Reëlection Watch: May 2011
This is the first in a series of articles we will publish every month between now and the general election. As we get closer to November, 2012, the frequency will almost certainly increase.
Each time, we’ll take a look at the various factors that typically influence election outcomes, and compare them to the previous month. Since this is the first in the series, I’m taking a bit of a finger-in-the-air approach.
Let’s look at each factor individually.
Polls
The Washington Post/Pew Research polls are looking very good for Obama. His overall approve/disapprove numbers improved by five points among Democrats, and ten points among the critical-for-reëlection independents. Unsurprisingly, his Republican numbers are unchanged, but that’s not likely to impact his reëlection prospects. On terrorism, Obama’s numbers improved even among Republicans. On the economy, however, he has dropped six points among independents.
The latest Right Track/Wrong Track polls (taken in April), show a 41-point negative spread, which is strongly indicative of a “throw the bums out” sentiment. The numbers are far worse than they were in the run-up to the 2010 elections, or those shortly after the new Congress was sworn in. This makes it hard to tell, by itself, the degree to which these numbers apply to the President versus Congress. Considering the overall approval/disapproval numbers, however (even assuming that the “bin Laden bump” isn’t persistent), one can credibly conclude that it’s more a reflection of Congress than of the President.
The latest CNN/Opinion Research polls are interesting. Compared to Bill Clinton at the same point in his first term, Obama is polling five points better (+5 in “definitely vote for,” –5 in “probably not vote for,” and about the same in “probably vote for” and “definitely not vote for”). This isn’t a “bin Laden bump,” either; the numbers are essentially unchanged from January. On the other hand, Independents have a nine-point spread against Obama, and Moderates are evenly split. In the cross-tabs, a bare majority of Independents (50%) and a solid supermajority of Moderates (61%) approve of Obama’s performance. But the numbers reverse when looking at how they feel about Obama’s handling of the economy—61% of Independents and 50% of Moderates disapprove.
The overall picture is very mixed. It’s better than Clinton was at this stage in his first term, and other comparisons to Reagan’s first term show Obama tracking remarkably closely to Reagan.
The Competition
Mike Huckabee did some damage to his reputation by comparing the national debt to the Holocaust. The damage isn’t huge in the short term, but his refusal to apologize or retract the statement increases the likelihood that this move will bite him in the future.
Michele Bachmann made a similar statement before Huckabee did, but it’s so much in line with her existing public image that it’s not likely to change her prospects; it merely reinforces the image she already has…at least with those who are aware of her existence.
Donald Trump continues to act more like a reality show star than a candidate for President. The longer he does this, the less likely he will appear at the top of the ticket for the Republican Party in 2012.
With Trump’s prospects fading fast, the most credible candidate today remains Mitt Romney.
From the standpoint of the competition, polls suggest that the election is Obama’s to lose, a situation that hasn’t really changed in months.
The Economy
The economy is a mixed bag right now.
On the positive side, unemployment recently shrunk to its lowest level since July, 2009. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is at its highest level since the summer of 2008, and has been rising at a rapid clip pretty consistently for the past two years.
On the other hand, the real estate market remains soft. Analysts have suggested that there is a four-year inventory backlog, which indicates a long wait for improvement in the housing market.
Furthermore, oil prices have risen significantly of late. West Texas Intermediate crude is trading above $110 per barrel, a 30% rise since February, and more than 2½ times the price of the trough during the 2008 recession. Gas prices at the pump are nearly four dollars nationwide, within a hairs-breadth of the 2008 peak just prior to the recession. Those prices, particularly accompanied by a rise as rapid as this one, significantly increase the chances of another recession. Unemployment has most recently been on the rise again, suggesting that we may be seeing the early signs of exactly such a scenario. If we have another recession now, the effects are likely to linger into next year’s election season. Voters are not kind to sitting Presidents during recessions, or shortly after they end.
This one is hard to peg, with such conflicting data. I’m going to call the economic impact as mixed for now.
Other Factors
The release of Obama’s “long form” birth certificate eliminated the last barely-credible vestige of birtherism. Whether intentional or not, the decision to release it at the same time as authorizing a military operation to kill Osama bin Laden does a fine job of highlighting the triviality of the birther claims.
