"What might this mean for the Electoral College map? This is even more difficult to address this far in advance of the election. Chris Cillizza had an interesting recent article on the topic entitled "Obama Could Survive Some Bumps on Road to 2012 Re-election." Cilizza looks at the 2008 results, notes that Obama scored 365 electoral votes in 2008, and concludes that he has room to spare. The article title would be correct for early 2009. But the president has endured many, many bumps since winning his 365 electoral votes. This has weakened him significantly in many states. For example, he won North Carolina and Indiana by a combined 40,000 votes, when the Republican Party was in the midst of a perfect storm. It seems highly unlikely that he would win these states today, especially after the 2010 election results in these states."
"Similarly, given the results of 2009 and 2010, Virginia, Ohio and Florida are looking iffy for the president. This is especially true of Florida, where a very weak Republican gubernatorial candidate beat a highly touted Democratic candidate last year, and where a very conservative Republican just missed winning a majority of the vote in the three-way Senate race. These states, plus reapportionment changes, would bring Republicans close to an Electoral College victory."
"Democrats will doubtless reiterate that the 2012 electorate is unlikely to look like the 2010 electorate. This is true; however the likely Obama surge is built into the above analysis. But consider this: if you take the 2008 turnout levels, but model the white vote to resemble 2010, President Obama would lose, albeit narrowly. Set the Democrats' share of the white vote to halfway between 2008 and 2010, and President Obama would win narrowly."
"Even then, recreating the 2008 electorate will be difficult for the Democrats. For one thing, the president is no longer the candidate of change; public anger at the status quo will now be directed at him, rather than Republicans. Also, the historic nature of re-electing the first black president seems much less than that of electing him. In other words, re-energizing casual Democratic voters to the extent that he did in 2008 is tough."
"More importantly, he has little control over Republican voters. During the post-convention period, when McCain and Obama were running neck-in-neck in the polls, Republicans claimed to be about as enthusiastic about voting as Democrats. Gallup showed a dramatic drop-off in Republican enthusiasm after the passage of TARP; this coincided with Obama's final lead opening up. The GOP may be similarly unenthused about 2012, but it seems unlikely (again, depending on the nominee). In other words, the GOP doesn't need to be on the positive side of the enthusiasm gap to make 2012 much closer than 2008; it just needs to motivate its own troops to close it."
Where’s the birth certificate?
Americans are stupid. Obama is a lock to be re-elected.
If the Republicans put up another dud like John McCain, it won’t matter anyway. Obama will win re-election no matter what the polls on his policies say.
Everything will hinge upon the candidate we put forth. We’d better be on our game this time.
Obama will win by default if his opposition continues to splinter behind factional Palinites, Randites, Mittites, etc.
There needs to be an obvious leader in the field, and she isn’t.
And also as always, the media will pick the lousy Republican candidate in Iowa and New Hampshire and OWEbama will win again, which is likely to shuttle the planet towards Armageddon. Not kidding. Sorry.
Sean,...States all over the nation have introduced legislation that demands that candidates provide certified documentation that PROVES they are who they say they are. and are qualified, constitutionally, for the position.
So,..Sean,...Even if none if this legislation passes, we **KNOW** that there are plenty of totally TICKED-off legislators ( many of them lawyers, themselves) who will demand that Obama prove that he is a natural born citizen.
1)The GOP will run Romney who picks Huckabee
2) American voters will too busy watching American Idol
3) the media will be in overdrive about ‘Do we REALLY want to return to 2000-2008??”
4) Tea Party sits out Presidential elections and focuses on the Senate.
5) Gop holds Congress and retakes Senate 54-46
6) DeMint Senate Majority leader and he has a plan..
7) Palin sits out but does play congressional kingmaker again
8) The reelection of Obama 46-44 is the last victory from the MSM, who immediately eliminate nightly news casts, NY Times is bought out by Trump and the Washington Post is neutered. Numerous third parties run.
9) Gas is 6 bucks a gallon, unemployment is officially 9.8% , the GNP is at a standstill yet Obama with a 1 billion dollar warchest wins anyway
10) American sheeple breathe a sigh of relief that no riots occur after numerous rumors of urban mayhem will happen if Obama is not reelected.
