More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Bob Burnett

GET UPDATES FROM Bob Burnett
 

2012: Who's Going to Vote?

Posted: 06/24/11 09:42 AM ET

On June 16th, political pundits observed that liberals are unhappy with President Barack Obama and conservatives are displeased with GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney. If the 2012 presidential contest matches Obama and Romney, and their bases are turned off, how will this affect the outcome?

The latest Pew Research poll helps answer the question. In 2012, Pew believes that 10 percent of potential voters, mostly young people, will not vote; Pew allocates the remaining 90 percent to three groups: "Mostly Republican," 25 percent, "Mostly Independent," 35 percent, and "Mostly Democratic," 40 percent. (This reflects ideology not actual Party registration.)

In 2008, the Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Obama, got 52.9 percent of the vote, and the Republican candidate, John McCain, received 45.7 percent. Liberals voted overwhelmingly for Obama (89 percent), conservatives did the same for McCain (78 percent), and the race was decided by "moderates" / independents, where 60 percent favored Obama.

The Pew Research poll clarifies Obama's reelection challenge. The President will have to retain "solid liberals" (16 percent of registered voters), "hard-pressed Democrats" (15 percent), and "new coalition Democrats" (9 percent), but this won't give him a majority. To achieve his 2008 margin of victory, Obama must appeal to Independents, probably "post-modern moderates" (14 percent). In other words, Obama has to hold onto a block of voters that are liberal on social issues (abortion, gay marriage, marijuana) but whose opinions on foreign policy (the war in Afghanistan) and domestic policy (the role of government) run a wide gamut. Obama's 2012 dilemma is how to hold onto a liberal base that is unhappy with some of his policies while attracting moderate voters.

Romney has a similar but more difficult test. First, he must hold onto "Staunch Conservatives" (11 percent) who are the Tea Party activists. Then he must attract "Main Street Republicans" (14 percent). Next, Romney must sway all of the "libertarians" (10 percent) and all of the "disaffected moderates" (11 percent) but even then his total would only be 46 percent. Romney's quandary is that he is the champion of only one of the elemental Republican groups, "Main Street Republicans." The "Staunch Conservatives," Tea Party activists, have their favorite candidate, Michele Bachmann. And the Libertarians have their own choice, Ron Paul. (A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll gave Romney 43 percent of the Republican vote, with Bachmann and Paul each garnering 22 percent.) While it's not likely that Bachmann or Paul can win the 2012 Republican nomination, it's unclear whether their supporters will unify behind Romney.

(Romney has an additional problem. Twenty percent of Republicans and Independents indicate they would not support a Mormon for President.)

Barack Obama has the advantage so long as Democrats turn out their base, something they failed to do in the 2010 mid-term elections. In 2008 the generic House vote was 55 percent Democrat and 45 percent Republican. This flipped in the 2010 mid-term election where Republicans got 54 percent and Democrats 46 percent. The change was due to turn out: in 2010, Republicans got out their base and Dems didn't. In 2008 the percentage of voters identifying themselves as liberal, moderate, and conservative was 22 percent, 44 percent and 34 respectively. In 2010 this shifted with liberals having 20 percent, moderates 38 percent, and conservatives an astonishing 42 percent. In 2010 the electorate was considerably older and whiter than it had been in 2008; this was the Tea Party phenomenon: white conservative seniors angry at government. But since then Democrats have regained their enthusiasm and a recent Gallup Poll noted a jump in Democratic Party affiliation.

An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed Romney as the strongest Republican candidate against Obama. Nonetheless, Obama got 49 percent of the vote versus Romney's 43 percent with 8 percent undecided. Splitting the undecided vote, the projected tally becomes 53 percent Obama and 47 percent Romney, similar to the 2008 Obama-McCain vote.

Thus, the 2012 election seems to be Obama's to lose. Romney has the more difficult political task. He has to unify the Republican Party -- which is actually three different Parties - in a way that does not alienate the Moderate/Independent voters that he must have to win.

To be reelected, Barack Obama must do three things: First, he has to repair relations with liberal democrats by deeds as well as words -- withdrawing troops from Afghanistan was a good first step. Second, Obama has to make clear the differences between his candidacy and that of Romney or whomever the Republican Presidential nominee is -- the more awful the GOP candidate, the easier this task will be. Finally, the Obama campaign has to turn out his base: solid liberals, hard-pressed Democrats, and new-coalition Democrats.