And, of course, being the man in the White House at the time that bin Laden was found and killed gives a short-term boost regardless of other factors. It also puts to rest many of the memes that Obama is soft on terrorism, which should have more lasting effects. In essence, it all but eliminates one potential talking point for the Republican candidate on next year’s ballot.
The Trends
Here’s how things look overall.
| Area | Effect |
| Polls | Slightly positive |
| The Competition | Neutral |
| The Economy | Mixed |
| Other Factors | Positive |
Conclusion
Things are looking pretty good for Obama’s reëlection prospects right now. The biggest danger currently within view is another recession. If that happens, he could lose even to Sarah Palin. But, barring another recession, his reëlection looks today to be assured.
We’ll be back next month to see how well this situation has held out.
Related Articles
- Will Obama Win Now? (bigthink.com)
- Obama Reëlection 71 Percent Likely After Bin Laden Kill, Says Irish Bookmaker (huffingtonpost.com)
- Leader of the ‘Piac (logarchism.com)
- Not so fast! Obama still hasn’t shaken the Carter syndrome (salon.com)
- Killing Bin Laden: A Pivotal Political Moment for Obama (swampland.time.com)
- Obama gets bump in polls after Osama Bin Laden killed (rightpundits.com)
- Obama Approval Numbers After Bin Laden Kill (thedailybeast.com)
- Bin Laden Death Should Have Only Modest Influence on 2012 Election (elections.firedoglake.com)
- Steele: Bin Laden slaying shouldn’t scare off 2012 GOP hopefuls (thehill.com)
- How Republicans praise Obama for getting bin Laden (dailykos.com)
- Dead-Cat Bounce Continues (thepage.time.com)
- Bin Laden Kill Bumps Obamas Numbers (lezgetreal.com)
- Obama Approval Jumps to Two Year High (politicalwire.com)
- Obama’s popularity in state sinks in pre-bin Laden poll (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- Measuring The Bin Laden Bounce, If There Is One (outsidethebeltway.com)
- Chris Weigant: Obama Poll Watch: April 2011 (huffingtonpost.com)
This entry was posted by Michael Weiss on May 6, 2011 at 9:00 am, and is filed under Reelection Watch. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0.You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.
-
#2 written by filistro 2 years ago
-
#3 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Again, paralleling 1948 when Truman was elected partly because of the do nothing Rep congress. bin Laden being killed made me think of another factor which helped Truman ~ dropping the bomb(s) ie national security leadership.
If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen Can one imagine mittens, Huckabee, Pawlenty etc. sayin’ something similar.
>
Why did Bush beat Kerry. 1) Kerry was a god awful candidate. 2) Bush was an incumbent wartime president. 3) Reps were incorrectly perceived at the time as being stronger on defense/national security.
Perception = reality
It’s very hard to defeat an incumbent president. Reagan didn’t seal the deal against Carter, w/all his baggage, until the final weekend, when the polls broke in his favor, Reagan only getting 50.75% of the vote. Anderson got (8%). And yes Virginia, there are no Reagan’s in the current group of Rep wannabes.
But as always, I’ll take a wait and see attitude …
-
#4 written by filistro 2 years ago
However, the single biggest factor in Obama’s reelction is (and will remain) the Republicans’ disastrous vote in the House to dismantle Medicare.
The Dems are just having way too much fun on this issue.
Talk about handing a gift to your opposition. “Here, hit me on the jaw, right here, it’s a sensitive spot for me. But wait till I get my hand out of the way so you’ve got a clear shot…” -
#5 written by filistro 2 years ago
And the bump goes on… check Obama’s approval numbers.
Take particular note of the graph below the tables. What a pretty sight.
-
#6 written by dcpetterson 2 years ago
OMG filistro, did you realize, even Rasmussen has Obama at a +1 !!
Of course, the public is fickle, and the election isn’t going to be held tomorrow. But still!
