Why Obama Cannot Win in 2012

The smart money in a presidential election is on the incumbent. But in a down economy, or when the public perceives the incumbent as feckless, dithering or simply not up to the task — can you say Jimmy Carter or George H.W. Bush? — the conventional wisdom can go out the window.

That’s pretty much where we are with President Obama. Several factors, when taken together, make it almost impossible for him to win reelection.

1. “It’s the Economy, Stupid.”

We have former Bill Clinton advisor James Carville, who knows a little something about beating an incumbent president, Bush 41, to thank for that important insight. Maybe Carville was anticipating Obama.

A new Washington Post poll claims 57 percent of the public disapproves of Obama’s handling of the economy. Those kinds of numbers can create electoral landslides for the opponent.

Since 1940 no incumbent president has been reelected with an unemployment rate above 7.5 percent (i.e., Reagan’s rate in 1984). It’s currently 8.8 percent. Of course, many states have significantly higher unemployment rates; California, Nevada, Michigan, Oregon and Florida, among others, remain above 10 percent. Those states are essential for Obama’s reelection. While California and Oregon will remain blue, economically struggling Michigan, Nevada and Florida could express their discontent by voting Republican.

The economy will likely pick up over the next 18 months, but very slowly. And that means millions of struggling families will head to the polls on election day and vindicate Carville’s political insight .

2. Consumers Are “Fueling” the Pain

High gas prices create immediate and visceral economic pain. A new ABC/Washington Post poll says that seven out of 10 respondents claim high gas prices are “causing financial hardship.”

When those prices get high enough, the public starts demanding solutions and holding politicians responsible.

There have been three major gas-price hikes in the past century:

The mid-1970s when Gerald Ford was president;

Followed by an even bigger spike when Jimmy Carter occupied the Oval Office; and

2008, when oil exceeded $100 a barrel between January and September, ending just before the presidential election.

Incumbent Gerald Ford lost his reelection bid, as did Jimmy Carter. Of course, John McCain wasn’t running for reelection in 2008, but the Republican Party with Bush in the White House was and the party lost. Even though prices had started to decline by September, it wasn’t enough to stem the summer of our discontent.

Barack Obama has never proposed a serious energy policy. Indeed, he has either directly or indirectly opposed virtually all efforts to develop domestic energy sources, including offshore drilling and in Alaska. Rather, his energy policy seems to be to put everyone in a (Government Motors) Chevy Volt.

The 2008 gas-price surge lasted about nine months. If the current surge follows that pattern, that would take it to the beginning of 2012—and some think it may go significantly longer. If voters continue to “fuel” the pain at the pumps, the president will feel their pain at the polls.

3. The Debt Bet

A newly elected President Obama made a political bet: the American people would be so glad to get all the new federal handouts and bailouts there would be little or no political fallout.

Although he still complains he inherited the first-ever $1 trillion deficit from the Bush administration, Obama immediately doubled down with a $1.4 trillion deficit for the 2009 fiscal year, and $1.29 trillion for FY 2010, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Then CBO also projected budget deficits at $1.43 trillion for FY 2011 and $1.16 trillion for FY 2012. Of course, repeated Republican calls for spending cuts, backed up by widespread public support in the polls, forced the president to reverse course in April, which may affect future deficits.

But Obama’s repeated efforts to blame Bush for deficit spending deficits that were created by a Democratically controlled Congress and supported by then-Senator Obama no longer look disingenuous so much as dishonest. Much of the voter angst that led to the Democrats’ drubbing last November was due to the president’s unchecked federal spending spree. Obama gambled big and lost. The public wants the country’s fiscal house in order, and that means big spending cuts—not tax increases.

4. Promises Made, Promises Broken

The man is a serial flip-flopper who has reversed himself on almost every major promise and a lot of minor ones, too: His assertion about the openness of the health care reform legislation; his opposition to an individual mandate requiring people to buy health insurance; his strong support for publicly funded presidential campaigns; his claim that he would shut down Guantanamo and try terrorists in civilian courts; his criticism of Bush for getting us bogged down in a winless war in a Muslim country, then going into Libya; his promise that families making less than $250,000 would see no tax increases. The list of his flip-flops is endless.

