SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home O Lucky Man!

TIMOTHY NOAH SEPTEMBER 13, 2011

O Lucky Man!

BY TIMOTHY NOAH

President Barack Obama may have an unfavorable rating of 50 percent, but he still leads every major Republican candidate in the field, according to a new survey by Public Policy Polling. That's remarkable given the dismal state of the economy. Median household income declined in real (after-inflation) terms during the first two years of Obama's presidency, the only ones we have data for. According to a new Census study, real median household income was, at the end of 2010, down 6.4 percent since 2007 (i.e., since before the recession). Unemployment stands at 9.1 percent. The poverty rate went up during Obama's first two years, and it now stands at 15.1 percent. No wonder this guy's unbeatable! (For more on the Census report, see Jonathan Cohn's blog entry.)

That the Republican presidential candidates are unable to capitalize on the miserable state of the economy gives you some idea of how weak Obama's opposition is. None of the major GOP candidates can beat John McCain's 46 percent from 2008. Mitt Romney, who at this point seems the likeliest nominee, loses 45 percent to Obama's 49 percent (a much smaller margin, I'll grant you, than 2008's 53-46 percent; the difference is the 7 percent who are undecided). Front-runner Rick Perry loses 41 percent to Obama's 52 percent. (The poll was conducted before last night's debate, so it doesn't take into account Perry's weak performance.) Newt Gingrich loses 41 percent to Obama's 53 percent, and  Michelle Bachmann loses 39 percent to 53 percent. With the exception of Romney, every one of these Republican clowns has negatives as high as or higher than Obama's. Gingrich's unfavorable rating is 57 percent, Bachmann's is 53 percent, and Perry's is 50 percent. Romney's is only 44 percent.

If the GOP nominee ends up being Romney, Obama will face in the fall of 2012 an opponent who, in a sensible world, would boast that he instituted Obamacare before Obamacare was cool. Since this is not a sensible world, Obama will face an opponent who frantically tries to distance himself from Obamacare, an effort for which he has been mocked by the Wall Street Journal editorial page and the Club For Growth, who aren't buying it. The Massachusetts health reform is Romney's only significant governing legacy and it's become his biggest liability. In these dark days of Obama's presidency, Obama's biggest electoral problem is that these numbers might make him overconfident. How lucky can you get?

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 51 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

51 comments

This is a good post, Timothy, but you could have left out the part about the "Republican clowns." That sort of thing was blessedly absent from Jonathan Chait's blog. This is more redolent of the many Manichaean commenters who dwell here.

- liberalref

September 13, 2011 at 5:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Republicans Bob Inglis & Chuck Hagel have perhaps been more tactful than Mr. Noah here, but they would agree with the new TNR guy. http://video.ft.com/v/1138459180001/Former-Republican-senator-criticises-party http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/08/bob-inglis-tea-party-casualty both via http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/09/hbc-90008232 I don't know how I'd keep a straight face if I had to share a stage with Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, & Bachmann. They are a laughable lot. The Republican party deserves so much better. Calling them "clowns" is only inappropriate because roughly half of American voters are prepared to promote at least one of them to the highest office in the world. {shudder}

- Konstantin

September 13, 2011 at 5:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Links are the devil here. Continued: both via http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/09/hbc-90008232 I don't know how I'd keep a straight face if I had to share a stage with Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, & Bachmann. They are a laughable lot. The Republican party deserves so much better. Calling them "clowns" is only inappropriate because roughly half of American voters are prepared to promote at least one of them to the highest office in the world. {shudder}

- Konstantin

September 13, 2011 at 5:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Gosh Libref maybe you can lick him into shape. To write as you prefer. Hm.

- ReganaD

September 13, 2011 at 5:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Very, very lucky. Facing McCain/Palin after 8 years of Bush and now this ridiculous circus of a Republican bench? Not to mention the Republicans not accepting his almost disastrous grand bargain in the final hours of the debt talks. (Give it a rest Liberal. Chait said far worse. Can we read the man's posts without having to endure your nostalgia.)