Apparently, the public isn’t buying the Republican meme that the death of bin Laden was Bush’s doing, and that we need to torture more people. Otherwise, Obama wouldn’t be getting a bump, particularly with the Democratic opposition to torture.
Let’s hope this will finally put the rest all that offensive propaganda that Republicans are better at national defense than Democrats are, or that Democrats are “weak” on terrorism. I think we should ask bin Laden whether Democrats or Republicans are better at taking out threats to America. Oh wait, we can’t ask him. He’s at the bottom of the ocean.
-
-
#8 written by filistro 2 years ago
@DC.. Oh wait, we can’t ask him. He’s at the bottom of the ocean.
Jimmy Fallon commented that it’s been a really tough year for the ocean. First BP dumps in a few million barrels of oil, then Japan leaks in a whole bunch of radioactive water, and finally, as if all that’s not enough, they put Osama bin Laden in there…
-
#9 written by mclever 2 years ago
-
#10 written by Turrboenvy 2 years ago
On real estate:
First, I only know what I observe. We rent.I don’t think housing will “recover” any time soon.
Most importantly is supply. Thanks to the boom, we’ve got more houses than people who can afford to own them. Stock is not going to go down for years. It’s going to take a lot of population growth to catch up. Construction will suffer greatly, because who’s going to build a house when they can buy from existing stock cheap.
And unlike consumables, houses are durable. It’s not like the houses will be “used up,” or even go obsolete (like computer parts) and reduce stock any time soon.
The other problem is what people consider “recovery.” House prices are still above their pre-boom ranges, aren’t they? Houses are supposed to gain value over time, but unless we hit another boom, they’re not going to reach boom prices soon. They’ve “corrected” and will not be going back up — Especially with the glut of houses.
-
I know, it does sound rather pro-Obama, doesn’t it? The thing is, I’m not convinced that the Obama of April, 2011, would beat the Reagan of April, 1983, in a head-to-head. But none of the Republican bench right now is garnering that level of enthusiasm. Now the Obama of May, 2011, probably would beat the Reagan of May, 1983, but that’s a temporary kind of thing.
The big unknown is the economy. A lot can happen to an economy in 18 months. Just look at where George H. W. Bush was in May, 1991, when the end of Operation Desert Storm was still fresh in the public’s mind. His approval ratings were through the roof, and the economy was still doing fine. But the spike in oil prices that came from the operation led to a decrease in discretionary spending, which led to a recession, which contributed to (but was certainly not the sole cause of) his defeat in 1992.
We have a similar oil price spike here, and a similar reduction in discretionary spending…
-
#12 written by mclever 2 years ago
-
#13 written by mclever 2 years ago
-
Turrboenvy,
You’re seeing what I’m seeing. But housing is a funny kind of product. It’s durable, true, but unlike cars or washing machines, houses are immovable in any practical market sense. So having a glut of housing in Las Vegas doesn’t really help anyone if there is a sudden population boom in Omaha.I’m reminded of what I saw in the late 1980s. In Houston, there was a huge (and frothy) boom in housing during the early part of the decade, fueled (!) by a steady rise in oil prices. There was a rather sudden drop in 1986, and the real estate market there crashed (part of the Savings & Loan collapse). It took about a decade for housing prices in Houston to recover. At the same time, in Los Angeles, the late 80s had a boom that was sustained even as Houston was crashing. The Los Angeles boom was fueled in part by the money being poured into defense (especially SDI). The Los Angeles housing crash didn’t occur until the Clinton years, when defense funding was cut dramatically. But the housing boom was then shifting to the San Francisco Bay area and, a little later, the Puget Sound region, funded by the Dot Com boom and the rise of Microsoft.
And so it goes. Usually, real estate booms are regional. There are regional recoveries now that are serving to soak up the real estate backlogs. In other parts of the country, though, that’s not happening. We’re probably looking at a spotty recovery in the housing market.
-
mclever,
Maybe we can hope the oil markets overreact and the price drops enough to stave off a recession…
Cart before horse. I think the recession is already starting, but it will probably be relatively mild. There wasn’t a whole lot of discretionary spending going on in the first place, so there wasn’t far to drop.
