Posted on 12/27/2010 5:52:19 AM PST by StatenIsland
On the day after Boxing Day, it’s worth noting that Barack Obama is down but not out.
You could tell as much from the contrast between his petulant post-election press conference and his peppy pre-Christmas press conference. In the former, he was crabby about accepting Republicans’ demands that income-tax rates on all taxpayers not be raised. In the latter, he was celebrating the lame-duck Congress’s acceptance of his stands on the New START treaty, repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell, and even the previously reviled tax deal.
Obama has obviously figured out that Americans prefer to see their president describe the glass as half full rather than half empty. That’s a good lesson for him, and for Republicans, as well — especially those who believe that the Obama Democrats’ shellacking in the midterms means that Obama himself will definitely lose in 2012.
History should provide some caution for these folks. Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush saw their parties fare pretty well in their midterm elections. But they were nonetheless defeated in their reelection bids.
In contrast, pundits thought that Ronald Reagan’s Republicans took a shellacking in 1982 (actually, about half their losses resulted from redistricting), and Bill Clinton’s Democrats definitely did in 1994. But both the 40th and 42nd presidents were resoundingly reelected, carrying 49 and 31 states.
Several factors will likely work less strongly against Obama in 2012 than against the Obama Democrats in 2010. Turnout will be different, for one thing. We may see again the record turnout of blacks we saw in 2008. Young people who pretty much shunned the polls in the midterms may turn out and vote — though the 34-point margin they gave to Obama was halved to 17 points for congressional Democrats in 2010.
The balance of enthusiasm favored Republicans and conservatives in 2010, as it had favored Democrats in 2006 and 2008. It could conceivably shift and favor the Democrats once again.
Another factor is that polls show that most Americans have favorable personal feelings toward the president. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both happened to have personal characteristics that people on the other side of the cultural divide absolutely loathed. Obama doesn’t.
His reliance on his teleprompter, his secret smoking, his irritability when not adored — these are pretty minor failings. People like his family and his obvious devotion to them. They don’t mind that he likes to get away and play golf or shoot hoops from time to time.
Then there is the powerful desire Americans have to see their presidents succeed. That worked for Bill Clinton in 1996 and George W. Bush in 2004. Polls and focus groups showed that voters in the middle of the political spectrum were ready to overlook their weaknesses and appreciated their strengths in those years. That could be the case with Obama in 2012.
Moreover, there will be a reluctance on the part of many voters, understandable in light of our history, to reject the first African-American president. I’m convinced — though I cannot prove — that Americans who feel this way far outnumber those few who cannot abide seeing a black man in the White House.
All of which does not mean that Obama is a sure winner. Polls suggest that if the election were held today he could lose to several possible Republican nominees who are much less well known and have weaknesses of their own. But they also suggest he could win.
Still, there are substantive issues working against Obama. Most Americans want to repeal Obamacare; he wants to keep it. Most voters rejected his vast expansion of the size and scope of government; he still thinks it’s a good idea.
Obama came to office with the assumption that economic distress would increase support for his policies to (in his words to Joe the Plumber) “spread the wealth around.” But the 2010 midterms make it about as clear as these things can be that voters reject such efforts.
American voters are not seething with envy over income inequality and are not convinced that we’ll all do better if the government takes away more of Bill Gates’s money. Obama, like the academics in whose neighborhoods he has always chosen to live, think they should be seething — and that, if the message is just delivered the right way, they can be convinced to do just that.
That’s a big difference on some fundamental issues. Enough to make the difference in 2012? Not clear.
Only ONE state has to demand proof that he is qualified under the Constitution and he will be OUT!
A Dem in-law from an affluent suburb of Wash DC was visiting us just before Christmas. She was shocked, SHOCKED, to see all the closed stores and restaurants here in flyover country where she grew up. She affirmed my perception that the inside the beltway crowd has no idea what is occurring in flyover land. Barone probably lives in her neighborhood.
>Another factor is that polls show that most Americans have favorable personal feelings toward the presiden...
Stopped paying real attention right there.
No polls that I have seen state anything remotely like that.
Westy, that's over half the electorate already. You neglected to mention those really "nice" people who think that voting against a Black Man (or even the Odd Mulatto) is racist.
You also completely ignore the Negro Homoerotic Factor (NHF). Apparently, anyone who makes Chris Matthews' leg tingle can be President for Life.
(1) I greatly mind the President's reliance on a teleprompter--because it gives the lie to the assertion from the Obamabots about his alleged "high intelligence."
