More, he has the ability and potential to be another Reagan.
No way. Sooner or later he’d have to point out ACTUAL BILLS that failed due to Republican opposition. Due to Democratic congressional majorities this is going to be tough. Two, he’d basically be admitting his own ineffectiveness after FOUR YEARS on the job. Probably not a good electoral strategy.
Voted for him and would gladly do so again, but if after four years the economy is still hurting, I’d have to be forced to really re-evaluate my own economic approach.
I don’t think so. As with Iraq, the Dems have rather successfully coupled the current economic woes to the previous administration and previously Republican controlled House and Senate, and I think that, at least as far as Obama is concerned, that perception is likely to carry him through the next election cycle even if the economy stays pretty much as it is today. If it seriously tanks from here…well, we will probably have bigger things to worry about at that point.
Now…if the economy continues to suck until the next Congressional election cycle…well, then I’d have to say that the Dems better be careful if they want to maintain their current narrow majorities. My guess is that this is where the American voters displeasure would fall if things stay the same or get worse…though of course, it may be more along the lines of ‘a pox on both of your houses’, with both Dems and Pubs currently serving being given the boot for some fresh faces.
-XT
Those cunning rascals! Cleverly blaming the guys who had all the power. Looks like a lot of Americans fell for that one.
Did I say they were wrong? I must have missed that part…
-XT
…he said, batting big, brown, innocent eyes.
…he retorted, while having no clue what my position on this actually is…
-XT
No way.
It would take something bigger than the economy continuing to suck. A changeover would take a 1994-style mid-term election–a nearly unprecedented event in modern electoral history. Clinton’s approval hovered around 50% for the entire first two years and was around 40% on election day. The post-1990 redistricting had not fully come into effect until 1994 (affecting the House outcomes). And in the Senate, 22 Democratic seats were at stake and only 13 Republican ones.
By contrast, Obama’s popularity has hovered in the mid-60’s. The effects of the 2000 redistricting have already been entirely played out. The “right-track” numbers are on the rise. Critically, the Republicans are not half as well-organized as they were in 1994. And in the Senate, 17 Democratic and 19 Republican seats are up for reelection in 2010.
And remember, in 1994, the GOP only picked up 8 Senate seats. In short, it would take something truly catastrophic to result in a mid-term changeover.
Ok…you are right, I hadn’t considered that. Seems unlikely when put in those terms.
-XT
Somewhat better, though not overwhelmingly so. Of course, various sources find various numbers.
I think the main thing to take away from the comparisons is that 100-day-mark popularity isn’t much of a predictor of how things will look two, four or eight years down the road.
He sure acts like Carter, though.
There are worse people to act like.
There is no way the economy can recover. The last few years the financial industry picked up the slack from industry. That blew up and will not recover near the same level. Our industrial base is greatly diminished. I see larger unemployment and lower wages the future of America. The auto companies and supporting companies are getting smaller every day. If green development does not pick up the slack, we are in for economic doldrums for a long time.
This is completely and utterly at odds with what economists – and my own financial advisor – are saying. Things will be bad for a while longer, yes (on the order of months, not years) and thing the turnaround will begin. There was a recession in 1981 that was worse than this current one, and the “dip” in 1981 is a tiny, tiny blip compared to the Great Depression.
What Obama has going for him in winning a second term is the widespread perception that the economy is in an unprecedented crisis, and the natural fluctuations of the economic cycle. Whatever Obama does for good or for bad, it’s highly unlikely that the economy will be worse in four years then it is now. Obama will say “yes we still have our work cut out for us, but look how far we’ve come under my administration - just give us four more years so we can continue to build on the progress we’ve already made”, and it will make sense to a lot of people.
If I was setting odds, I would say he’s about 80% likely to win in 2012, at this point.
The Intrade prediction markets has the democrats winning 2012 trading at about 70%.