightmare this November
n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. I certainly agree with that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. Until I see Jeb Bush running, I'm not worried....
Edited on Fri Oct-08-10 11:09 PM by Clio the Leo
.... and I think he will ... if not in '12, maybe in '16.

The Bushs are a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them ..... well MOST of them aren't stupid. At least not politically. Jeb is making a point to kinda stay on the political radar, but I think even HE knows that all the GOP can offer in '12 is another sacrificial lamb.

And let's all HOPE that the rumors of Hillary wanting to run in '16 are true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. I hope the rumors of Hillary running in '16 are false ..........
She ran on Bill's record, which means she would govern like Bill did. I was never a Clinton fan, and probably never will be. Triangulation politics is just another way to move the party closer to the right.

Someone has to put on the brakes, and the only people who can do that are the voters. I would of hoped that the part would of learned its lesson after Gore failed to win over the left. The left took a gamble and helped put Obama in office, but it seems we are getting screwed again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. Same here. If they put Rubio on the ticket with him, it's trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Two Floridians though?
..... now I can see Rubio running on his own one day .... or down ticket even as early '12 .... but I think to put them both on the ticket would be a bit of an electoral waste ... and with Jeb's Latina wife and kids, he might not "need" Marco like, ya know, some other white dude would. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. You make good points there, but they'd have to push the wife case real hard.
Anyway, it's not a happy thought that Bush would run. This country forgets fast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
impik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
5. On what base you assume that this is "happy thoughts" for people here?
Most of this site will be happy to impeach him today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-08-10 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Vocal minority. Silent majority.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
11. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
16. This article implies Obama is not center but may be leaning left...interesting. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azmouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
18. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
19. Saturday night kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ebadlun Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-09-10 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
20. That's all very well
But he'll be a six-year lame duck with a hostile congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC