Tweet
President Obama is currently tied with a generic Republican for his 2012 re-election bid. When Gallup asked registered voters if they would vote for Obama or the Republican Party’s candidate, the public was split evenly, with 45 percent for each. Overall, the same demographic voting patterns we saw in 2008 have remained unchanged.
Women and nonwhites were important elements of Obama’s winning 2008 coalition. Today, a wide gulf in political preferences remains between whites and nonwhites, with the majority of the former favoring the Republican candidate and a larger majority of the latter favoring Obama. Women are five percentage points more likely to say they would vote for Obama than are men (47% vs. 42%), similar to the seven-point gender gap in support for Obama in Gallup’s final pre-election poll in 2008.
Younger voters are one element of Obama’s original coalition that may not be intact heading into 2012. Gallup’s 2008 pre-election poll found 63% of registered voters aged 18 to 34 choosing Obama, while 33% backed his Republican rival, John McCain. In addition, 53% of 35- to 54-year-old voters and 48% of those 55 and older supported Obama in that same poll. By contrast, today a bare majority of the 18- to 34-year-old group, 51%, and 43% of those 35 to 54 say they would vote to re-elect Obama.
The good news for Republicans is that the poll shows Obama is potentially vulnerable in 2012, although there is plenty of time for the political winds to change over the next year and a half.
On the other hand, Obama’s camp can take some solace in knowing that there is rarely ever an actual person that can live up to everyone’s preferred image of the generic Republican nominee, and that, in this cycle especially, the Republican front-runners are all fairly weak and/or flawed.
41 Comments
Kinduva tautology, isn’t it, since O is a generic R.
I wonder how he would do against a generic Dem FDR.
Doesn’t leave many scraps for the rest of us to gnaw on, does it?
The problem for the GOP is that Obama’s consistently been running tight with the “generic” Republican — but as soon as you match him up against Huckleberry or Willard or the Quitter, he gains.
How would a real Democrat do against Obama?
this is what progressives really want to know.
Well, it’s like eCAHN said. Obama is basically running neck-in-neck with himself. What a horse race this will be!
It’s the economy, stupid. It always is. Krugman warned the administration right off the bat about the inadequacy of the stimulus programme. If it weren’t for the weak Thug field, that inadequacy would be coming back to bite Obama hard. The unemployment rate will still be above 9 percent next spring when the campaign heats up. It’s a great economy for the top 10 percent of the income distribution, but most of them vote Republican, and even if they didn’t there aren’t enough of them to make a difference.
Clearly Obama needs to move to the right to try to attract more of the Generic Republican vote. /s
“…tautology…”
Thassit, eCahn; tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee.
Only, tweedle-dum is actually tweedle-dem, and HE is in the White House, so when we’re stuck in the same status quo bullshit (or worse) 18 months from now, you can forget about that split: unless the repubs are stupid enough to nominate some full-on bible zombie like Palin, Obama is toast.
In fact, I still believe that his numbers will be so low that the dems won’t WANT him to run. I sure as hell don’t.
Obama has one thing going for him. People are so pissed off at the new improved Republican Dems and the Radical Republicans, that he just might squeek this one out. At the end of the day, what diff does it make anyway? Republican wins…they get Republican legislation. Dem wins…they get Republican legislation.
Obama is a generic Republican!
Maybe President Stupid Fucking Idiot wouldn’t be in this position if he ACTED LIKE AN ACTUAL NON-REPUBLICAN.
The poll you described is almost meaningless. Only state by state polling is a true indicator of the status of matters affecting Mr. Obama’s potential re-election. Is he going to be able to win in Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida and Pennsylvania?
Campaign Obama vs. President Obama, campaign Obama would kick his ass.
Well said, Dave.
So Obama might be tied with an ideal republican (and I would love to see that candidates characteristics), but would handily beat any actual republican.
I would ask to see just what a generic republican is supposed to be.
