Your best guess for Obama's probability of re-election

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama wins. It's a lock.

and the US fails

[Anonymous]

The US can't afford another 4 years of Obama. I hope you all are wrong.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Complete metaphysical certitude.

Not that I'm all that thrilled about it.

I would certainly like some of what you are smoking, Mr. Steele. This is pretty close to a 50/50 nation and Obama's not polling very well these days. Barring significant economic improvement, I'd put his chances of re-election at about 40%. Unemployement goes down materially, and it's a toss-up. This election is going to be about turnout, and you really don't understand how committed even vaguely conservative people are to voting Obama out of office; it's not the kind of thing you can discuss in polite society here in DC. Independents are going to turn out and skew heavily R (60/40); this won't show up fully in the polling due to the Bradley effect, and it's going to be 2004 redux; Obama's going to look good in the exit polling, but the numbers won't really be there. The D's are ambivalent and a bit tired of Obama; the R's view this moment as an existential crisis. (BTW I agree with this. From the conservative perspective, this one really is for all the marbles; what Obama would do in a second term--in terms of regulations, judicial and executive branch staffing, with wild cards such as a potential immigration amnesty on the radar screen--really would be impossible to undo.) I think enough liberally inclined people stay home that it's not a close as it otherwise would be. 53-47 Romney in the popular vote; 2-1 in the electoral college. You heard it here first.

All this assumes the Republicans do the smart thing and nominate Romney. I'd say Obama has about a 55% chance of winning vs. Cain and 60% vs. Perry, and it only goes north from there. Perry, especially, will fire up the left and prompt huge turnout. He's the second coming of Geo. W. Bush--except worse, which is something you and I should be able to agree on, Mr. Steele--and people will turn out in spades to vote Obama over Perry. Romney is bland and competent-seeming enough that I don't think the Dems will be as motivated, and competence is a message that is going to resonate with independents.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Complete metaphysical certitude.

Not that I'm all that thrilled about it.

I would certainly like some of what you are smoking, Mr. Steele. This is pretty close to a 50/50 nation and Obama's not polling very well these days.

Just remember that it is not one national election. Rather it is 50 state-wide elections. Only a handful of states will ultimately matter. It's no accident that while Romney is being beat up by the other Republicans, Obama is doing bus tours through swing states. Obama will gladly give up a 90 point loss in Alabama for a 1 point victory in North Carolina.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Complete metaphysical certitude.

Not that I'm all that thrilled about it.

I would certainly like some of what you are smoking, Mr. Steele. This is pretty close to a 50/50 nation and Obama's not polling very well these days.

Just remember that it is not one national election. Rather it is 50 state-wide elections. Only a handful of states will ultimately matter. It's no accident that while Romney is being beat up by the other Republicans, Obama is doing bus tours through swing states. Obama will gladly give up a 90 point loss in Alabama for a 1 point victory in North Carolina.

LOL. I know the rules of the game, Mr. Steele. I think you are underestimating the anti-Obama sentiment among swing voters across the country, but it will certainly be interesting to find out who is right.

[Anonymous]

Romney could pull a McCain and go off the deep end and/or pick a wing-nut Veep. That would motivate the Dems.

Either way, Obama is raising so much money and the Republicans are wasting all theirs right now trying to take each other out.

Also, if Ron Paul runs as an Independent, which he likely will, there go all your independent votes as well as some R votes.

Not to mention how Obama might capitalize on the Occupy Wall Streeters to motivate for votes.

It's gonna be Obama again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Romney could pull a McCain and go off the deep end and/or pick a wing-nut Veep. That would motivate the Dems.

Either way, Obama is raising so much money and the Republicans are wasting all theirs right now trying to take each other out.

Also, if Ron Paul runs as an Independent, which he likely will, there go all your independent votes as well as some R votes.

Not to mention how Obama might capitalize on the Occupy Wall Streeters to motivate for votes.

It's gonna be Obama again.

All possible, but unlikely. Nothing in Romney's record suggets he is stupid or undisciplined; indeed, quite the contrary. Obama's money is, of course, quite helpful to him, but I don't think it will be decisive. He can run all the ads in the world, I think there are lots of people who just aren't interested in listening anymore. It will certainly help him build an effective organization, but he's not going to out-execute Romney in the basic blocking and tackling of campaign operations. (I agree Obama's money advantage would likely be decisive against someone like Cain.) Paul will not run as an independent, and he won't attract enough votes to make a difference if he does. Everyone learned their lesson from Ralph Nader. OWS is a flash in the pan with no real legs; an irrelevancy by mid-December at the latest, to say nothing of a year from now.

