The Iowa caucuses kick off the official steeplechase to the Republican Party’s presidential nomination. While the results may not predict the ultimate winner, we can agree that talking about the 2012 elections is no longer premature. It’s time to examine the state of the U.S. electorate.
President Barack Obama’s job performance is rated positively by less than half of Americans. Yet the number who do approve of his performance exceeds — ever so slightly — those who disapprove of the job he is doing.
Many Democrats are disenchanted with the president and expected a bolder agenda and more charismatic leadership in solving long-term problems. Many shake their heads at what they believe is his political naivete in dealing with congressional Republicans. Still, on Nov. 6, it is not likely they will embrace a GOP candidate.
In spite of Newt Gingrich’s recent surge and rise to the top in some preference polls, Mitt Romney remains the favorite among Republicans nationally. Of course, the 50-state process may provide some bumps in the road for both Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich, so another candidate could potentially climb to the top, as did Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Herman Cain.
If the nominee is either Mr. Romney or Mr. Gingrich, the Obama campaign is cheered that most recent polls show the president defeating both in head-to-head match-ups. But Republicans hope the historically weak economy gives them a strong opportunity to reverse that picture.
Voters who are truly independent will carry the day for one candidate or the other, as will the enthusiasm one inspires in the electorate at large, which translates into turn-out. This leads to the matter of the mood of the 2012 voter.
One recent survey revealed a complex picture. The independent, nonpartisan Pew Research Center published the results of a recent comprehensive study of the electorate’s views and found historically strong feelings among voters about Congress.
“Two-in-three voters say most members of Congress should be voted out of office in 2012 – the highest on record,” Pew reports.
But there is a distinct partisan break on this disdain.
“A record-high 50 percent say that the current Congress has accomplished less than other recent Congresses, and by nearly two-to-one (40 percent to 23 percent) more blame Republican leaders than Democratic leaders for this,” Pew reports. “By wide margins, the GOP is seen as the party that is more extreme in its positions, less willing to work with the other side to get things done, and less honest and ethical in the way it governs.”
The economy, which the GOP hopes to use to damage Mr. Obama’s chances at re-election and also taint others on the Democratic ticket, remains troubling to those surveyed by Pew:
“Public assessments of the American economy remain gloomy — about nine-in-ten say the economy is in only fair (38 percent) or poor (53 percent) shape. Looking forward, most say things will either be the same (50 percent) or worse (18 percent) a year from now,” Pew reported. This gloomy view favors Republican candidates.
It will be a long ten months. Changes in partisan control of both chambers of Congress and the White House are, at this moment, entirely up for grabs.
I look at this from an Independents perspective, which others I have spoken with agree on fully. The problem is not Republican or Democrat it is the “incumbent” that is the problem.
As such this will be a very fluid election. Incumbent Republicans can be replaced either by a new freshman or a Democrat. A Democrat can be replaced by a new Republican and vice versa.
As such the major change will be a new Congress with few incumbents remaining. I also predict based on my conversations with many is that Obama will be a one term President. ala Jimmy Carter. There is no way that all of a sudden 21millon jobs will be created in 10 months. The housing market will not turn around and the debt ceiling debate will continue, the American people do not believe in the President or in Washington anymore to do it’ s job.
All the Republicans need to do to win this is run a candidate who appeals to the moderate middle, independent voters.
Those voters ran away from McCain in 2008 when he foolishly chose Sarah Palin as his running mate— her fundamental social conservatism is out of step with most Americans.
Alas, it appears the Republicans did not learn from this mistake, and are desperately trying to find the most extreme conservative in the current batch of candidates, because Mitt Romney “isn’t conservative enough”…
News flash folks: moderate independents won this for Obama last time, and they will vote for Obama again if you run someone like Santorum, even as the VP candidate.
“…….This gloomy view favors Republican candidates.”
hence the concerted effort by Republican leaders to sabotage every single legislative effort to create jobs and kickstart the economy.
