Is Obama Toast?

That is a question asked by Nate Silver at the New York Times.  Silver is a polling analyst and a pretty good one. He is honest so far as I can tell and does a very good job when it comes to reading the tea leaves. In the NYT piece he tries to guess whether President Obama can win reelection. The answer is:

Obama has gone from a modest favorite to win re-election to, probably, a slight underdog. Let's not oversell this. A couple of months of solid jobs reports, or the selection of a poor Republican opponent, would suffice to make him the favorite again.

That is, probably, modestly uncertain. As I said, he seems to be honest. Silver tries to game Obama's chances based on three variables: the President's approval ratings, the economy, and the "the ideological positioning of the Republican candidate." His discussion of the three variables is well worth a read.

He presents a number of "case studies", i.e., projections based on various possible values for his three variables. Here is the most interesting:

Obama approval rating in November 2011: 43%

G.D.P. growth in 2012: 0%

Probability of winning the popular vote: Romney: 83%, Obama: 17%

If Obama's approval rating is at 43% and GDP growth is zero in 2012 and Romney is the nominee, then Romney very likely wins. Okay. GDP growth will likely be better than zero. Will it be as good as 4%? If so:

Obama approval rating in November 2011: 43%

G.D.P. growth in 2012: 4%

Probability of winning the popular vote: Romney: 40%, Obama: 60%

That gives Obama only a marginal likelihood of reelection. If zero is too pessimistic, 4% is too optimistic. Silver is being careful.

I enjoy this sort of bone tossing, but the outcome obviously depends on a lot of things that are difficult to measure. For example, what can the Republican nominee say about the Obama's economic record? Here is Peter Wehner at Commentary:

Obama is now on track to have the worst jobs record of any president in the modern era. The unemployment rate will be significantly higher than when he took office. Chronic unemployment is worse than it was during the Great Depression. And during the Obama presidency the United States saw its bond rating downgraded for the first time in history.

Mr. Obama will have shattered all the records when it comes to the deficit and the debt. For example, under Obama the budget deficit and federal debt have reached their highest percentage since World War II. The same is true when it comes to federal spending as a percentage of GDP. During the post-recession period from June 2009 to June 2011, the median annual household income fell by 6.7 percent – a more substantial decline than occurred during the Great Recession. The Christian Science Monitor points out: "The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the U.S. government began recording it five decades ago." The housing crisis is worse than the Great Depression. Home values worth one-third less than they were five years ago. The home ownership rate is the lowest since 1965. The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty has seen a record increase on President Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty. And government dependency, defined as the percentage of persons receiving one or more federal benefit payments, is the highest in American history.

That's a lot of arrows in the quiver of the Republican to be named later. The Republican nominee can repeat them over and over and maybe that is all he ought to do. What can President Obama say in response, except to deny responsibility? That might not help.

What Obama will do is try to change the subject by attacking his opponent. I doubt that Nate Silver has any way to calculate the chances of that. One thing is for sure: if Obama wins with that record, he will have earned a place in the record books.

Comments

[larry kurtz]

"...the selection of a poor Republican opponent, would suffice to make him the favorite again."

You could have stopped right there, Ken; there isn't an earth hater on the globe that can defeat my president.

[Donald Pay]

The problem for the Republicans is they have to win the electoral college. National poll numbers don't mean much.

With the extremist Republican/Koch agenda being unmasked every day in Congress and in states with extremist Republican governors, the Republicans have very little chance at this point to take Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan or Pennsylvania. The Republicans have thrown away the Hispanic vote, so they are likely to lose in a couple key Rocky Mountain states.

The Republicans know this. That's wey are doing their best to enact policies that suppress votes of minorities and college students. They are doing their damnedest to cripple the labor unions, so that the Democratic Party's money and ground game is hurt. Their only path to victory is likely to be marital law.

[Bill Fleming]

I don't think there is anyone in the current GOP field who can defeat Obama once the campaign begins in earnest. I am surprised at how much traction Huntsman gets in Nate Silver's analysis vs how little attention he's getting from the press and his fellow GOP party members.

From my perspective, he's the most qualified to run against the Prez, but that idea seems to be going exactly nowhere. i.e. you maybe listening to Nate Silver, KB, but your party sure isn't. At least not so far.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/11/03/magazine/538-gdp-election-calculator.html

Great little toy though, don't you think?