-
#16 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Considering that this meme has been 40 years in the making, a single event won’t undo it altogether.
The cheney/bush misbegotten/misguided/unplanned/total waste of blood and treasure Iraq War put to rest the Rep strong on defense/notional security meme, especially w/young voters.
Plus being caught w/their pants down on 9⁄11.
Fascinating watching Bush’s job approval go from 90% to 25% Oct. 2008. And speaking of national security, Katrina enters into the equation also.
Again, Reps are stuck w/mittens as he is the only semi-adult, non bat-shit crazy fool in the field ~ imo. And re: mittens, Mark McKinnon doesn’t think he can be the second comin’ of Dutch. FWIW
The former Massachusetts governor launched a 2012 exploratory committee on Monday to a collective yawn. Romney should lead the GOP field—but his Tea Party misfires and connections to Obamacare mean he won’t win, writes Mark McKinnon.
Mitt Romney tries so hard. And he’s so damned earnest. But among his long list of impressive credentials, I don’t think president is going to ever make the résumé.
By all conventional standards, Romney should be running away with the Republican nomination. A solid executive-government experience outside of Washington (a plus these days). Highly successful businessman in the private sector. Solid family man with strong religious background. Personal wealth. Leading man handsome. Prodigious fundraiser. Been-through-this-before drill. Knows the ropes.
Plus, there is a historic GOP tradition of handing the nomination baton to the guy who’s been standing second in line (e.g. Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, John McCain).
So, why is it that with the announcement of his exploratory committee today there seemed to be a huge collective yawn? And the refrain from most people, including me, “What, I thought he announced his exploratory committee a year ago.”
Mitt Romney is damned by timing and circumstance.
Let us ponder some of Romney’s problems:
yada yada yada
~~~~~ -
The cheney/bush misbegotten/misguided/unplanned/total waste of blood and treasure Iraq War put to rest the Rep strong on defense/notional security meme, especially w/young voters.
Not in any of the polls I’ve seen. Got some to back that up?
Plus being caught w/their pants down on 9⁄11.
Funny thing about memes. Instead of the reaction being a “why didn’t you stop it from happening?” it was more of a “thank God we have the Republicans in charge to take care of this.” The meme set that reaction, and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan, coupled with the meme, led to the general consensus that Gore wouldn’t have gone in, but with a Republican in the White House, we were gonna kick butt and take names.
Fascinating watching Bush’s job approval go from 90% to 25% Oct. 2008.
But a big contributing factor was the economic meltdown. And the quagmires of Afghanistan and Iraq, which looked endless. But that’s just one guy, so the meme survives by calling Bush an exception. If the next Republican President performs as badly in national defense, then the meme may start to change.
And speaking of national security, Katrina enters into the equation also.
Not so much. National security is not generally thought of in terms of domestic affairs. Democrats have the meme of being better at dealing with domestic noneconomic affairs.
-
#18 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Poll: Bush Ratings At All-Time Low
“We” disagree on the definition of national security, especially since the arrival of Dept. of Homeland Security
btw, Bush achieved the record for highest disapproval ever:
President Bush has set a record he’d presumably prefer to avoid: the highest disapproval rating of any president in the 70-year history of the Gallup Poll.
In a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday, 28% of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing; 69% disapprove. The approval rating matches the low point of his presidency, and the disapproval sets a new high for any president since Franklin Roosevelt.
The previous record of 67% was reached by Harry Truman in January 1952, when the United States was enmeshed in the Korean War.
Bush’s rating has worsened amid “collapsing optimism about the economy,” says Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who studies presidential approval. Record gas prices and a wave of home foreclosures have fueled voter angst.
Bush also holds the record for the other extreme: the highest approval rating of any president in Gallup’s history. In September 2001, in the days after the 9⁄11 attacks, Bush’s approval spiked to 90%. In another record, the percentage of Americans who say the invasion of Iraq was a mistake reached a new high, 63%, in the latest poll.
Assessments of Bush’s presidency are harsh. By 69%-27%, those polled say Bush’s tenure in general has been a failure, not a success.
~~~~~Congrats!
