Sorry for starting yet another ObL is dead thread, but I’ve seen this sentiment expressed by several people so far and haven’t seen a full discussion of it (which is understandable given the timing . . .). So, if you believe ObL’s death increases Obama’s re-election chances, here’s your opportunity to make your case.
At this point (i.e., without having read a full argument in favor of the proposition), I’m doubtful. I just don’t see how someone who otherwise would not vote for Obama would do so now that Obama was occupying the White House while ObL was killed. Stated another couple of ways, the type of person who’s exuberant over ObL’s death is likely the type of person who isn’t voting for Obama no-way-no-how, and the type of person who voted for Obama the first time but has since cooled on him a bit is not likely to get all that jazzed over ObL’s death (I mean, they’ll view it as a positive, but I don’t think they base their voting decisions on that sort of thing).
'Cause he accomplished something Bush wasn’t able to do? 'Cause his opponents can’t point at Bin Laden, still alive, and say that Obama can’t get the job done? I don’t think it cinches his chances for election, but a dead Bin Laden certainly doesn’t hurt.
I’m psyched that Osama is dead. Like been grinning all day happy. And I was, and will almost certainly remain, an Obama voter. So that is at least one counter-point to your last paragraph.
As to the main reason it will improve his chances, you greatly underestimate the thought process of the “swing voter”. They talk in ridiculous generalities: “I like the guy”, “The economy sucks”, “He will be stronger against our enemies”. “He killed Osama” is a perfectly likely reason for some of these people. It won’t be a huge number, but 5% is all it takes to go from squeaker to landslide.
Finally, the GOP candidate will now have a much more difficult time attacking Obama on the foreign policy front. Which of the current GOP contenders has any military or foreign policy experience? What do they have that can compare to: drew down forces in Iraq, stabilized Afghanistan (perhaps…), and killed Osama bin Laden?
To illustrate my final point, read this article from a conservative pundit Saturday (before the news came out) and tell me it looks reasonable today. Money quote:
Yeah, along the lines of the more humorous, consider: While Obama began his speech telling the world that US special forces had killed the most notorious terrorist in the world, Donal Trump was deciding whether to fire Starr Jones or NeNe, and to bring back Latoya Jackson…
Many have pointed out that GHW Bush mopped the floor with Iraq in Desert Storm and lost 18 months later. While I think there are obvious differences between the two situations, a few percent bump can mean a lot. It also helps defuse the whole “soft on terrorism” “weak on national defense” attack.
The economy still needs to improve, but I think if that’s going the right direction, that plus the “he got Osama” factor will help to seal the deal. In addition, right now the Republican 2012 field is, to be charitable, questionable and I doubt we’ll see the equivalent of Perot on the left.
You aren’t naive enough to believe Osama is really dead, are you? No no - he is in hiding, ready to assist his Muslim brother in whatever way necessary.
Obama must be desperate - first that badly faked birth certificate (like they had pdf back in 1961 - who do they think they are kidding?), now this transparently faked death. You mark my words - once the campaign gets rolling, Islamo-fascists will be going down faster than the interns at the Clinton Memorial Library.
Not that I’m worried - I’m selling way short on pork bellies. Once Caliph BHO imposes sharia law on the country, I will be ready to start funding the Lutheran resistance.
It’s not about changing votes, it’s about getting people of their ass to vote. This creates enthusiasm, enthusiasm creates votes out of thin air without anyone having to change their mind about anything.
Well it’s because Obama single handledly swooped out of the sky on his magic rainbow unicorn and plucked Bin Laden out of Pahkeestan, all the while pooping skittles out of his butt.
Here’s what really happened:
Years and years of intelligence gathering, which the majority of which was collected during the Bush Administration, finally led to Bin Laden’s whereabouts and Obama was the ever so lucky guy to get to say “Ok, go get him”.
