Fact: When looking at the last eight elected presidents, all but two (George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter) got a second term. When considering this, we can conclude that Obama’s chances of getting reelected are higher than his chances of not getting reelected. His approval rating are in the 40’s so it’s hard to say. Nate Silverman of the New York Times analyzes previous presidents and what America thought about them right before reelection. It becomes clear that, it’s not always black and white. Who we might think will win, won’t necessarily do even close to as well as expected.
Obama has had some criticism over the debt ceiling debates, which were said to have “crystalize his vulnerabilities”, which in turn frustrated swing voters as well as annoyed his base, but most importantly, mark the major policy victory for the republicans. Shortly after the debate, Obama’s stock on Intrade, a popular betting market fell below 50% and has remained in the high 40% range ever since. This has undoubtedly made Obama a bit of the underdog.
He also has a jewish, Hispanic, working class white- problem, and somewhat an African- American problem. His standing amongst Jews has declined, with a 54% approval rating amongst them. His African American approval rate declined from 90% to 80%. His problems don’t end with races, but extend to his problem in Ohio, Florida, and New Hampshire.
Nate Silver of the New York times writes, Nevertheless, this is an unusual circumstance. Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton and both Bushes all looked like the favorite to win a year in advance of their re-election battles, either having strong approval ratings or good-enough ones accompanied by robust economic numbers. When we look at the last eight elected presidents, only Carter faced a situation worse than Obama’s: approval ratings in the low 30s rather than low 40s, the likelihood rather than the mere possibility of a recession, a primary challenge rather than a clear path to renomination and a crisis in Iran rather than a string of foreign-policy victories.
The other seven had stronger fundamentals heading into the election year. This includes the elder Bush, who lost despite an extremely high approval rating and a disarrayed Democratic field (Mario Cuomo and others skipped the race at a time when Bush appeared unbeatable). It also includes Reagan and Clinton, who had grave problems early in their terms but who saw their numbers tick upward at the very moment in their presidencies that Obama’s have continued to slide. None of this is news to the White House. Following the debt-ceiling debate, Obama’s strategists started comparing their boss with the original comeback kid, Harry Truman — an implicit concession that the president will most likely fight 2012 from behind.
Obama is undoubtedly having a few “problems” and Nate states that all of these, however, are symptoms of Obama’s larger problems, a set of three fundamental misgivings shared by much of the American electorate.
• First, many of us understand that Barack Obama inherited a terrible predicament. We have a degree of sympathy for the man. But we have concerns, which have been growing over time, about whether he’s up to the job.
• Second, most of us are gravely concerned about the economy. We’re not certain what should be done about it, but we’re frustrated.
• Third, enough of us are prepared to vote against Obama that he could easily lose. It doesn’t mean we will, but we might if the Republican represents a credible alternative and fits within the broad political mainstream.
Each of these factors, in turn, can be quantified.
• The first factor, Americans’ performance reviews of Obama, can be measured through his approval ratings.
• The second factor, economic performance, can be measured through statistics like G.D.P.
• The third factor — essentially, the ideological positioning of the Republican candidate — is sometimes thought of as an “intangible.” But it can be measured too, and it matters a great deal.
No comments:
Post a Comment