Again, all fame is fleeting
btw, it’s been reported mittens is also studying Reagan’s voice and speech patterns, which begs the question? Did Obama study Lincoln’s voice and speech patterns.
-
-
#20 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Gallup: Sarah Palin is the GOP’s preferred foreign policy candidate
>
MW, as mentioned in my previous post, we disagree on your national security definition ie Iraq War, Katrina, Port security etc. btw, the 2004 election was totally about national security, having very little to do w/the economy and cheney/bush squeezed by Kerry, a god awful Dem opponent using the fear factor/misinformation meme that’s worked so well for them previously.
Plus turdblossom registered 300/400k new Rep voters in OH/FL between 2001 and Nov. 2004 ie while Bush was riding high in the polls on his faux national security meme.
take care
-
shiloh,
we disagree on your national security definition ie Iraq War, Katrina, Port security etc.
I think you miss my point. It’s not your definition, or my definition. Rather, it’s the collective definition of the constituents. And, in terms of election outcomes, it’s the collective definition of actual voters. That’s where the meme matters in the end, because that determines who drives future policy.
-
#22 written by shiloh 2 years ago
That’s where the meme matters in the end, because that determines who drives future policy.
So all the inane/idiot wars America has gotten into the past (50) years were the fault of public opinion?
Interesting many think the huge Vietnam War protest is partly responsible for LBJ’s not running in ’68.
>
Also interesting one could easily say the 2001⁄2009 disaster of cheney/bush was a major factor in the election of the tall guy w/a Muslim/Arab sounding name. A country which has a 300⁄400 year history of racial oppression.
And I get that you say it’s all about the economy, but i say it’s a combination of cheney/bush incompetence, etc. Obama defeated Hillary mainly because of her Iraq War vote which she did not apologize for. Plus Obama was the better candidate/campaigner.
-
shiloh,
So all the inane/idiot wars America has gotten into the past (50) years were the fault of public opinion?
In part, yes.
Interesting many think the huge Vietnam War protest is partly responsible for LBJ’s not running in ’68.
Indeed. And the opposition to the Vietnam War was a big part of why Nixon campaigned on the promise of ending that war with his secret plan (consisting of admitting defeat and bringing everyone home). Had that level of opposition existed back in the 50s, we probably wouldn’t have gone in there in the first place.
one could easily say the 2001⁄2009 disaster of cheney/bush was a major factor in the election of the tall guy w/a Muslim/Arab sounding name.
One could. But was it foreign policy, domestic handling of Katrina, the economy, the way that things were dragging in Afghanistan, the way that things were dragging in Iraq, or other stuff? I’d posit that it’s a combination of all of them to varying degress with different people. And, yes, I’m sure a lot of that stuff rubbed off on the Republican party in general (the results of the election are certainly supportive of that). But for it to become a meme of the party, it needs to persist more than two years. It didn’t.
Obama defeated Hillary mainly because of her Iraq War vote which she did not apologize for.
And on what do you base this assertion?
-
#24 written by Jungle Jim 2 years ago
My own opinion is this:
One point that needs clarification is the make up of the so-called “independent voters”. At one time this was a stable group of moderates who didn’t substantially lean toward either party. But the general dissatisfaction among Republican voters with their own party has swelled the ranks of this group and pulled it to the right. Does anyone doubt that they are still Republicans? -
#26 written by Jungle Jim 2 years ago
-
#27 written by filistro 2 years ago
-
#28 written by Jungle Jim 2 years ago
-
#29 written by maxakabirdpilot 2 years ago
-
#30 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Jan/Feb 2008, plus as mentioned Obama was the better candidate/campaigner, plus he was the new kid in town and Hillary represented the old school Dem Hierarchy ie voting for the Iraq War resolution mainly for political expediency, not because she thought it was a good idea.
MW’s not going against idiotic popular public opinion meme because it wasn’t politically prudent at the time. ie a coward/weasel.
Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way! ~ Thomas Paine Another reason flip/flop expert mittens will have problems in 2012.