Am I the only one who sees the total dysfunction in this attitude? Aren’t these people exhibiting destructive paranoid schizophrenic behavior? Shouldn’t they be confined to an institution where their insanity cannot harm the rest of us?
I am no fan of the Democratic party and their self serving ties with Wall Street and the unions but I think they would at the very least throw us a bone once in a while if the Republicans would allow them to. They might even lead us out of the economic morass that we are in if enough of us demanded it of them.
This is no horserace, this is the future of our country as a going concern that these folks are gambling with. It is time to pull the plug on all the obstructionists from both parties and elect someone that is not beholden to the corporate megalith and the 1%.
Even if Ron Paul doesn’t get the nomination and doesn’t run, I’m still voting for him. He might be running on a republican ticket, but that’s only to get the support he SHOULD have anyway. I’ll write-in his name, because I am so disgusted with the status quo. Republicans vow to cut spending, but don’t. Democrats vow to pull us out of wars, but don’t. It’s stupidity. It’s the same damn political party, two sides of the same coin.
Ron Paul 2012!
LOL, I wrote in Ron Paul for the last presidential election, because the Libertarian party ran a religious conservative (Bob Barr).
A vote for Paul is a vote for Obama. If you want 4 more years of out-of-control spending and freedom stealing, then vote for Paul. But, don’t complain when they come for your family, your guns, your money, and your freedom.
Gotta say you’re right: that’s how we ended up with LePage! Stubborn Mitchell voters who couldn’t see the writing on the wall…
EJ, see my note below to Pat Riote about libertarianism. You once thought I was a libertarian, but I think the libertarians are among the most dangerous!
Paul is a decent guy who is right about a couple of things and wrong about most. I like his position on the Patriot Act and most civil liberties issues, and although his foreign policy ideas are extreme (he would allow Iran to build nuclear weapons, for instance), he is correct that we can’t afford to be the world’s policeman.
On the other hand, he says he would return us to the gold standard, thus constricting the money supply and sending us into a deep depression; he would do away with the Federal Reserve system, destabilizing the nation’s finances and increasing the likelyhood of economic meltdowns; he would cut most federal regulations, leaving both workers and consumers at the mercy of the big multi-national corporations; he would do away with environmental regulations, leaving our rivers, lakes, land and air at the mercy of big multi-national corporations — and that’s just for starters. Libertarians say they are for personal liberty, but in reality their policies would take away our liberties by turning most basic powers over to the big corporations, and let those powerful corporations decide whether we will have safe products, safe working conditions, safe water to drink or air to breathe, etc.
Anarchism leads to the unmitigated oppression of the weak by the powerful, because nature abhors a vacuum, and so violent people — warlords — step in and take over when government disappears. Libertarianism (a kind of utopianism that advocates that the government should have almost no power) is “anarchism lite,” and in actual practice would lead to the loss of most of our liberties. We would have rule by the big corporations.
Where is Hunter Thompson when we need him.
Yeah, I can see why the alcohol- and drug-addled Thompson, who committed suicide, would be a role model for the left. They’re never so happy as when they’re manufacturing misery.
When all the name calling and blather is done and over… the candidate with the most electoral votes wins the election. There is no Republican in the race that will or can get more electoral votes than Obama.
Let us review.
Congress in April (seven months late) passed a budget with increases in spending. Democrats wanted to reduce borrowing caused by the budget’s increased spending by letting part of the Bush Tax Cuts expire. Republicans refused, thereby causing a huge budget deficit.
In August the House Republicans were shocked, shocked I tell you, that they were being asked to increase the Debt Ceiling to pay for the budget they passed in April. So they caused the Completely Bogus Debt Ceiling Crisis. Watching these chuckleheads in action, Standard & Poors lowered the country’s debt rating and the stock market dropped more than 500 points – one of its worst days in history. It still hasn’t fully recovered at year-end.
