Popular
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
February 26, 2011 | 10:05 am -
February 25, 2011 | 6:46 pm -
February 25, 2011 | 5:21 pm -
February 25, 2011 | 2:54 pm -
February 25, 2011 | 8:01 am -
February 24, 2011 | 9:20 am -
Colorado vs. Ohio
Two possible reelection strategies for Obama, only one of which can succeed.
- February 23, 2011 | 12:00 am
- 8 comments
Print
More From this Author
In some presidential cycles, an incumbent’s reelection strategy doesn’t matter all that much. When the economy is very strong (1984), the incumbent wins big; when it’s very weak (1932), he loses even bigger. And when a party chooses a nominee seen as outside the mainstream (1964, 1972), it suffers a crushing defeat. It’s possible that one or more of these circumstances could prevail next year. The economy could over- or under-perform current projections; the Republicans could choose a nominee who’s too conservative or lacks credibility as a potential president. But it’s more likely that both the economy and the presidential nomination contest will yield results in the zone where strategic choices could prove decisive. In that context, two recent events are alarming, because they offer clues to what may well become President Obama’s reelection strategy.
The first was a Ron Brownstein interview with David Axelrod, who said that he saw Michael Bennet’s 2010 senatorial victory in Colorado as “particularly instructive.” As Brownstein noted, Bennet prevailed by mobilizing “enough minorities, young people, and socially liberal, well-educated white women to overcome a sharp turn toward the GOP among most of the other white voters in his state.” The second event was DNC chair Tim Kaine’s selection of educated, new economy Charlotte, North Carolina, as the site for the 2012 Democratic convention. In the process, he rejected three Midwestern finalists: St. Louis, Minneapolis, and, most notably, Cleveland.
Taken together, these clues suggest that the Obama’s 2012 campaign will focus more on the Democratic periphery—territory newly won in 2008—than on the heartland, where elections have been won and lost for the past half-century. This could turn out to be a mistake of epic proportions. Why? Because the United States looks a lot more like Ohio than like Colorado.
Here’s a snapshot from the exit polls in the 2008 election, versus the 2010 Ohio and Colorado Senate elections, broken down by education level:
| 2008 presidential election | 2010 Colorado Senate | 2010 Ohio Senate | |
| Less than HS | 4 | 1 | 3 |
| HS only | 20 | 12 | 25 |
| Some College | 31 | 20 | 32 |
| College Grad | 28 | 39 | 24 |
| Post-grad | 17 | 28 | 15 |
The 2010 Colorado electorate was a total outlier (67 percent with a B.A. or more), while Ohio was a near-microcosm of the national presidential electorate. Every Midwestern state for which exit polls are available looked pretty much like Ohio.
There's another reason to support your hypothesis, Bill: Bennet's win in Colorado in 2010 was a bit of a fluke: the GOP nominated its weakest possible candidates for Senator and Governor. There's a consensus among Democratic insiders that Bennet would not have beaten GOP primary runner-up Jane Norton. And, the GOP gubernatorial candidate was so weak that he finished a weak third, outpolled 3-1 by the second-place finisher. The statewide GOP is in disarray; the chairman is leaving his position. It would be a mistake to conclude that Bennet's campaign, which deftly exploited GOP weakness, should be a model for a campaign against a presumably competent, and extremely well-funded GOP presid ... view full comment
There's another reason to support your hypothesis, Bill: Bennet's win in Colorado in 2010 was a bit of a fluke: the GOP nominated its weakest possible candidates for Senator and Governor. There's a consensus among Democratic insiders that Bennet would not have beaten GOP primary runner-up Jane Norton. And, the GOP gubernatorial candidate was so weak that he finished a weak third, outpolled 3-1 by the second-place finisher. The statewide GOP is in disarray; the chairman is leaving his position. It would be a mistake to conclude that Bennet's campaign, which deftly exploited GOP weakness, should be a model for a campaign against a presumably competent, and extremely well-funded GOP presidential candidate.
Ok, off topic, but I can think of no better audience to ask: True or false, in Jewish culture, it is considered wildly inappropriate to name a newborn son/daughter after a LIVING relative. I was told this last night over dinner, and I had never heard such a thing. Is this true, or was the young lady pulling my leg?
Ok, off topic, but I can think of no better audience to ask: True or false, in Jewish culture, it is considered wildly inappropriate to name a newborn son/daughter after a LIVING relative. I was told this last night over dinner, and I had never heard such a thing. Is this true, or was the young lady pulling my leg?