Re: Nixon/Kissinger/Vietnam War: “Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize.” ~ Tom Lehrer
Something “we” and most folk agree on ~ Reps have always been better at national security meme ie their constant need for a boogeyman as when the Soviet Union broke up and Communism collapsed they switched to the Middle East and Muslim/Arab boogeymen.
>
Interesting SEAL Team Six was also involved in Carter’s failed Iran hostage mission. The H-53’s used in that mission were from HM-14 which “we” shared a hangar bay with at NAS Norfolk in 1980. They were given a (12) hour notice and “poof” the whole squadron was gone, no one knowing what happened. Later heard they relocated to Bahrain as their operational center which was amusing to us ’cause their detachments never went on ships, instead shore basing in Marseilles, France, Barbers Point, Hawaii and other exotic locations getting plenty of per diem along the way.
I digress.
The main reason for the failed Iran mission, the H-53’s had to fly low to the ground to evade radar and sand got in the engines and one of the helo’s had to abort and they needed every helo to complete the mission ie no emergency contingency plan.
btw, urban legend trivia: The Israel “special forces unit” which performed the Raid on Entebbe also volunteered to do the Iran hostage mission, but Carter refused their help. Woulda, coulda, shoulda …
-
#31 written by mostlyilurk 2 years ago
-
#32 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Conservatives never shut down, but they do pout.
They are regrouping making ready for the exact right opportunity to pounce!Again, quoting Grog, I love you guys!
Whereas liberals never go away ie part of our DNA.
>
Kind of ironic as Reps win elections by constantly spewing their ad nauseam meme, never deviating from the script, and of course liberals can never agree on anything, which is part of “our” appeal lol.
If Dems could ever get on the same page ~ look out!
-
>Considering that this meme has been 40 years in the making, a single event won’t undo it altogether.
I agree. However, it puts a significant dent in it. Fox will put enormous effort into rationalizing it away, but at least it has made them sweat.
For some reason, I keep remembering back to an episode of Bill Maher where Ann Coulter referred to her fellow guest, Richard Belzer, as “Osama Bin Laden.” That kind of line always played well with righties in the Bush era, because they liked to think of Dems as traitors who were “soft” on terrorism and possible closet sympathizers. It’s now much harder for that kind of narrative to resonate with the public, with the Democratic President having not only nabbed Bin Laden, but killed him. The fact that he did it amid a different foreign policy than that of the previous president, who was always expected to be the one to capture Bin Laden, further cements this perception.
It’s like the birthers. After Obama released his long-form, most commentators predicted it wouldn’t make any difference in public opinion. Conspiracy theorists will never be convinced, they said. How surprised they were by the recent WashPost poll, which revealed a sharp decline in the number of believers. The fallacy the pundits made was in failing to distinguish between hardcore birthers and the many casual observers on the fence who weren’t sure what to make of the evidence, but were open to persuading.
Similarly, the death of Bin Laden won’t influence the opinion of the true believers who want to say Democrats are soft on terrorism. But it greatly blunts the persuasiveness of those right-wingers who try to spread this message, by creating a counter-narrative. The original narrative won’t disappear on the right, and it won’t cease to be influential, but it will be pushed back.
-
#34 written by filistro 2 years ago
@mil… It’s looking like they’ve done the exact same thing with their decision to eliminate Medicare.
No kidding. That Medicare vote is the most entertaining spectacle I’ve seen in years. And now TPM is reporting that it turns out the Ryan budget doesn’t come close to eliminating the deficit unless they privatize Medicare. So it wasn’t just “another good idea”.. it was pretty much the only arrow in their quiver, and now they’re falling all over each other trying to back away from it.
No wonder our righties aren’t anxious to talk to us these days.
(I sure do miss them, though. I really do
-
#35 written by shiloh 2 years ago
The fallacy the pundits made was …
Study: Pundits Wrong Most Of The Time, Just Like You Always Imagined
As anyone who routinely tunes in to watch Sunday Morning prognosticators sound forth on their big predictions about politics will tell you: it hurts to watch. So much. So very much. But they’ll also tell you that being a political tout seems to be a pretty great gig: you show up, you say a bunch of stuff, and you never worry that you’ll ever be held accountable for whatever you get wrong. That’s why if you choose that path in life, you may as well be bold and make a bunch of insane predictions, because you’re just as liable to accrue renown for being crazy as you are for being correct.