On the positive side, the man can claim that he’s been right on almost every issue because he’s been on both sides of so many of them. But American voters want a president with principles who stands for something besides his own reelection.

5. The Electoral Flap

The November election was a boon for Republicans, giving them control of the governor’s mansions in 29 states and another five with Republican legislatures and a Democratic governor. So how do some of the pundits see this massive electoral upheaval playing out for Obama’s reelection? Why favoring it, of course.

USA Today reporter David Jackson writes, “Our friends at NBC News have revised their battleground map, and it shows Obama and the Democrats have the edge in states with 232 electoral votes.” (It takes 270 to win.)

By contrast, political tracking pro Michael Barone writing in the Washington Examiner comes to a similar number for Democrats, 237 electoral votes, but he sees that number at the top end of their total votes, not the starting point. As a general rule, you don’t want to bet against Barone.

The fact is the state-by-state breakdowns show a Republican trend. For example, of the four states USA Today lists as “lean Dem,” three of them, Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania all have Republican governors now. And the fourth, Minnesota, just had a two-term Republican governor step down and now, remarkably for that state, has a Republican House and Senate.

Of the 10 states considered toss-ups, several of them, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia have strong Republican leanings, and voted both times for George W. Bush. The electoral map is leaning more Republican than it has for years. Obama can win it, but it’s an uphill climb, not a downhill slide.

6. The Tax Man Cometh

Presidential candidate Walter Mondale famously predicted at the 1984 Democratic convention, “Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I. He won’t tell you. I just did.” The crowd was silent for a few seconds, then slowly began to applaud probably wondering if they should publicly approve of Mondale’s self-inflicted wound. He went on to win Washington DC and, barely, his home state of Minnesota.

Barack Obama is embracing the Mondale tax-increase strategy by demanding higher taxes on the “rich.” And I bet it works every bit as well him as it did for Mondale.

Taken together, Obama’s economic malpractice, flip-flops, class warfare and the country’s rejection of his policies will make it very hard for him to win reelection. The one big plus in Obama’s favor, besides incumbency, is the lack of a strong Republican alternative — yet. But even that may not be a deal breaker. The 2012 presidential election will likely be more a vote against Barack Obama than a vote for the Republican candidate.

Where Hispanic Votes Will Matter in 2012

With the recent release of the national Census data pundits have been quick to point out the obvious: the Hispanic population is growing!

As if data points from the annual Current Population Survey, and now American Community Survey did not already tell us this on a yearly basis, the official 2010 decennial census now confirms that more than 50.5 million Hispanics are part of America and politicians should take note.

However, the lingering question on journalists minds is whether or not this population growth will transfer into immediate political power?

With 33 U.S. Senate contests and a Presidential election across 50 states in 2012, the Hispanic voter is positioned to have a bigger impact than ever on the political landscape of America. However, even as the citizen eligible population is increasing rapidly, Hispanics continue to face a registration gap vis-a-vis Whites and African Americans.

Despite massive voter registration drives in 2008 and 2010, only about 60% of Hispanic citizen adults are registered to vote, compared to 70% of Blacks, and 74% of Whites. Thus, while the Hispanic population is growing dramatically (43% growth since 2000, compared to 1% growth in the White population), it's influence in 2012 could be even greater than expected if voter registration drives take shape.

Using data from the 1996 - 2008 Current Population Survey, Voting and Registration supplement, and 2010 Census data where available, we have projected the Hispanic eligible voter population, by state for November 2012.

Given the trends in growth rates over the previous decade, and new data from 2010, we project linear estimates for each state in 2012. By the 2012 election, Hispanics will account for over 10% of the citizen adult population - potential voters - in 11 states.

In another 13 states, Hispanic account for 5-10% of the citizen adult population. All told, that's 24 states where Hispanics have the capacity to influence electoral outcomes, given a competitive statewide election. In the table below, we outline the potential states where Hispanics votes might matter in elections for U.S. Senate and President in 2012.

For each state, we list the percentage of the total citizen adult eligible population that is Hispanic, as well as an estimate of how many eligible Hispanics are not yet registered to vote. States are sorted by where Hispanics are likely to have the most influence in 2012.