[larry kurtz]

Prof. Schaff calls David Brooks a "squish," but, he's the only Republican for whom I have any respect whatsoever. His appraisal of the primary season resonated with me pretty clearly yesterday on NPR:

http://www.npr.org/2011/11/04/142031011/week-in-politics-economy-herman-cain-mitt-romney

[duggersd]

Bill, for once I agree with you. You don't think. There are four viable candidates who can beat BHO. BHO has too many problems. He has led an economy downhill, and it is getting worse. He will have Fast and Furious tagged to him, as well as the "green energy" company fiascoes. He owns the OWS group.
If I were a betting man, I would bet on the Republicans. Four of them have at least offered plans to compete with BHO.
All BHO has is the ability to lame Congress. He has to lie to make his point about not passing his jobs plan. The House has passed 15 jobs bills and cannot get them past the Senate. His approval numbers are in the tank and even with a willing media, he will not be able to overcome this. I am not saying this is in the bag for the Republicans. The election is a year away and many things can happen. In the end, the people will be voting on incompetence or someone who brings ideas people want. I believe four of the Republicans have offered that and one of them will most likely beat BHO, barring the unforeseeable.

[Bill Fleming]

duggerSD, please detail why you think Congress has passed 15 "jobs bills."

Just because they call them that, doesn't mean that's what they are.

List them if you would please, and describe how each will create jobs, and how many.

Then describe to me the jobs plan each of the four candidates you cite has put forth, how each of those will create jobs, and how many.

Then we'll find out who knows how to think and who doesn't.

[duggersd]

I said the House passed 15 jobs bills. The rest of the information is easily found if you want it. One of them was bi-partisan. Others include removing regulations that are killing jobs. They are there if you care to look. Those four all have offered good tax plans that will bring people working. Perry has mentioned a couple of times removing some of the regulations killing jobs. All of them would at least get Gulf drilling going again. All of them would at least try to get home drilling going. These will all bring about jobs, not that you would believe it. But you said it yourself. You don't think. I just agree.

[Bill Fleming]

Correct. Not a jobs idea among them.
Just more of the same policies that got us into the mess we are in.
Thanks dggerSD for proving my point.

[duggersd]

If you ever make a point. And removing overbearing regulations goes a long way towards jobs. Those are not the policies that got us into this mess. I could go down the line pointing at certain things such as the mortgage industry, the over regulation of businesses, the killing of jobs because they are not union jobs, etc. Yes, your buddy BHO started with something bad and has made it worse. There have been concrete proposals that the Democrats have turned down. The best the Democrats can come up with is to tax the 1%. They want to spend. THAT, by the way, is a major part of what got us into this mess. The only person cheering him on is Jimmy Carter so he will not go down as the worst president in the last century. The only point of yours that I proved is you don't think. I am glad you admit it.

[Donald Pay]

No one can take duggersd seriously when he states this: "[Obama] has led an economy downhill, and it is getting worse."

This is simply and demonstrably factually wrong, and indicates a stunning lack of knowledge.

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/studies/recession_perspective/

First, the economy started a decline in late 2007 (Bush's term) and continued through the last of Bush's term. The economy came out of recession in the fifth month of Obama's term. Economic indicators indicate that that there has been a sustained, if weak, recovery, although it has been a stronger recovery on a percentage basis than the recovery from the 2001 recession under GW Bush. Anyone can find these facts with minimal research, duggersd.

[duggersd]

Donald, go ask people who are trying to sell a house how the economy has improved under Obama. Go ask anybody who worked in the Gulf drilling oil but cannot anymore because the administration refuses to approve permits how the economy has improved. Ask anybody who is among the 14 million people out of work and many of whom have been out of work for over a year how the economy has improved. Hell, ask those who have depleted their 99 weeks how the economy has improved. Every time I go to the grocery store, I am looking at my dollars shrinking. With 25% of the people (and that is being generous) saying this country is on the wrong track, one wonders why you seem to think it is on the right track.
GW Bush inherited a recession. Just when things were looking better, we got hit with 9/11. That was a terrible hit on our economy. What happened after that was remarkable. The level of growth we had until that recession hit was some of the best years we have had in several. You have shown in the past that like Bill, you just don't think. Go ahead and go to the unemployment office and tell them that the recession is over.

[Donald Pay]

duggersd,

This is not a matter of thinking. It's a matter of reality, something that you and the Republicans have a habit of not living in.