That’s a question for the programmers at ES&S. As soon as they learn who the highest bidder is, they’ll be able to provide you with an answer.
Meanwhile, while everyone is focused on the top of the ticket, they’re programming even bigger landslides for the Republicans in the state legislatures.
It’s the same figment of the R-voters’ imagination that a generic D is of the D-voters’ imagination.
I think they should just dig up Raygunz and let that Jeff Dunham guy use him as a puppet. He’d win in a landslide.
That’s going really well for them in Wisconsin right now. *g*
So Obama tied against a generic GOPer but none of the GOPers can beat an imaginary candidate? I wonder why?
I think I have some pictures… ah!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Klan-in-gainesville.jpg
I never read anything into polling because it is always slanted in one way or another.
However, the topic of this post is just too darn funny. It shows that even Obama has made himself out to be a good repug to the masses.
Tell me again why Dr. Dean said it would be a bad thing to primary him?
I have a feeling more than a few of us would not vote for Obama OR the other Republican.
Its funny no GOPer can beat a Generic candidate and they go everything from Moderates to hard core racists running. What they don’t have is a person running Left of Obama. On the issues America cares the most about Jobs, Homes the GOP and Obama say nothing and thats why a Lefty candidate can win.
America wants change anyone but Obama but right now we don’t have the option to choose anyone Left of Obama. Polls like this give me hope for America and despair about our ruling class.
Gee, commenter 1, you beat me to the punch. Yes, O is a generic Republican: he loves North African dictators and Middle Eastern dictators.
New rule for 21st century: if we have a naval base in Bahrain, then Bahrain should have a naval base in the US. If we have a military base in Egypt, then Egypt should have a military base in the US. See how the right-wingers here suck on this equality…
Obama is a generic person IMO. He’s like a robot that has been aimed in one direction and it cannot be changed. Very destructive and determined.
“If you give the People a choice between two Republicans, they’ll pick the real one every time.” -Harry Truman… (sigh)
I just hope all our embassies in turbulent Middle Eastern capitals are safe. There’s still time for a year-long hostage crisis to truly cripple this presidency and usher in a new improved Reagan2.0: Christie, Lex Luthor, Thune.
Seems logical that a generic Republican would be tied with a generic Republican.
By the way, Gallup is a poll that is always slanted towards the white GOP. BAck in 2004, they had Bush “ahead” of Kerry, before 7,000,000 Kerry votes were flipped into Bush votes late election night…
I’m a lifelong Progressive….2012 will be the first election I won’t bother to vote. Pres O tolerates bill o reilly walking over him…yet he gives the back of his hand to the Progressives, the very people who got him elected and would have walked over hot coals to back him if he fought for the changes on which he campaigned. We, America, are fucked. 1984 was prophecy.
Kerry defeated himself. He is as inspirational as watching paint dry. Elections have to be close in order for fraud to take place. It shouldn’t have been close at all.
there is a saying about journey man NFL Quaterbacks (think Matt Cassel)
‘He’s the guy you want; unless you have someone better.’
Obama is the President Americans’ want, unless we had someone better.
Obviously, non of those youngsters understand eleventy dimensions.
If the generic Republican is honest about how badly s/he’s gonna screw me over, like attacking Social Security and shredding the rest of the safety net, I’d vote for a Republican for the first time in my life over a lying, deceptive piece of shit like Obama.
The details of the poll are really bad news for Obama, but worse for the Democratic party.
While the tie is similar to numbers in the 2008 campaign, the Independents and new voters were the biggest unknown factors. But if I read this poll right he’s lost them all, and then some. Every election until 2008 showed a greater decline in registered Dems than Republicans. These past two very destructive years are likely to send Democratic party numbers into a freefall.
12% of the youth vote and 10% of the 35-54 yr olds that were willing at the last minute to take a chance on a new Democratic face, 22% in total – gone.