- IggyPop

September 13, 2011 at 5:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, "Republican clowns" was unnecessary, and yes, Chait said worse. I personally cringed at that line. In an indirect way, we have Bill Clinton and the DLC to thank for this situation. The GOP's rightward lurch has correlated with the Democrats' move towards the center/center-right; refer, for example, to Obama's recent jobs speech, in which he focused on stimulus ideas that the Republicans had supported in the past. As the Democrats move right, though, the Republicans will need some reason to oppose the Democrats, and their constituency isn't going to be open to the GOP suddenly becoming the liberal party. This is a clear case of chicken-or-the-egg - did Republicans force Democrats to move to the right, or did Democrats accommodate the GOP's shift? I do not endeavor to answer that question, and I do not suppose that the DLC influence was the principal cause of this shift; however, I do posit it as one contributing factor among several or more.

- whyamihere

September 13, 2011 at 6:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Awesome post and your fearlesslessness in telling it exactly like it is - is so appreciated. Please do NOT mince words like the rest of the cowed media. These are clowns and call them exactly what they are as much as possilble. Thank you!

- WandreyCer

September 13, 2011 at 6:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Look - pretending the modern Republican party is respectable or in any way comparable to the Republican party of the past is part of the problem, good for you for refusing to do so. A rally with "Domnionist" preachers spouting hate headlined by the Republican frontrunner? Do you people have any idea what "Dominionist Christianity" means? Look it up. This is not John Warner, Bob Dole, etc. Except for Huntsman, these are dishonest destructive clowns. Period. Calling then anything less is the sort of fearful relativism that led us here. Bring it.

- WandreyCer

September 13, 2011 at 6:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So the Romney Death Watch is ... dead?

- koppgeo

September 13, 2011 at 7:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It remains a puzzle why Obama holds up in polls against the Republicans. Do people really know them well enough already to reject them for being crazy? Who is really paying attention right now. It is interesting that PPP poll last month showed Obama tied with most of the Repubs, but has now reopened a lead. Back in Feb/March/April the economy was adding 200k jobs/month, and unemployment had dropped from 10 to 9%. Since then we have stalled. However, if we can get back to 200k jobs/month during most of 2012, Obama will have a good shot at reelection. The economy is better than it was, but it has been a very slow process.

- nayyer_ali

September 13, 2011 at 8:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's not the fearlessness that bothered me so much as the cavalier and (mildly) amateurish tone. I also hope that this column doesn't devolve into a cheerleader's row for Obama. On the other hand, it's hard not to sympathize with Noah here. He's coming in on the heels of what was a well-done, well-liked blog by a sharp, intelligent writer, and that's never an easy act to follow. It's understandable that it will take a few months for the new writer to fully flesh out what he wants to do with this new stage.

- whyamihere

September 13, 2011 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I've got no problem with "Republican clowns." The time for respect and deference to a party that makes Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann two of its leading lights is long past. This isn't the Eisenhower era, and if they're not going to be statesmanlike, hell if I am either. I say call 'em like you see 'em and let the Frums fall where they may. (If I have a suggestion, it would be to adopt Chait's policy of periodic engagement with us schlubs down here in the comments section. It makes for a friendlier and more engaging blog.)

- austinexpat

September 13, 2011 at 8:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Do people really know them well enough already to reject them for being crazy?" Yup. They don't have to know them as individual candidates. The people have had well nigh a decade to soak in the emptiness and venality at the heart of the modern GOP, and all they really need to know about any of them is that they are Republicans. I'm going to repeat my predictions from last month: GOP nominee = Romney GE winner = Obama House stays in Republican hands but by smaller margin Senate control is a toss-up (tho I favor Repub control) Neither party will hold more than a one-vote margin.

- AaronW

September 13, 2011 at 9:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good post. And an excellent postscript by WandreyCer. Clowns they are. Keep it coming.

- appleton

September 13, 2011 at 9:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, I too applaud WandreyCer. And extend a warm welcome (and laurel and hearty handshake) to Mr. Noah.

- BryanRWA

September 13, 2011 at 9:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good points made by austinexpat, AaronW, and others. Thinking this over, I was indeed being way too hard on Noah, and wish to apologize. This is not to say that that apology means anything to Noah or anybody else on here; I realize I'm just a lowly reader, and a neophyte at that (and, on top of that, a fairly unlikable, thin-skinned reader as well). I wish I could stop being such a damn pain in the ass.