Just My predictions..
Friends, I tried to warn you last year, get Pelosi out of the way and Obama loses his political anchor dragging him down. It is still early but so far I don't see the new Republican congress effectively fighting Obama.
Not only did Obama lose Pelosi as a drag on him, but now he has little or no responsibility to get things passed making it even easier for him. He will call for new ‘critical investments’ at the SOTU address, then ask the Chamber of Commerce to support them getting passed, then go on the FNC BoR show and look ‘reasonable’ (thanks to worthless Bill), and just sit back and tell Republicans to deliver.
By about August it will be obvious who has the upper hand.
Below are the states offer a guaranteed lock or a strong likelihood of going 0bama’s way, for a total of 259 EV. Included are some states whose statehouse and legislatures changed over after the Nov 2 elections, because presidential elections draw more minorities to the polls.
In short, beating 0bama will be a steep climb. He’ll have a big advantage going in.
CALIFORNIA (Lock)55
NEW JERSEY (Likely)15
COLORADO (Likely) 9
NEW MEXICO (Likely) 5
CONNECTICUT (Lock) 7
NEW YORK (Lock) 31
DELAWARE (Lock) 3
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Lock) 3
HAWAII (Lock) 4
OREGON (Lock) 7
PENNSYLVANIA (Likely) 21
ILLINOIS (Lock) 21
RHODE ISLAND (Lock) 4
IOWA (Likely) 7
MAINE (Likely) 4
VERMONT (Lock) 3
MARYLAND (Lock) 10
MASSACHUSETTS (Lock) 12
WASHINGTON (Lock) 11
MICHIGAN (Likely) 17
MINNESOTA (Lock) 10
The article does make a good point that many people at least respect the fact that he is not the same reprobate in his personal life that Bill Clinton was.
But that will not be enough to save him with high unemployment, a skyrocketing misery index, and tumult and chaos in general rocking the globe. I doubt his re-elect numbers at the ballot box will break 40%.
The danger is that might be enough though if the GOP nominates another limp-wristed milquetoast, and a fire-breating economic populist gets on the ballot as a 3rd choice. Then you would have 4 more years of an extremely weak Obama with GOP majorities in the House and Senate.
By 2012, The National Popular Vote bill could guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). That candidate would get the needed 270 electoral votes.
Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn’t be about winning districts or states. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.
In the 2012 election, some pundits and campaign operatives already agree that only 14 states and their voters will matter under the current winner-take-all laws (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state) used by 48 of the 50 states. Candidates will not care about 72% of the voters– voters in 19 of the 22 lowest population and medium-small states, and big states like California, Georgia, New York, and Texas. 2012 campaigning would be even more obscenely exclusive than 2008 and 2004. In 2008, candidates concentrated over 2/3rds of their campaign events and ad money in just 6 states, and 98% in just 15 states (CO, FL, IN, IA, MI, MN, MO, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, PA, VA, and WI). Over half (57%) of the events were in just 4 states (Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia). Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. Voter turnout in the “battleground” states has been 67%, while turnout in the “spectator” states was 61%. Policies important to the citizens of ‘flyover’ states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.
The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO– 68%, FL – 78%, IA –75%, MI– 73%, MO– 70%, NH– 69%, NV– 72%, NM– 76%, NC– 74%, OH– 70%, PA — 78%, VA — 74%, and WI — 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE –75%, ID – 77%, ME — 77%, MT – 72%, NE — 74%, NH –69%, NV — 72%, NM — 76%, OK – 81%, RI — 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT — 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and border states: AR –80%, KY — 80%, MS –77%, MO — 70%, NC — 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, VA — 74%, and WV – ‘81%; and in other states polled: CA — 70%, CT — 74% , MA — 73%, MN – 75%, NY — 79%, OR – 76%, and WA — 77%.
The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA ,RI, VT, and WA . The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, and WA. These 7 states possess 74 electoral votes — 27% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
http://www.NationalPopularVote.com