"And white working-class skepticism about the first two years of the administration’s economic agenda gives the president one more reason to participate in broader bipartisan discussions about our fiscal future." At least Galston didn't bury his real point in the middle of a paragraph. It's true that an austerity wave has spread across the across. Is Obama supposed to jump on the wave too, because "white working-class" folks (mostly men) believe we can save our way out of this depression?
On the other hand, I'm with Galston that relying on social liberals (economic conservatives) as the center-piece of Obama's re-election strategy doesn't look promising. College-educated women, okay, ... view full comment
"And white working-class skepticism about the first two years of the administration’s economic agenda gives the president one more reason to participate in broader bipartisan discussions about our fiscal future." At least Galston didn't bury his real point in the middle of a paragraph. It's true that an austerity wave has spread across the across. Is Obama supposed to jump on the wave too, because "white working-class" folks (mostly men) believe we can save our way out of this depression?
On the other hand, I'm with Galston that relying on social liberals (economic conservatives) as the center-piece of Obama's re-election strategy doesn't look promising. College-educated women, okay, but the young and African Americans can't be relied on to show up this time in any where near the numbers as in 2008. So the question is should Obama jump aboard the wave of austerity and attempt to appeal to the white working-class? I'm skeptical that Obama and his advisors can frame any appeal to these voters, austerity included. Not now anyway. Last year maybe, if he had taken a more populist approach, with a much larger (temporary) tax cut aimed at the middle class (payroll taxes, primarily), and let the Bush tax cuts expire. Instead, he tried to split the difference and appease everybody and didn't please anybody. Galston seems to be suggesting that Obama adopt a similar re-election strategy, with austerity as the center-piece. To paraphrase GWB's favorite philosopher, it may be easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than to craft a winning re-election strategy on voters who won't vote and voters who believe you are a spendthrift out to bankrupt the country (and believe you don't care about them anyway).
I'm too lazy to do the math right off the bat, but if Obama loses Ohio, Indiana and Wisconsin but wins the rest of his 2008 states (including Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and Nevada), doesn't he still get enough electoral votes to be re-elected?
Also, any analysis of the political dynamics in the Midwest that doesn't mention the labor battles afoot in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio (now spreading to Michigan and even Pennsylvania) is ignoring a pretty big elephant in the room. Of course, Galston is good at that so long as he gets to mention the Infrastructure Bank.
I'm too lazy to do the math right off the bat, but if Obama loses Ohio, Indiana and Wisconsin but wins the rest of his 2008 states (including Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and Nevada), doesn't he still get enough electoral votes to be re-elected?
Also, any analysis of the political dynamics in the Midwest that doesn't mention the labor battles afoot in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio (now spreading to Michigan and even Pennsylvania) is ignoring a pretty big elephant in the room. Of course, Galston is good at that so long as he gets to mention the Infrastructure Bank.
Tristan, in case you're reading this the answer to your question is "Yes", assuming that you are talking about Ashkenazi Jews. There is a long-standing custom among Ashkenazim not to name children after living relatives, or after living persons in general. Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews don't share that custom and routinely name children after living relatives. As an interesting exception to the general Ashkenazi rule about prohibiting naming children after living persons, Ashkenazi Hasidim often name boys after the Rebbe of their sect (living or otherwise)
Tristan, in case you're reading this the answer to your question is "Yes", assuming that you are talking about Ashkenazi Jews. There is a long-standing custom among Ashkenazim not to name children after living relatives, or after living persons in general. Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews don't share that custom and routinely name children after living relatives. As an interesting exception to the general Ashkenazi rule about prohibiting naming children after living persons, Ashkenazi Hasidim often name boys after the Rebbe of their sect (living or otherwise)
Isn't this scenario predicated upon the Republicans having a candidate who is neither an unelectable wacko nor an unctious smooth-talking panderer?
Isn't this scenario predicated upon the Republicans having a candidate who is neither an unelectable wacko nor an unctious smooth-talking panderer?
irony, right, it is way, way, way too early to be talking this crap. I guess Galston is looking for a paycheck by writing in filler until then. Hey Galston...Libya...Bahrain...Iran...hell even an update on Zimbabwe would be far more worthwhile then "Obama will have trouble against generic Republican candidate who can be all things to all people."
irony, right, it is way, way, way too early to be talking this crap. I guess Galston is looking for a paycheck by writing in filler until then. Hey Galston...Libya...Bahrain...Iran...hell even an update on Zimbabwe would be far more worthwhile then "Obama will have trouble against generic Republican candidate who can be all things to all people."
Wildboy - thank you, my friend. I appreciate the info.... T
Wildboy - thank you, my friend. I appreciate the info.... T