I think Steve M. is concerned that I’ve lost my mind and am guilty of engaging in some irrational exuberance about Obama’s chances of winning a landslide reelection. I want to make clear that when I talk about Obama winning 35 or 38 states, I am not making a prediction. I’m talking about a potential maximum upside. Steve thinks the maximum for a Democrat is 33 states. I think it’s probably 38 states. That difference of opinion is really the main distinction between what he’s saying and what I’m saying. But there’s also a difference in confidence that Obama will win at all. Steve is concerned. Given the stakes, I’m concerned too, but I am very confident.
There are reasons to worry. The Republicans are going to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands, perhaps even as many as two million likely Democratic voters through Photo ID laws, eliminating or shortening early voting, and other devious schemes. The Citizens United ruling ensures that corporations can make up for any money advantage the president has over the Republican nominee. The economy is still weak and unemployment will be still be high, by historical standards, in November. And who knows what crises might pop up to change the mood of the country? So, it’s best to not get complacent.
So, on what do I base my confidence? First, there’s the president and his campaign team. After you watched Michael Jordan win his first championship, did you ever worry that he wouldn’t win more? Or, if you prefer football, think about Joe Montana and the San Francisco 49ers. Some teams are born champions. They are a cut above everyone else. Barack Obama and his campaign team are better at elections than anyone in history. And now they have the advantages of incumbency and four years to prepare. Are you impressed by Mitt Romney’s campaign team? Does anyone else even have a campaign team?
Second, despite the Republicans’ best efforts to keep Democrats from voting, they’re trying to block a firehose with their thumbs. The electorate of 2012 is going to be younger and browner than the electorate of 2008. There’s a good chance that Obama will improve his performance among Latinos by better than 10 points, and there will be many more Latino voters to pool from.
Third, the president will be running a very positive and upbeat campaign reminiscent of Reagan’s 1984 Morning in America campaign that won 49 states. Romney or Santorum will be running a relentlessly negative campaign filled will apocalyptic downer language. People generally vote for the optimistic candidate.
Fourth, the Republicans are trying to convince the voters that stuff they advocated four or eight or eighteen years ago is the most radical stuff ever when proposed and implemented by the president. But that’s all hypocritical bullshit that takes a fortune to sustain. Meanwhile, the Republicans are proposing very radical and deeply unpopular policies on entitlements, on birth control, and even on foreign policy. People do not like what they are selling.
Finally, there are the candidates. Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney are two of the least appealing presidential candidates in modern American history. Santorum excels in offending people. Romney excels at nothing. A politician (from either party) with average political skills should be able to win at least 41-42% of the popular vote. But these are not average politicians. These are the worst politicians to reach this echelon in living memory. We’ve seen ridiculous running mates before, but we’ve never seen anything as ridiculous as Mitt Romney trying to connect by talking about the height of the trees in Michigan or telling us that his dog had a great time on top of the car. No party has ever even considered nominating anyone half as divisive and unpopular as Rick Santorum.
So, we’re talking about a contest much like when the Harlem Globetrotters take on the Washington Senators. Or like when Mike Tyson fought Michael Spinks.
The president won 53% of the vote in 2008 when he was untested. He took 53% despite running against a national war hero, despite being black, despite having a pastor who said ‘God Damn America,’ and despite being named Barack Saddam Hussein Osama Obama. The president is tested now. The economy is on the mend, the auto industry is saved, the Iraq War is over, and bin Laden is dead.
So, to summarize, the president should do better than he did last time among every group the Republicans have been offending, including public service workers, women, gays, auto workers, Latinos, Muslims, environmentalists, the unemployed, college students, etc. Some core Democratic constituencies will be larger in 2012 than they were in 2008, especially Latinos. The president’s team has been gearing up for this for four years. Their opponents have not even been assembled. The president has a positive message and a lot of accomplishments to tout. The Republicans have neither of those things.
There’s very little reason to believe that he won’t do better this time around than he did last time. If he were facing a reassuring, optimistic, and well-respected opponent, things would be different. But he’s not. Barry Goldwater was a much better and more serious candidate for office than Romney or Santorum.
And the secret is that Obama doesn’t have to do all that much better than he did in 2008 in order to start winning in some very red states, including several that Steve assumes are unwinnable.
I respect Steve’s views. I respect his caution. I’d ask him, though, to really take a long look at Romney and Santorum. Try to imaging them winning anywhere. Candidates matter. Clinton would have beaten Bush in 1988 and Dukakis would have lost to Bush in 1992.
If Obama improves his performance by just 7% in states his lost in 2008, here’s the 10 new states he will win.
Arizona 52/47
Georgia 54/45
Mississippi 50/49
Missouri 56/42
Montana 54/43
North Dakota 54/44
South Carolina 52/47
South Dakota 52/46
Texas 51/49
West Virginia 50/49
Steve assures us that no Democrat can win Mississippi, Montana, either of the Dakotas, or West Virginia. Well, that’s the question, isn’t it? Take a look at the numbers. We’re closer to winning Texas than we to winning West Virginia. That’s a big change. Montana really isn’t that heavy of a lift.
The nice thing about this kind of dispute is that we get to find out what happens and who was closer to being correct. I’m not saying Obama will win in a landslide. I’m saying that I see all the signs I’d expect to see on the way to a landslide. Let’s hope I’m right.