All the work done by Gov. Dean to restore some faith in the Dems to vote for them again was thrown out the window by this crop of sell out Dems. And with it’s two top dogs, Obama and Reid, in power for 2 more agonizing years in a Congress happily fueled by troughs of pig slop, I have zero HOPE left for a happy outcome in 2012.
under
Just heard Tom Hartman interview a student that’s going to lose her Pell Grant with Obama’s proposed budget cuts. Yes, how do you get the base fired up? Kick’em in the teeth. This is Obama’s mantra.
Everyone is saying you have to run an incumbent and a Primary Challenge is just not done to an incumbent. The only problem with this thinking is Obama is single handedly losing his chance of winning in 2012.
At this point Obama is the lesser of 2 evils but that didn’t work well in 2010.
Well, I’m as progressive as they get, and I must say every progressive bone in my body cries out to NOT vote for Obama/Clinton 2.0. That’s the only reason I voted for him and not Hillary in the first place, I didn’t want 4 more years of Clintonesque BS with our nation and planet in such dire need.
However, not on the progressive in me is in rebellion mode against Obama and the DNC controlled Democratic party, but also the realist.
How in the world are we every going to attain things if our leaders don’t even have the strength to propose the solutions, or even show evidence they understand our problems, much less our solutions? How are progressives going to ever get the conservative controlled corporate Democratic to respond to our wants (which happen to coincide better with the actual solutions) if we always support them as long as they aren’t as abhorrent as rethuglicans?
Solution #1: Progressives have to be willing to lose elections and split from poor Democrats.
Solution #2: Progressives have to advocate for the correct positions and make the case for:
1) Social, political, and environmental, and legal justice
2) Human and civil rights (gay marriage = yes; torture & rendition = no);
3) For the rule of law to apply to all (torture & mortgage fraud)
4) Greater economic equality instead of economic growth to solve problems
5) A thoughful critique on the limitations/moral shortcomings of the capitalist/fee-market/profit motive system that is the dominant paradigm today, and realize that it is unsustainable.
6) To make a real case about climate change and its dangers and the fact we are getting really close to tipping points, the realization that cap and trade (if it is effective at all) doesn’t do enough fast enough;
7) The reality of evolution, and the need for some right here in America as the current system is not serving everyone (or hardly anyone) well, and isn’t sustainable anyway.
8) The pernicious influence of corporate dollars on our political system, and the need for BIG changes (constitutional amendment limiting corporate rights).
9) Other big time changes to the political system making it more representative, more democratic, more grassroots, and harder for special interests to take over (Amendment for ending filibuster; abolish the 1929 act limiting the # of reps at 438 (make it more democratic and more grassroots); real oversight of conflicts of interests in the judicial branch; real oversight of same + abuses in the executive branch.
10) A sane moral, ethical, and financial advocate for health care as a right (that means it is paid for out of your taxes & everyone gets it).
11) A sane discussion about the looming food crisis and sustainability generally.
12) A sane defender of real FDR/Teddy style economics. How to create jobs during a recession (government spending); SS doesn’t impact deficit; weakness of tax cutting in creating jobs and the fact it inflates deficits; abundant wealth doesn’t serve the public good and therefore should be taxed more than work, etc.
I think that is the bedrock, the starting point for any progressive, sane candidate.
Of the “progressive dozen” above, how many checks to you really think Obama gets? Maybe a half of one here and there? But he’s not strong on any of them. Hence, he isn’t going to get my vote, and I’d encourage others to vote for someone else as well.
Thom Hartmann frequently makes comments which ARE for the common good in society. Then he pushes to vote for Obama due to future Supreme Court nominees. I view this as complete hypocrisy. If he truly believes in what he states on most issues, then he shouldn’t push for a neo-liberal to continue as President. He should have pushed from the time he became aware of who Obama really is for a true New Deal Democrat…yet he didn’t. (Note: I stopped listening to him about 3 months ago for this reason. If his “message” has changed, feel free to correct me.)
The lesser of two evils is still an evil.
Right. Why doesn’t the prez just do the honest thing and run as a Republican in 2012?