In 2012, Hispanic voters have the best chance to influence outcomes in 10 states for either Senate, President, or both. Four of the top five states will be "Hispanic influence states" on everyone's map - New Mexico, Florida, Nevada, Colorado all have large and growing Hispanic electorates in otherwise politically competitive states.

In addition to close presidential contests, New Mexico, Florida and Nevada will likely see very competitive Senate elections. Another state we include, Arizona, has a large Hispanic population, and depending on who the nominees are for U.S. Senate, could have a fairly competitive election with Hispanic voters proving decisive. In 2010, Hispanics registered voters in Arizona demonstrated the highest turnout rate of Hispanics in any state.

The next batch of states Hispanics may influence are ones that historically are not obvious Hispanic states, but significant population growth over the last decade has left a substantial Hispanic eligible voter population.

In Connecticut, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Massachusetts, Hispanics account for over 5% of potential voters, and each state is expected have a competitive U.S. Senate or Presidential contest in 2012. For example, in Georgia, the Hispanic population grew by 96% since 2000 while the White population grew by 6%; a state McCain won by just 5% (52-47) in 2008. In Wisconsin Hispanics grew by 74% compared to 1% growth for Whites, and could be one of the most fiercely contested states in 2012.

Beyond these 10 states, there are others where Hispanics will matter if elections are close, as expected in Nebraska, Virginia, Indiana, Missouri and Ohio. While the Hispanic population is a smaller percentage, the number of Hispanic citizen adults is growing rapidly, and with voter registration drives targeting potential Hispanic voters, we could very well be talking about the next "Hispanic upset" ala Reid vs. Angle in one of these five states. In Missouri the Hispanic population grew by 79% - 20 times faster than the White population (which grew by 4%), in a state that McCain won by just 4,000 total votes in 2008. One of the biggest keys to Hispanic influence in 2012 will not just be the population growth which has already occurred, but rather, voter registration drives that still need to occur.

Over 8 million more to be registered

Overall, we estimate 21.5 million Hispanic citizen adults will be eligible to vote in November 2012, up from 19.5 million in 2008. If registration rates remain constant, that will leave over 8 million Hispanic eligible voters who are not registered in 2012. With significant voter registration drives the Hispanic vote can go from influential to essential. In addition to the current Hispanic share of the citizen adult population in each state in the table above, we've also listed the estimated number of Hispanics eligible to vote who are not registered, given growth rates. For example, while Hispanics are growing in influence in Arizona, there are over 400,000 Hispanics eligible to vote who are not yet registered. In Florida it's even more - over 600,000 Hispanics could be added to the voter rolls. Newly naturalized citizens and young Hispanics turning 18 are adding literally a half-million of new potential voters each year.

Over the past decade, and well before, Hispanic civic and political organizations have led the charge in registering voters, as political parties rarely ventured into el barrio for campaign outreach. Groups such as NALEO, NCLR, Southwest Voter have invested millions of dollars and millions of hours into Hispanic voter registration and civic education drives. Today, many new and influential groups have emerged and done considerable work in Hispanic voter registration and mobilization including Mi Familia Vota, Democracia USA, The Hispanic Institute, and Voto Hispanic among many other groups. However, these non-partisan groups operate mostly on soft money contributions and an extensive volunteer network.

A significant investment in Hispanic voter registration is badly overdue by both major political parties. In Texas, for example, there are an estimated 2.1 million Hispanic eligible voters who are not yet registered, who could be crucial to either party's desire to win and hold statewide office in Texas in coming years. In California there are another 2 million eligible Hispanics to be registered. There are 300,000 unregistered Hispanics who could be voters in Illinois where a U.S. Senate election was decided by less than 60,000 votes in 2010.

As pundits look towards 2012, Hispanic voters are positioned to cast crucial votes in many states. Beyond looking at just the likely 4/4 voters, or perhaps the pool of registered voters, campaigns and candidates would be wise to look at the growing pool of Hispanic eligible voters and invest now in bringing more Hispanics into the political system - an investment that will pay off for decades to come.