Obama's 2012 victory: Bigger or Smaller than Clinton 96?

[LanceMcSteel]

Thoughts?

[phk]

Thoughts?

Call me later, as in early 2012.

Are we talking about exceeding Clinton's 9% pV gap over Dole or exceeding 379 eV's?

[RIP Robert H Bork]

This question is nonsense, because Obama has yet to win in 2012.

[Barack Hussian YO MAMA!!!!]

This question is nonsense, because Obama has yet to win in 2012.

I think he means if he wins, I say smaller.

[Lincoln Republican]

I do not assume Obama will be reelected in 2012.

It depends on so very many factors.

If he does win, however, it will be a smaller win than in 2008.

[Eraserhead]

I do not assume Obama will be reelected in 2012.

It depends on so very many factors.

If he does win, however, it will be a smaller win than in 2008.

...and you know this how exactly? Looking at historical trends, that's very unlikely.

[Lincoln Republican]

I don't know this.  Nobody does.

It is simply my view that, since Obama's win in '08 was very substantial, given the extremely poor conditions for Republicans, that some of the traditionally Republican Presidential states will drift back to the fold come '12.

[Person Man]

It will probably similiar to his 2008 victory. I mean, people were getting tired of Bush, but he still fully won the election in 2004. Incumbency is powerful. The last time an incumbent won by a smaller margin was in what? Like 1944. Usually, if an incumbant is reelected, he is reelected by a wider margin than his original election.

[Nym90]

I don't know this.  Nobody does.

It is simply my view that, since Obama's win in '08 was very substantial, given the extremely poor conditions for Republicans, that some of the traditionally Republican Presidential states will drift back to the fold come '12.

The same thing could well have been said about 1996 (or 1984, or 1972, or....). And indeed, a few traditionally GOP states that spurned Bush did come back into the Republican column in 1996 (Georgia, Montana, Colorado), though that didn't stop Clinton's victory margin from growing overall.

[bullmoose88]

I don't know this.  Nobody does.

It is simply my view that, since Obama's win in '08 was very substantial, given the extremely poor conditions for Republicans, that some of the traditionally Republican Presidential states will drift back to the fold come '12.

The same thing could well have been said about 1996 (or 1984, or 1972, or....). And indeed, a few traditionally GOP states that spurned Bush did come back into the Republican column in 1996 (Georgia, Montana, Colorado), though that didn't stop Clinton's victory margin from growing overall.

Then again, Dole lost Arizona and Florida from 92.

The expectations are so high for Obama, that I think its going to be pretty hard for him to meet or exceed them.  While he'll probably win, this question will be answered by the improvement or decline of the GOP and Obama's meeting of expectations.

[Matt Damon™]

[RI]

In order for that to be true, Obama would both need to fail massively, and the Republicans would need to nominate a respectable candidate. Even if Obama does poorly, if the Republicans nominate Palin, Jindal, or Huckabee, Obama would be reelected, barring third party challengers on the left.

[Reaganfan]

In order for that to be true, Obama would both need to fail massively, and the Republicans would need to nominate a respectable candidate. Even if Obama does poorly, if the Republicans nominate Palin, Jindal, or Huckabee, Obama would be reelected, barring third party challengers on the left.

What about Romney?

[Matt Damon™]

My Map presumed Romney, Crist or Hagel or some other relative moderate.

[RI]

In order for that to be true, Obama would both need to fail massively, and the Republicans would need to nominate a respectable candidate. Even if Obama does poorly, if the Republicans nominate Palin, Jindal, or Huckabee, Obama would be reelected, barring third party challengers on the left.

What about Romney?

Romney is one candidate who would have a very good shot, especially if he nudges back towards his time in Massachusetts while still stressing his economic expertise. He is the only Republican I am currently concerned about.

[Matt Damon™]

Romney, Crist or Hagel have the best chances.

[RI]

Romney, Crist or Hagel have the best chances.

I only question whether Crist or Hagel could win the Republican Primaries. Also, I don't really think Hagel will run in the first place.

[Matt Damon™]

I didn't say he was likely. I just said if he ran he could pull it off.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Yes, quite easily.

[pbrower2a]

Truman-like victory (Huckabee splits from to start a southern Third Party  -- or runs as the  Reform candidate? --  as Romney/Palin win the GOP nominations):

Obama       313
Romney      84
Huckabee   119

Several states split 38/34/28 in a hotly-contested election in which everything is up for grabs, but the Democratic firewall largely holds, Obama losing only Iowa from it but continuing to hold Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, and Nevada.  Note some of the very pale colors because of such splits, as in Texas, Missouri, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, the Dakotas, Kansas, and Nebraska. As an extreme freak, Huckabee manages to win Nebraska at large despite winning neither NE-01, NE-02, nor NE-03... Huckabee and Romney split the white vote in Mississippi enough for Obama to win the black vote, getting an odd win in the South. Virginia is no longer "southern".

This is the best performance of a third party since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912, and because Huckabee's support isn't confined to the racists who supported Thurmond in 1948 and Wallace in 1968, it suggests to some that the Reform Party has become the #2 party (it actually picks up some house seats and a Senate seat!)  and that the GOP is in big trouble.

Here's an Eisenhower-scale victory:

Obama picks up Montana, the Dakotas, Arizona (no Favorite Son Republican this year, and Arizona has more Latinos than Mormons in the electorate), Missouri, NE-01 (thanks to all the young Cornhuskers at the University of Nebraska), Georgia, and Texas (Latino vote and transplanted Yankees fleeing "Michigrim". and "Oh-I-Owe").   

[Antonio the Sixth]

If Obama manages to resolve economical crisis in his term, it will certainly be a democratic landslide. For the moment, there are reasons to be hopeful.

[Nym90]

The 1994 or even the 2002 versions of Romney would be excellent general election candidates, but would never get past a GOP primary. Conversely, the 2008 Romney could well win the primary, but barring Carter or Bush like approval numbers for Obama, is unelectable in the general.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Here's an Eisenhower-scale victory:

Obama picks up Montana, the Dakotas, Arizona (no Favorite Son Republican this year, and Arizona has more Latinos than Mormons in the electorate), Missouri, NE-01 (thanks to all the young Cornhuskers at the University of Nebraska), Georgia, and Texas (Latino vote and transplanted Yankees fleeing "Michigrim". and "Oh-I-Owe").   

Obama will win SC before TX. Plus, I think that Obama would win WV in this scenario.

[Wall St. Wiz]

If Obama manages to resolve economical crisis in his term, it will certainly be a democratic landslide. For the moment, there are reasons to be hopeful.

Good god..this is who elected Obama

[Nhoj]

If Obama manages to resolve economical crisis in his term, it will certainly be a democratic landslide. For the moment, there are reasons to be hopeful.

Good god..this is who elected Obama

15 year olds from france?