~~~~~Shocking! ~ Again, we need more pundits …
and more studies.
-
#36 written by shiloh 2 years ago
Re: pundits ~ CWCID
THE GOOD: Paul Krugman, New York Times (highest scorer); Maureen Dowd, New York Times; Ed Rendell, former Pennsylvania Governor; Chuck Schumer, New York Senator; Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader; Kathleen Parker, Washington Post and TownHall.com; David Brooks, New York Times; Eugene Robinson, Washington Post; Hank Paulson, former Secretary of the Treasury
THE BAD: Howard Wolfson, counselor to NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas Governor/Fox News host; Newt Gingrich, eternal Presidential candidate; John Kerry, Massachusetts Senator; Bob Herbert, New York Times; Andrea Mitchell, MSNBC; Thomas Friedman, New York Times, David Broder, Washington Post (deceased); Clarence Page, Chicago Tribune; Nicholas Kristof, New York Times; Hillary Clinton, U.S. Secretary of State
THE UGLY: George Will, Washington Post/This Week; Sam Donaldson, ABC News; Joe Lieberman, Connecticut Senator; Carl Levin, Michigan Senator; Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Senator; Cal Thomas, Chicago Tribune (lowest scorer)
-
#37 written by filistro 2 years ago
@kylopod.… But it greatly blunts the persuasiveness of those right-wingers who try to spread this message, by creating a counter-narrative. The original narrative won’t disappear on the right, and it won’t cease to be influential, but it will be pushed back.
Kylopod is absolutely right. They can never again use the “soft on national defense” meme getting pushback. Just as, in the wake of the Bush presidency, they can no longer use their old “we’re the fiscal conservatives” meme without getting pushback. And now that they’ve also lost the “Obama’s not a real American” meme… they’re looking pretty much memeless.
Still MEAN… but memeless.
-
Jungle Jim,
I agree that the Independents group has moved to the right as it has accumulated disappointed Republicans. It’s one reason I put more weight on the self-identified Moderates group than the Independents group.The Republicans overplayed their hand on the national security issue and it blew up in their faces when both wars went south.
No disagreement there. Where I think I disagree with shiloh is the extent to which that is a lasting effect that upsets the meme. Polls haven’t lent much credence to it being a lasting effect. Yet. It takes a long time to overcome that kind of momentum.
-
#40 written by Jungle Jim 2 years ago
Michael, I don’t believe the general public still trust Republicans on the national security issue the way they did before. Its only my opinion, but I think this (the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan) did more to damage them on the national security issue than anything Obama has done. It doesn’t help that Obama got bin Laden by doing something completely different than occupying an entire country, either, though. In fact, I suspect as this sinks in and gets digested by the public, that a small group of terrorists is best dealt with by using a small group of crack troops, this will be the preferred method in the future. If so, it spells the end of the meme of going to war to achieve this goal. That would mean that Republicans will find themselves at a loss to explain why we should trust them to handle national security at all.
-
I think the observations that have been made here about Republicans and National Security are correct. They’ll find it increasingly difficult to maintain the narrative. Republicans have proven to be both wrong and incompetent.
The same is true about the economy. Republicans have tried to push the idea that they know what they’re doing, because they’re in bed with business. But the Bush disaster proved, as with national defense, they are both wrong and incompetent. Revealing their desire to dismantle Medicare proves they additionally are actively and purposefully destructive.
-
You must be logged in to post a comment. - Comment Feed for this Post
About Michael Weiss (322 posts)
Michael is a jack of many trades, and master of a few. His varied background includes government and private businesses, both large and small. His experience in the financial services and computer industries has led him to computer security.






Sigh… I wish some of our righty friends would log on and present their side of the reëlection projection. But I guess I can understand why they’re a bit bummed right now, poor guys.
Hey righties… be sure check in tomorrow at Logarchism, where we have a big surprise in store for you.
Hint… I think you’re going to like it