Six months ago, the press was filled with stories about how Obama was unbeatable. Sure, the GOP had won the mid-term congressional elections, but Obama's ratings were in the 50% range, he had been lucky enough to have Osama bin Laden killed, and the GOP field had nobody who could compete with Obama (or so the storyline went). Of course, since then the economy has continued to sputter, the debt ceiling debate showed that Obama was incapable of leading, Obama has spent months pushing for passage of a "jobs plan" that he knew could not pass in order to take a political position rather than helping the country. Obama's ratings have declined. And, by the way, the ratings of the GOP candidates have improved.
Starting about three months ago, the main stream media began running stories about how Obama could still pull out a victory even though his ratings had fallen. These stories focused on dissension and unhappiness among Republicans and the great new energy that the Occupy Wall Street movement would bring to the Democrat cause. Indeed, Obama and many high ranking Democrats either endorsed the Occupy movement or made clear that they sympathized strongly with that group. After that, the Occupy movement revealed itself to be violent, angry, anti-semitic, and far left. Images of Occupy protesters pushing old women down marble staircases do not help win over the public or inject much energy into the Democrat cause.
That has led us to the new big topic in the mainstream media. Now, we are hearing about how the electoral college split will still allow Obama to win even with bad ratings and all of the economic problems facing the country. In today's Washington Post, Chris Cillizza puts forth just such a piece. The need for the press to project an Obama win is astonishing. Of course, the president has gone from a sure winner to one who can thread the needle through the electoral college, but they still project Obama as a winner. The actual facts, however, are quite different.
According to Cillizza, the states that will matter are these: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada. For the most part, however, Cillizza's analysis consists of pointing out how many states that Obama carried in 2008 can be lost with him still winning. That, however, is not analysis; it is math. The actual two questions are (1)which of the above states will go to Obama and which to the GOP; and (2) what other states, if any, will be in play? Here the answer is not too encouraging for Obama. If current polling is any guide, Obama has no chance of winning in Indiana, Georgia, North Carolina or Arizona in 2012. Polls also show that Obama does not win a majority of votes in any of these other states against many of the potential GOP candidates. This is key. If a strong Democrat state like Michigan or Pennsylvania remains up for grabs, Obama's hold on the presidency is shaky at best. There are also states like New Hampshire, Washington, and Minnesota that could flip to the GOP.
The real truth is that the electoral college will matter in a very close election. If the GOP candidate wins by even 51-49%, however, the electoral college will not help; Obama will lose. The press should start focusing on that reality. Obama could still win; there is a full year to go. Dreaming about electoral college projections, however, is truly a waste of time.
No comments:
Post a Comment