Because Republicans won't have an attractive candidate and, therefore, little chance of legitimate victory, their strategy will be to suppress the vote for Obama in key states. (They've already started doing this in states like Wisconsin with new voter-id laws that make it more difficult for Democrats to vote.) Whether or not the GOP miscreants are successful will determine who will vote in 2012 and the President's reelection.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 259
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
10:19 PM on 07/07/2011
Im not going to vote in 2012 if Obama allows republicans to cut social security and medicare. I am in my mid 40's, so I wont recieve benefits for many years to come. I have however, paid into both systems since I was 16. He has already extended the tax cuts for the rich and this would just be the last straw for me. Since democrats dont get to have a primary, that would mean I simply have no one to vote for.
04:55 PM on 06/28/2011
How wonderful a political system we have where a major party outwardly can declare that their strategy is to make it more difficult for people to vote. so if they cannot get out their own vote, make it more difficult for the opposing party's voters to get to the polls.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
columbusbuck
LGBT/Veteran
09:29 AM on 06/27/2011
I think Romney would attract the majority of independents. So, naturally, I'm hoping the Tea Baggers run him out of the contest.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
01:13 AM on 06/27/2011
By failing to take decisive action or make up his mind whether he is for the republicans or the democrats, let alone what the democrats ought to actually be trying to accomplish, Obama is doing a great job of supressing the vote for him all on his own.

Obama and his supporters need to stand for something more significan than simply not being republicans if they want to be taken seriously or have a chance in 2012. Even if such a weak position might stand a chance of winning the election, it still is a lousy position to govern from that takes us, as we have seen, nowhere.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pyrum
03:40 PM on 06/26/2011
I'm planning to vote third party again for president, but I suppose some people consider that to be "not voting."
08:35 PM on 06/26/2011
Do what you want, just know it's a vote for the "R"s though...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pyrum
12:28 AM on 06/27/2011
Not always. I'm a registered republican. In 2008, the GOP old timers complained and asked we younger Ron Paulers to leave the party, because we didn't want to vote for John McCain.
InYourWorld
Progressive, educated, redneck but fan of no party
04:07 PM on 06/27/2011
A vote for the (R) is a vote for the (D)s and visa versa. They are essentially the same party. Issues like gay marriage, abortion, etc.. are just polarizing issues that keep the voters away from the real issues like both sides being tools of the banks and wrecking our country for a very small minority's profit.

I'd ratehr vote for a 3rd party, as voting for a (D) or (R) is a vote for GE, Goldman Sachs, Raytheon, Monsanto, etc......
09:15 AM on 06/26/2011
In 2008 the lame stream media was kissing obama ring. His pass was not questioned, his record was not questioned. Everything the lame stream media did was push Obama for president. In this article you have a wealth person saying what middle class and poor will do. Since obama has taken office the price of all goods have gone up, the only thing that has gone down is the value of thier house. People on SS have not seen a raise, while welfare has seen a 36% raise. Working people pay has gone down for those that can find a job. Job creaters will not hire because they have no idea what regulations this adminstration will put on them next. EPA attack energy companies and the price of energy goes up. This is killing the people on fixed income. Will these people be out in force to vote. Liberal you are killing the older people on a fixed income.
08:37 PM on 06/26/2011
It's bad, but if you think the "R"s have a better plan in privitizing ss, medicare, you are sadly mistaken!
08:16 PM on 06/25/2011
Romney would make a good VP for Obama. They are basically the same candidate.

I do not think Romney will win the GOP vote

I do not know why Obama deserves the left's vote either.

I think the libertarian candidate actually fits really well in this election cycle.

People want a new foreign policy, responsible fiscal spending, honesty and more individual liberties.
08:39 PM on 06/26/2011
People want jobs and fair taxes...all the rest is secondary...
01:40 PM on 06/25/2011
Elect Ron Paul in 2012
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jmpurser
See My micro-bio
04:24 PM on 06/25/2011
Because it's time to burn this place down?
04:27 PM on 06/25/2011
Not yet. The fire protection services haven't been privatized.
08:39 PM on 06/26/2011
Please we have a libertarian gov in FL...it isn't pretty!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
01:19 PM on 06/25/2011
I think it is useful to bear in mind that Obama had difficulty winning his party nomination compared to other recent candidates of either party. This suggests to me that support by his own party is not that reliable.

Meanwhile some people who voted for Obama, including mysel have been profoundly disappointed by his performance, his lack of skill negotiating, his lack of progress on jobs and tax policy and the economy, the slow pace and high price of the wars.

