What are the chances that Obama cruises into his second term?

[BrainGlutton]

I think Obama should pursue a red-state strategy. Swing the presidential vote or not, the effort might help swing some Congressional votes.

[Zakalwe]

@penultima_thule

I presume that the words “one of the” have been omitted, and even that’s with deep rose tinting. I’m not sure that it’d be the standout amongst USA candidates in the past quarter century or so.

Wait, what? Okay. Cite? Given your own criteria (past quarter century), please identify which of the below Presidential campaigns that were better than Obama’s 2008 campaign:

2008 - John McCain
2004 - George W Bush
2004 - John Kerry
2000 - George W Bush
2000 - Al Gore
1996 - William J Clinton
1996 - Robert Dole
1992 - William J Clinton
1992 - George HW Bush
1988 - George HW Bush
1988 - Michael Dukakis

[Zakalwe]

Whoops! Sorry, did it from memory and forgot two:

2000 - Ralph Nader
1992 - H Ross Perot

[Kozmik]

@Chronos

Why would Obama divide up his strategy geographically like that? The things he’d have to do to win California are completely different to the things he’d have to do to win Arizona, or the things he’d have to do to win Texas. To win California, all he has to do is not royally screw up: Strategically, California is in the same category for him as, say, New York or Illinois, despite those being in vastly different parts of the country. This isn’t like a war, where your troops have to push through one part of the map to get to the far side of the map: A political candidate can deploy his resources anywhere he wants to, without having to go through the places in between.

I was replying to DSeid who noted Texas being “the joker in the deck” with its big Hispanic population. Same with California and all the states “between” California and Texas (Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico) except Utah - a big Hispanic population. 124 electoral votes. Not to mention the popular vote. And it’s exactly like war.

With that election analysis there are two fronts, one, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and two, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio.

The question is: What are the battleground states going to be?

[DSeid]

California is not a battleground state.

But yes, similar marketing to Hispanic voters will be deployed throughout the Southwest. Whether they will be more successful in getting Hispanics both out to vote, and voting for Obama, is the question. McCain was of the Southwest, so it was hard to win it from him. Bush’s adoptive home was the Southwest. Neither Romney or Santorum have such an advantage and have made some statements that will get played lots in certain markets.

I think those four named Southwestern states will be battlegrounds, and Texas too, even though winning it is a bit of a longshot. Idaho, Wyoming, Utah? All ceded to whoever the GOP candidate is.

[PandaBear77]

As things stand right now, I don’t see Obama winning a 2nd term. That said I don’t think he’s going to get his ass kicked - I can see us having a repeat of election 2000.

I don’t see us having a Republican candidate anytime soon, though. Still too much scrambling going on.

[Onomatopoeia]

@PandaBear77

As things stand right now, I don’t see Obama winning a 2nd term.

Please explain.

[PandaBear77]

@Onomatopoeia

Please explain.

He hasn’t been a particularly good President, many who voted for him are disillusioned, the economy still sucks ass and gas prices are going through the roof (again).

[CaptMurdock]

@PandaBear77

He hasn’t been a particularly good President,

Details?

many who voted for him are disillusioned

Because, of course, that’s never happened before in the history of American politics, because every single POTUS before him kept every single campaign promise they made before Election Day.

Trust me, the “disillusioned” will get over it.

[BrainGlutton]

@CaptMurdock

Details?
Because, of course, that’s never happened before in the history of American politics, because every single POTUS before him kept every single campaign promise they made before Election Day.

Trust me, the “disillusioned” will get over it.

Not a bad record on promises kept, either.

[Isaristh]

I can’t see Obama losing to Santorum or even Gingrich. Romney is the only real challenge to Obama, maybe Paul if he’d actually get any attention.

So yeah, I foresee a second term.

[Kozmik]

@Chronos

If, come November, there’s even the slightest chance that Texas might go blue, that’s a sign that Obama has enough votes nationwide to easily guarantee the victory.

Battleground states will be Indiana, Ohio, and Texas.

[Kozmik]

After watching the President’s speech to the UAW on YouTube and after doing some electoral analysis, the 2012 election, unlike the 2008 election, should be about Texas.

[BrainGlutton]

@Chronos

If, come November, there’s even the slightest chance that Texas might go blue, that’s a sign that Obama has enough votes nationwide to easily guarantee the victory.

Interesting. BTW, Romney/Paul/Gingrich/Santorum quite often remarks on the ugly-bitchiness of Texan women and the stupid-fagginess of Texan men, it’s a well-known fact that I don’t even need to document before repeating, so feel free to do the same.

[septimus]

@Buck_Godot

A lot of this is due to the fact that 6-months is still a long way away and its possible that something totally unforeseen could happen would shift the election one way or another. As a result the probability is attenuated towards 50%. If the election was only 2 months away I think the results would be much more in favor of Obama.

Well, yes, but …

As I write, Democrat winning 2012 Presidential election is offered at Intrade for only $6.03. If we assume Democrat victory is 95% in any “normal” scenario and, say, only 35% if there’s a “Big Surprise”, then the market is judging the chance of a Big Surprise at 58%. :dubious:

Before I get tempted by the “easy money” via Obama/Democrat bet, any comments on what this (very likely) “Big Surprise” is likely to be?

[Bridget_Burke]

@PandaBear77

As things stand right now, I don’t see Obama winning a 2nd term. That said I don’t think he’s going to get his ass kicked - I can see us having a repeat of election 2000.

I don’t see us having a Republican candidate anytime soon, though. Still too much scrambling going on.

2000? Which Republican prospect has a brother who is governor of an important state?

[Svejk_1]

@Kozmik

After watching the President’s speech to the UAW on YouTube and after doing some electoral analysis, the 2012 election, unlike the 2008 election, should be about Texas.

Would you care to share that ‘electoral analysis’ with the board? What you are suggesting is a major realignment in US politics, so that’d be good to hear about.

[Kozmik]

@Svejk_1

Would you care to share that ‘electoral analysis’ with the board? What you are suggesting is a major realignment in US politics, so that’d be good to hear about.

All I’m saying is that with 38 electoral votes and with a population of 25 million, the President would be foolhardy to write-off Texas as ‘red’.

[tullsterx]

If I had to bet my life on it I would bet on Obama. Remember, this is the country elected Bush twice. . .

Really, being the president gives you extreme exposure and allows you to have some control of the topics, and basically unlimited resources. It’s not really fair. I think for any sitting president to lose it would take a real ground-swell, like with Clinton, or you have to be really unpopular, like with Carter. .

[Onomatopoeia]

@tullsterx

If I had to bet my life on it I would bet on Obama. Remember, this is the country elected Bush twice. . .

Really, being the president gives you extreme exposure and allows you to have some control of the topics, and basically unlimited resources. It’s not really fair. I think for any sitting president to lose it would take a real ground-swell, like with Clinton, or you have to be really unpopular, like with Carter. .

Clinton didn’t lose.