To get past the Completely Bogus Debt Ceiling Crisis, House Republicans agreed to set up the Completely Bogus Super Committee.
Deadlines set for the Completely Bogus Super Committee passed, with no effect, proving its complete and total bogusness.
Now it’s an election year. So I’m sure all of the Republican bogusness is over and we can get serious about solving our problems – NOT.
I love that word — “bogusness.” Thanks for making me smile!
:-)
The time has come for a third party. However, anything less than a majority in both houses from the third party and the White House will result in more gridlock. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are in the pockets of the corporations. Anyone who thinks the government is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people is asleep.
Finger on who’s pulse? Certainly not the average American. We are flat lined.
“By wide margins, the GOP is seen as the party that is more extreme in
its positions, less willing to work with the other side to get things
done, and less honest and ethical in the way it governs.”
This shows that the BDN and other liberal news organizations have done their job well. Even when democrats are in control, keep blaming republicans for everything and you will continue to get elected even when incompetent as Obama most certainly is.
Have you not watched congress in the last 2 years? Sounds about right.
“This shows that the BDN and other liberal news organizations have done their job well.”
You mean by objectively reporting? I guess so.
The GOP is the party that is more extreme in its positions, and they have been less willing to work with the other side to get things done. This was proven last summer when tea-party republicans in the House played chicken with the global economy over the debt ceiling debate, making completely unrealistic demands such as getting a constitutional amendment enacted in 90 days.
What about the “unbiased” news source that gave you your numbers in the post above?
Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St.
Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the last
Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Obama: 19 McCain:29
Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million McCain: 143
million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2
McCain: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain
won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the
country.
Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income
tenements and living off various forms of government welfare…”
McCain won 22 States. I am guessing the rest of the post is as much gibberish. In fact after checking it out on Snopes, the exact post was proven false back in 2000 when the exact same numbers were used for Bush vs Gore and attributed to the same person.
Just goes to show that some people will search and search until they find the information they want to hear, regardless of whether it is true or not. Obama won 28 states and recieved nearly 10 million votes more than McCain.
Your copy and pasted post is a HOAX and originated from a phony claim about the 2000 Presidential election.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp
You are wrong. Either correct your post or you’re a liar.
Look if they knew the truth, they wouldn’t be Republicans or Conservatives. That type of thinking only exists in the world of forwarded emails from senile senior citizens.
29 +19 = 48. The real number is Obama 28 +DC and McCain 22. Back to class for Professor Olson!
If you are correct, that Obama won 19 states and McCain won 29, who won the other two? Harold Stassen? (I recommend that people look him up if they’ve forgotten.)
Mr. Romney is pure corporate status quo. Santorum is the squeaky clean my religion is correct guy who runs on morals while acting like the middle class. He will burn your books.
I’m not sure who to root for. The unelectable? (Bachmann, Perry, Santorum) or the most moderate (Romney)? I won’t vote for any of them, but if Romney wins, I won’t move to Canada. If Perry wins, I’m looking for a job overseas tomorrow…
It appears that Perry and Bachman are out — so the seven dwarfs are now down to five.
Santorm’s speech after the Iowa caucuses showed spirit and heart (although I disagree with most of his views), while Romeny came across like an automobile salesman — maybe because his father once ran a Detroit auto manufacturer, American Motors.
Back in the 2008 election I predicted that whoever won, they would be a one-term president because the global economy was not going to get fixed in 4 short years.
This is the Republicans’ election to lose— and lose it they will if they field a candidate who is more socially conservative than fiscally conservative.
In my humble, unbiased opinion(gratuitous to Tom Groening) this president has been running a re-election campaign since he was elected in 2008, via the ACORN groups that have re-organized under other names. Just watch the ads that appear quickly on tv, with Obama in the picture and the byliner being the .gov and community organizer sites.
The community organizer-in-chief is still in that position, only from the highest level in our land.