In your world, Obama halted drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. In reality, there was a moratorium on drilling for 90 days following the BP spill. Actually, BP just received a permit to drill in the Gulf and a couple of months ago the Wall Street Journal reported that drilling in the Gulf was back to normal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904491704576571052525514860.html

These facts took me two minutes to find. Rather than defend yourself by making stuff up, why not do a minimum of research first. That way you wouldn't prove yourself to be such a fool.

You seem to think Obama should do more to bring jobs back. I agree. Obama has proposed plenty of ways to do that. The Republicans, of course, refuse to agree to pass anything that will bring jobs back. You seem to whine a lot, but have nothing to offer here but subterfuge.

[Bill Fleming]

Some numbers for DuggerSD: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2011/11/poligraph_obama_1.shtml

[duggersd]

Donald, the article I read from this October said the new normal is going to be about 60%. Also, there have been several rigs that have left because they have not been allowed to drill. And one approved permit in the past 1 1/2 years is not normal.
Bill, believe what you will, but if things keep the way they are, then Obama is toast. 25% more unemployment or more than when he took office is indeed an improvement for Democrats. More people than ever being on food stamps is indeed an improvement for Democrats. Increasing the unemployment compensation to 99 weeks is indeed an improvement. Housing starts decreasing is indeed an improvement for Democrats. Health care costs rising as a result of that monstrosity of a health care law is indeed an improvement for Democrats. Why? Perhaps it has something to do with the Democrats want as many people as possible dependent upon them.
Last night there was a debate between Cain and Gingrich. There was a breath of fresh air!. Either one of those guys could run circles around the guy in the White House today. And in the debates, Gingrich would even be willing allow BHO to have his teleprompter.

[Bill Fleming]

The job market has collapsed worldwide, DuggerSD not just here. The financial industry destroyed it. Unless of course you are arguing we should become like India and China and work for peanuts we can get the jobs back. Admit it, Capitalism has failed its countrymen in America. Time to reign it in before we become a Theistic Plutocratic Oligarchy... which is precisely what the GOP/Tea Party "jobs plan" entails.

[Donald Pay]

Well, duggersd, I just mentioned one of the 23 rigs in water deeper than 3,000 feet. I figured you wouldn't bother to read the link, and would think that just the one I mentioned was the only one. You're such a predictable little tool for the Republican crooks, and you took the bait. Thank you.

[duggersd]

No, Bill. Capitalism has not failed us. Government getting in the way of capitalism has failed us. Now is not the time to rein it in. Now is the time to turn it loose. We have already gone through what the government did to force mortgage lenders to give loans to people who cannot pay it back. That is not capitalism. BTW, here is another example of the "leadership" of BHO: http://www.omaha.com/article/20111107/NEWS01/711079883
Now let's compare that "leadership" style with that of our former governor. This is the type of thing that will make him lose next year. Jimmy Carter was seen as wishy-washy and so is BHO.

[larry kurtz]

Had government not gotten in the way of the earth haters, Barnes, the chemical toilet in which you live would have been even worse and would have likely left you stillborn in your mother's uterus to be expelled into some hospital's incinerator.

You want a free market? Move to Ciudad Juarez.

[larry kurtz]

Here is a map of bridled capitalism: http://www.npr.org/series/142000896/poisoned-places-toxic-air-neglected-communities

[Dave]

And yet Obama wins in any head-to-head poll against any GOPer... What does this all mean???

[Donald Pay]

The problem is one can define capitalism in different ways. Duggersd seems to favor a libertarian or Randian definition of capitalism, but that is hardly a definition that most people support. Few people want to hand the keys over totally to the oil barons. One thing I've noticed is that the biggest opponents of Randian capitalism are corporations. For example, the modern oil economy could never survive without strong nation states and an international security and economic apparatus.

Duggersd totally misunderstands the housing/financial collapse. This was a case of inadequate or complete lack of regulation, not government intervention. For capitalism to work, there must be rules and regulations.

[Bill Fleming]

The banks made a lot of bad housing loans and gambled on them because it was (marginally) legal to do so. Their gambling excesses were so egregious, they caused a worldwide economic meltdown. We the people bailed them out and continue to do so by making their access to gambling money nearly interest free. Meanwhile, the bad housing loans are still there and small business people can't get loans because the banks can make more gambling with more free money from the people they have already defrauded.

DuggerSD, this is emphatically NOT a problem of too much "regulation."