while it was possible for Obama to win in 2008 on the basis of vague promises and the threat of a sarah Palin whitehouse if he lost, this time he will not beso lucky.
photo
Harbinger08
You have the right to remain silent
02:17 PM on 06/25/2011
I wouldn't characterize his winning the nomination that way at all. Instead, he was up against Hillary Clinton's extremely competent, well-funded and experienced machine. Hillary was the assumed nominee in a post-Bush election that the Democratic candidate would surely win. From very early on many felt it was Hillary's in the bag. When Obama began to show real possibilities of winning the nomination, the response from the Clinton side was shock, disbelief and outrage. I can understand how frustrating it would be to think you have a sure thing and watch it go awry. I really hope she runs in 2016. And this time it might be the threat of a Michelle Bachmann white house we will all be voting against. Don't start laughing at the possibility just yet. If progressives don't take this election seriously they will painfully regret it.
02:54 PM on 06/25/2011
Remember, when Obama was gaining on Hillary she turned to playing a very subtle race card. It cost her any possibility that I would support her. Obama's hard right turn taken immediately upon his victory over her cost him my support. His performance since prevents me from voting for him in 2012.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:44 PM on 06/25/2011
If you voted and won for a Republican, you would surely be standing in a soup line. Do you remember what party made themselves richer and brought us to the steps of a Great Depression?
Sorry you are so disappointed. Jobs have dropped off due to homes and businesses being flooded through out the middle of the country, whole towns being wiped off the map by tornadoes and the auto industry and others not being able to get parts from Japan. All this has happened in the past couple of months. It will take a long time for all those people to be re-employed. That is just one part of why the last 2 months has seen unemployment increase, but MSM can't see past the end of their nose, to understand what is happening to our slow, steady recovery.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jay0958875
05:35 PM on 06/25/2011
wow unemployment was a ten percent way before these natural disasters. the bigest disaster was electing a very liberal senator from chicago to spend like there is a surplus of tax payer money, and your solution is tax the rich more. the top 1 percent pay 39.5 percent of the taxes. the top 20 percent pay 86 percent of the taxes and the lowest 40 percent pay none.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
01:11 PM on 06/25/2011
I think people have very short memories.

Just because Bush locked down his candidacy very early in the game when he ran for President the first time does not mean that the Republicans have necessarily gotten behind schedule in finding a viable contender this time.
Freedom Lives
Do you wonder, watch, or make it happen?
12:54 PM on 06/25/2011
The fundamental premise of this article is remarkably false.

And if this author were at all candid and fair in his assessment-

he would acknowledge that since January 2008, the President's voter demographics-

have declined markedly-when using any objective metric.

Key voting blocs have abandoned Obama in droves.

And it is unlikely that any of the 47% of voters who voted against him in 2008-

will change their positions.

In FACT, Obama will face a severe reelection challenge-

not so much based upon the Republican challenger-

but rather-

the ineptness of his own first four years in office.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:52 PM on 06/25/2011
Once again, he has only been in office for a little over 2 years! The Republicans had 7 long war years in two countries and never came close to getting Bin ladden. We have also not gone into the Depression that the Bush and Republicans tried so hard to give us. That took some fancy strokes by this President to start to turn this sinking ship around. The last recession we had took 9 years for California to recover and that was only a recession. I guess everyone thought this guy was some kind of God and could turn it all around, in short order, with Republicans fighting him tooth and nail, every step of the way. When you find someone like that, let us all know!
Freedom Lives
Do you wonder, watch, or make it happen?
12:13 AM on 06/26/2011
Obama has been in office for going on two and a half years.

Democrats have controlled the Senate for going on five years now.

They had control of the House for two years-up until this January.

Obama and Democrats enjoyed COMPLETE control of Congress and the White House for two FULL years.

Their economic policies have been all about favorite special interest groups meaningless-no job creation-

transfer payments.

Democrats own their anemic economic and jobs albatross-

1000%.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
noaxe397
11:33 AM on 06/25/2011
Lots of numbers but it comes down to this: By anywhere from 55% to 80% the voter supports progressive issues from gay marriage to collective bargaining to taxing the rich to hands off SS and medicare. The president refuses to support openly, repeatedly and passionately these issues. Heck, not only would he win the indie vote, but he'd get some of the conservative vote if he spoke out frequently, widely and deeply on these issue. Even 70% of teabaggers want no cuts to Medicare. Note to Obama Democrats: I did not say the president doesn't support these issues; just not with the passion shared by the public and demonstrated by a candidiate seeking re-election.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
middleoftheroad
11:08 AM on 06/25/2011
It will all come down to the economy. and it will come down to the swing states. If Romney is the GOP nom, a lot will come down to him being able to carry MI. If he can, Obama will lose.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TN60
I Hope You'll Dance
10:40 AM on 06/25/2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-states-are-rigging-the-2012-election/2011/06/19/AGCdB3bH_story.html

I've been talking about this for days. When the election rolls around, it will be too late to stop this Roveian dirty tricks, like machine manipulation in Ohio in 2004,

The Justice Dept needs to start now, investigating these states.
12:48 PM on 06/25/2011
thanks for posting that.

where the hell is the DOJ on this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TN60
I Hope You'll Dance
01:09 PM on 06/25/2011
You are most welcome, dayala. There are some rumblings from the liberal press about it, and I;m not sure what the DOJ is doing, but since they are Obama's DOJ, I would bet they are on it.

I had some more articles on this matter but deleted them, which I shouldn't have. Word is getting around, and as noted, it just happens to be mostly in Red states.
10:16 AM on 06/25/2011
Foolish notions.

First, Obama is in a free fall he seemingly can't get out of. I know many progressives who simply
will not vote for Obama in 2012, they call him a 'stealth conservative', they will vote in local elections
only.
Second, it seems a bit early to say the GOP has a clear frontrunner in Mitt Romney. I think the
Texas Governor has a better chance, or Chris Christie, if he runs.