(2) I do find him culturally offensive-- not because of his skin color. I simply loathe overeducated, arrogant, elitist, Marxist morons. (I still cling to my guns and religion).
While I cannot explain why the Senate Republicans were so eager to make deals with Obama in the lame duck session, the jury really still is out on how Obama will deal with the new dynamic on Capitol Hill. For crying out loud, the new House members and most of the new Senators have yet to take office. Barone here is engaging in the "instant analysis" so beloved by our chattering classes. I think that it was Clauswitz who warned us that the first reports are almost always wrong. And we haven't even gotten the real first reports yet.
Obama remains a threat to get re-elected. But let's not give him too much credit for his "victories" in Dec.
Baraq’s only hope is a 3 way race.
Then he has a decent shot at a Clintonian plurality win like 1992.
Romney as the Republican nominee would play the role of Bush I.
Huckabee as a 3rd party candidate would be Perot.
The GOP Senate possibly just destroyed the party with the START capitulation.
And I still think that Glenn Beck neutered the rage behind a good chunk of the Tea Party movement with his weird Mormon spectacle in DC.
So we have this situation: The GOP continuing to push supporters out the door. The Tea Party movement with sails luffing and being misdirected into lalaland by that weird, crying Beck guy. And to boot, the GOP has no viable candidates for 2012.
These realities make it tough to climb the hurdles presented by: the masses of illegal immigrants voting in our elections, a well-oiled communist voter fraud machine, and the fact that the majority of legal and illegal voters are on the dole. The commie bastards hold a monopoly on news and entertainment media, they control the culture, they control education, they control pretty much every industry, and they just seized the power to reign in internet.
Anyone notice how the media has reported ‘’record Christmas sales’’ and how Everyone appears to be optimistic about the economy and more people are traveling this holiday than last year.........but nada about the 9.6% unemployed (who can’t afford to buy a Christmas tree)
Watch the left hand(the one that’s hidden). The media wants you to keep watching the right hand.
Only a few weeks from an embarrassing, crushing defeat, it is a bit early to be declaring obama ok for 2012.
I don’t believe he’ll be the candidate, but if he is, the American electorate is under a strong delusion.
see senate results in nv, ct, co.
Liberal candidates won these purple states and 2012 has even more urban ghetto and out of touch college kid voters. Independents hate Obama, but it is a choice between 2 candidates.
> Westy, that’s over half the electorate already.
Sadly, I must agree.
> You neglected to mention those really “nice” people who
> think that voting against a Black Man (or even the Odd
> Mulatto) is racist.
These constitute a cross-breed mentality between Moron and Black-Supremacist, but I agree they require a category of their own.
> You also completely ignore the Negro Homoerotic Factor (NHF).
You’re right, I forgot the NHF, as well as the LBGTXYZ factor.
Adding these groups brings us to about 60 to 70% of the population.
The only ones among these groups who will NOT vote for the communist black man are the ones who’ve been hardest hit by the economy and have started paying attention.
While the MSM will do its very best to get our Dear Leader re-elected in 2012, Obummer’s only real chance is if the economy comes back to life. And, it has to happen in 2011, because it’ll be too late to “turn the tide” come 2012. The Independents (i.e. the mushy middle) don’t know what they believe, so their collective pocketbook will be what matters. If unemployment is still high and growth is slow, they’ll leave him in droves.
I wonder how many people reject this man solely on the fact that he is black? I am a life time conservative Republican and I would not hesitate to vote for a conservative black man.
> Then he has a decent shot at a Clintonian plurality win like 1992.
IIRC, the Perotistas also handed Clinton the presidency when he ran against Dole-ful in ‘96.
1. a communist, 2. not paying attention, 3. a moron, 4. a black supremacist.
It's getting pretty hard to underestimate the size of category 2.
56% of voters now have serious doubts about Obama’s natural born citizenship.
With the help of a completely silent media ( liberal/Marxist and conservative) Obama did manage to get on the ballot last election. Does Barone honest believe that Obama could get away with this **twice**?
This guy is no Bill Clinton. He’s done the libs just can’t bear to stick a fork in him yet. The independents elected him not the blacks and they are not going to vote for him again.
The states in the rust belt went red in 2010 from blue in 08.They realized that they really screwed up in a major fashion and I dont see them voting for the same nut that made things worse.Look at the numbers of rats that were outed and lost reelection.The rats know he is doomed in 12.
see senate results in nv, ct, co.
Liberal candidates won these purple states and 2012 has even more urban ghetto and out of touch college kid voters. Independents hate Obama, but it is a choice between 2 candidates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.