[Anonymous]

"it's not the kind of thing you can discuss in polite society here in DC"
The same could be said about the Republicans. As an independent with Republican friend, I have stop listening to them. Lets see "he is a socialist", "his healthcare plan will be the end of the country", "My god man, he is black!" Please, Cain, Perry, Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Romney? What the f*** do you all stand for??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: "it's not the kind of thing you can discuss in polite society here in DC"
The same could be said about the Republicans. As an independent with Republican friend, I have stop listening to them. Lets see "he is a socialist", "his healthcare plan will be the end of the country", "My god man, he is black!" Please, Cain, Perry, Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Romney? What the f*** do you all stand for??

Really? I've never heard anyone say things like "My god man, he is black" as a reason not to vote Obama. I guess your "Republican" "friend" is not a Cain supporter either. Who does your friend like for 2012 then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Complete metaphysical certitude.

Not that I'm all that thrilled about it.

I would certainly like some of what you are smoking, Mr. Steele. This is pretty close to a 50/50 nation and Obama's not polling very well these days. Barring significant economic improvement, I'd put his chances of re-election at about 40%. Unemployement goes down materially, and it's a toss-up. This election is going to be about turnout, and you really don't understand how committed even vaguely conservative people are to voting Obama out of office; it's not the kind of thing you can discuss in polite society here in DC. Independents are going to turn out and skew heavily R (60/40); this won't show up fully in the polling due to the Bradley effect, and it's going to be 2004 redux; Obama's going to look good in the exit polling, but the numbers won't really be there. The D's are ambivalent and a bit tired of Obama; the R's view this moment as an existential crisis. (BTW I agree with this. From the conservative perspective, this one really is for all the marbles; what Obama would do in a second term--in terms of regulations, judicial and executive branch staffing, with wild cards such as a potential immigration amnesty on the radar screen--really would be impossible to undo.) I think enough liberally inclined people stay home that it's not a close as it otherwise would be. 53-47 Romney in the popular vote; 2-1 in the electoral college. You heard it here first.

All this assumes the Republicans do the smart thing and nominate Romney. I'd say Obama has about a 55% chance of winning vs. Cain and 60% vs. Perry, and it only goes north from there. Perry, especially, will fire up the left and prompt huge turnout. He's the second coming of Geo. W. Bush--except worse, which is something you and I should be able to agree on, Mr. Steele--and people will turn out in spades to vote Obama over Perry. Romney is bland and competent-seeming enough that I don't think the Dems will be as motivated, and competence is a message that is going to resonate with independents.

That's a lot of fancy thinking, but right now the Republicans are slaughtering each other, the "existential crisis" is whether they can vote for a black man or a mormon, when it should be about social conservatism vs. fiscal austerity. And poll after poll demonstrates that the GOP voters are grasping at straws. They will support anyone who is not Romney. That's why everyone but Rick Santorum seems to have had their moment of glory, only to plummet a few weeks later. And no matter what he does, Romney sits at 23%. You didn't like him last time, you don't like him this time. The conservatives are going to hammer on the mormon thing and the fact that he invented Obamacare (and you know what, he did). Romney has to emerge because you can't pick the eccentric candidate, the batshit crazy candidate, or the not so smart guy who hates social security but supports an open border with Mexico. But that's where it all ends.

[Anonymous]

To all those right wing nuts - who do you think got us into this mess? Why the hell would you want to have someone in office who has faith in the Republican ideology? You've all been snowed, how can you possible believe in trickle down when taxes were cut in 2001 but job creation sucked for the next 7 years? 7 years is a long time to test a theory, don't you think? Regulatory neglect and greed brought down this great country, but yet the right continues to preach "deregulate Wallstreet". Are you just stupid or do you REALLY believe all their crap?

Obama will be here for 4 more years and THANK YOU GOD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To all those right wing nuts - who do you think got us into this mess? Why the hell would you want to have someone in office who has faith in the Republican ideology? You've all been snowed, how can you possible believe in trickle down when taxes were cut in 2001 but job creation sucked for the next 7 years? 7 years is a long time to test a theory, don't you think? Regulatory neglect and greed brought down this great country, but yet the right continues to preach "deregulate Wallstreet". Are you just stupid or do you REALLY believe all their crap?

Obama will be here for 4 more years and THANK YOU GOD.

well that is just sad.

I've always thought Obama gets re-elected in a tight battle, because my guess was that the economy would be turning around or at least improving enough by summer 2012. I still feel that way, but a third party progressive could have an interesting impact.

Romney would at least make it close.

[Anonymous]

The problem for republicans is this: In response to 2008, they didn't move closer to the center. Instead, they doubled down on conservatism, shrinking their base -- for example, they lost any chance of getting conservative hispanics because of their stance on immigration, though they shored up their support from the religious folks and tea partiers, who they already had.

The Republican field is full of people who appeal to the base but not to swing voters, who will make the difference in the election. The only exception is Romney, but the base doesn't trust him. So Obama will most likely be reelected. If yesterday's economic news is the beginning of a turnaround, I agree that it will be a metaphysical certitude.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

zeitgeist Mitt