- whyamihere

September 13, 2011 at 9:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Republican Clowns" was absolutely necessary, although maybe there should have been an asterisk stating that Huntsman is merely foolish, but not a clown. Obviously it is not luck. It is the fact that ignoring policy concerns and adhering to ill conceived (and frequently contradictory) "values" has driven the Republican Party off a cliff. Eight years of Bush showed them to be completely political, without any concern for governance or policy. Faced with that reality they've chosen to double down on the crazy. Sadly I'm not entirely confident that this is a weakness. The answers they offer to the country's problems are simple minded and require no sacrifices from anyone. That will always be an attractive proposition to many voters.

- Attrill

September 13, 2011 at 10:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ditto what Wandrey said. "Clowns" is even mild under the circumstances given the connotation of benign and amusing.

- JackR

September 13, 2011 at 10:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Amen. "Clowns" is, as stated above, very polite. Anyway, I think the public knows that Obama isn't to blame for this mess. Plus, whilst he's been driving us lefties nuts, more middle of the road voters probably see him as very reasonable, conciliatory, clearly doing all he can to reach out to Republicans, who are treating him (and us) abominably. It's going to be awhile before people forget the debt ceiling thing; plus, running on a low taxes for millionaires platform is just not all that sexy in a depression:)

- Sophia

September 13, 2011 at 11:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, I agree - "clowns" was necessary. I'm sorry for the initial flak I was giving, and I'll try to cut it back in the future. I promise I didn't mean to upset anybody; I'm sorry.

- whyamihere

September 14, 2011 at 12:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm afraid that's wishful thinking, Sophia. Obama's approval rating with the middle-of-the-road Independent voter has fallen to a new low of 39%. He needs us in order to win in 2012. The debt ceiling shenanigans will soon be forgotten. The aroma of Obama's blithe "shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected" tee hee hee, however, will linger like yesterday's half-eaten Happy Meal behind the front seat.

- vox_mater

September 14, 2011 at 12:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A good first post, Timothy, but I'm not buying the notion that one poll in September 2011 indicates anything about what will happen in November 2012. Far too many things can change between now and then. To name just a few: one or more of the Republican contestants honing his/her message; their ceasing their attacks on each other as the nominee becomes clear; mistakes by Obama; today's report of the horrible poverty rate being a harbinger of more bad economic news; and perhaps most of all political, economic and overseas developments that none of us even anticipate. True, it's better that the PPP data shows Obama leading his opponents rather than vice versa. But to extrapolate 13 months into the future is a futile exercise.

- Thunderroad

September 14, 2011 at 1:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As a moderate Republican (yes, we still exist - barely), I'd caution anybody from being too cocky when it comes to Governor Perry, who I detest. Moreover, as Thunderroad stated, relying on September polls when the contest is over a year away doesn't sell me that Obama is a lock to be reelected, although I would concede he's a strong favorite. Of course Obama is thrashing some of the possible nominees, nobody knows who they are. In short, don't be too cocky. Romney will be a formidable candidate; he's definitely improved his debating style and is more polished, although still too stiff at times. Perry may seem like an ignoramus, but he's thrashed his opponents throughout his career; I'm hopeful Perry, Bachmann and Santorum destroy each other in Iowa - I can only dream. If the GOP were not so far out in right field, they'd nominate Huntsman and Obama would be in serious trouble. Instead, sigh, we're debating HPV vaccinations - oy vey! Welcome, Tim. Good luck to you.

- djselzner

September 14, 2011 at 4:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noah's "Clowns" is appropriate here. I second "djselzner"s warning above. The Democrats still need to examine themselves and ask whether Obama should be the candidate in 2012. He has been a weak liberal on the domestic economic front. His healthcare program is recycled RomneyCare. He rolled over for the Republican Right. His foreign policy of appeasing the Muslim Brotherhood has been delusional. And Romney, freed of his need to tilt to the cultural Right in the Republican primaries, could turn into a formidable opponent in the general election campaign.