But don’t let that get in the way of the Democrat mutual masturbation session that will last only as long as people remember they’re paying over $4 a gallon of gas and there are no jobs.
I think it certainly helps them. The better debate is “how much?”
If the election were held within a month, he’d be a lock. Bush bounced to 82% in some polls after 9/11. I expect Obama to peak at 65% or so for polls taken this week.
The bigger problem is – what do you hit Obama on now? The economy has stabilized (debatable, but from where it was when he first took over), we got bin Laden in a “Bay of Pigs” moment gone right, the birth certificate controversy is mostly put to rest, he’s being widely praised for his swift and decisive leadership on national security.
Most of the problems I have with Obama are too long for talking points.
Remember, elections aren’t won or lost on all the issues, they’re won or lost on the easily digestible and sound bite-able issues. The Republicans only hope is to hit him on the economy, but given that the Republicans will have played a significant part in our woes from 08-12, that’ll be a hard sell.
I think it’s silly to speculate seriously when we’re 18 months or so away from the election. That’s an eternity in politics.
As was pointed out, GHWB is a cautionary tale in this regard. I vividly remember him triumphantly addressing a joint session of Congress shortly after the first Iraq War and thinking, “Man, there’s no way he’s not getting re-elected.”
Are you serious? Do you not recall that when asked about this exact situation in 2008 McCain explicitly said he would not authorize a raid into Pakistan to kill Bin Laden. There is no question about this - if McCain were president Bin Laden would still be alive.
Perhaps. But I think any rational observer would agree that Obama’s reelection chances are significantly higher today than they were on Saturday. Do you disagree? Or were you just ranting?
Last night, Obama got a chance to look strong, decisive, and *Presidential *. He stepped up to the podium, and he knocked it out of the park. That image is going to stick in people’s minds. It might not guarantee Obama gets another term, but it can’t hurt.
Also weakens the case against him. Can’t really knock him for being soft on terrorism. He nailed Osama bin Laden. Can’t knock him for being indecisive–he chaired the National Security meetings, reviewed the intelligence, and greenlighted the mission. Seems like he also greenlighted shooting some pirates a few months ago. Obama is no Jack Ryan, and I probably won’t vote for him, but the guy is not afraid to pull the trigger.
Absolutely. There are always possibilities - in GHWB’s case it was a strong third-party challenge. If a viable leftist third-party candidate were to appear then obviously Obama’s chances would tumble. Similarly if a viable conservative one would appear (Trump, perhaps?) Obama’s chances would skyrocket.
We’ll get a bit more information about the size (if any) of the bounce in the next week or so. One note of caution I would strike is that my intuition is that the electorate is significantly more divided today than in the early 90s. That is, there is likely 35% or so that will never say they are approving of Obama. So anything above 65% is just about impossible in these times, IMO.
I don’t think we can say that with any particular certainty. In 2000, George Bush was very emphatic about not being interested in nation building, and look how that panned out. Just because McCain was saying that during the campaign, it doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have acted if this opportunity had come up during his presidency.
Even though I have only read sketchy accounts (there might be more info already out there), it seems like President Obama actually had a very in-depth and long term leading role in this operation. It was not that a military adviser just came to his room on Sunday and said “Oh hey, seems like we know where bin Laden is. Should we try to get him?” and Obama just said sure. From what I understand, he placed new priorities on the hunt, he advocated going into Pakistan more, he participated in multiple planning meetings on this operation, and he proposed and approved the “small commando team” style assault.
That kind of thing plays well, and this operation has a lot of symbolic value. I’m not sure if it will directly lead to votes in and of itself, but by removing a point of attack (So, you had 4 years, where is OBL?) and shoring up the “tough commander-in-chief” thing Republican politicians always attack Democrats for, it makes the Republican campaign have less options, thereby increasing the likelihood of a successful Obama reelection campaign. I wouldn’t call it “in the bag,” though, and I’m pretty sure Obama agrees with me on that.