- amidut

September 14, 2011 at 8:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, it couldn't be that a large minority (what else IS 50%) realize that Obama's efforts to jump-start the economy (and Health-care, and tax-rates, and employment) have all been crippled by Republican intransigence in the Congress. And since the 2010 Republicans they've added "Hostage Taking" to their list of strategies. Sure, Obama has enabled these behaviors, and so loses approval. That doesn't mean we want to REWARD Republicans for this sort of behavior -- at least 50% of us don't. Besides, it's not all about the Presidency. What it IS about is taking back the House and Senate, so rational policies can be implemented. And I don't see that fight going very well.

- AllanL5

September 14, 2011 at 8:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noah-nothing: You appear to be an even more useful idiot than Chait. Keep up the moonbat cheerleading and make sure to not disclose any counter-facts like a) PPP is a Democratic polling org b) their results are an outlier compared to other polls c) the poll was a joke -- had questions like "are you in favor of dismantling Social Security" If you really believe your BS -- go to intratrade where the odds of Obama re-election are 49.8% Go all in. Dare you.

- mr_rationale

September 14, 2011 at 9:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr_rationale, PPP is a Democratic polling outfit, but it is not partisan in its polling, Nate Silver found them to have a slight Republican bias in 2010 polling cycle. They are the only outfit that is nationally polling the Presidential race on a monthly basis, so even if there was a bias it would not explain the trend in which Obama improved from August significantly. Other than the Social Security question, what other questions make the poll "a joke"? I could find none. On top of that the SS question was asked after the Presidential preference questions, so I would not blame that for generating the result. Try harder to put together a coherent argument next time.

- nayyer_ali

September 14, 2011 at 9:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is it just me or has Obama avoided being implicated in any major "scandal"? Does this have any significant effect on his favorability ratings?

- dcarpen

September 14, 2011 at 10:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

AaronW's predictions and mine are pretty much the same, except that I think Perry has an even shot at being the nominee. And Romney could win, if the economy is worse next fall than now. Of course, predictions are difficult, especially about the future. (Was it Berra or Stengel who said that?) As for polls, I'm less interested in national polls than in state by state polls in the following: Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, and perhaps North Carolina.

- bjones

September 14, 2011 at 11:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I will go out on a limb and say that a Romney victory in 2012 (coupled with a Republican Senate) will be good for America for the following reasons: 1. It will mark the end of the filibuster, as the use of the filibuster by Senate Democrats to prevent the repeal of the ACA, the re-institution of the Bush tax cuts and the filibustering of the next Republican Supereme Court nominee will get Republicans to repeal the damn thing. This will liberate American democracy for the next 100 years. 2. It will result in an effective fiscal and monetary stimulus bill during the first 9 months of the Romney administration, as voter anger with a still-limping economy will catalyze Republicans to do things that they refused to do with a Democrat in the White House and lead them to pass a large-scale jobs bill, which will finally break the back of unemployment (combined with a more robust recovery starting in mid-2012 after years of post-crisis stagnation). 3. It will save a host of Democratic Senators in vulnerable states who are up for re-election in 2014 after being swept along in the Obama wave of 2008, as a generally happy public will return most incumbents to office that year. 4. It will provide bi-partisan cover to completing an orderly exit from Afghanistan and an orderly disengagement with Iraq. 5. Given the predilections of the Republican base, there will still be lots of anger over the fact that a Romney Administration gave no more than lip service to re-instituting Don't Ask, Don't Tell, re-instituting DOMA and pushing Constitutional amendments against gay marriage, abortion, for a balanced budget, etc, etc. Combined with what will probably be some sort of scandal borne of hackish incompetence and another recession that will start in 2015 or so, the Republican Party will split into factions and President Romney will choose not to stand for re-election, but will instead yield his bid to Vice President Rubio. Vice President Rubio will promptly be pummeled in the general election by a resurgent Barack Obama, who will go on to repeat Grover Cleveland's performance as the only President to serve two non-consecutive terms. Please note that my tongue is at least somewhat in cheek with regard to all items after (1) above. But they are far from the realm of the impossible.

- wildboy

September 14, 2011 at 11:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Lib, go easy on the newcomer ... he was hired to replace Chait, not be his clone.

- NR409654

September 14, 2011 at 12:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

BTW, at this point, I think either Romney or Perry are formidable risks to an Obama reelection because they have the ability to drive different parts of the electorate ... Romney, the independents, and Perry the moonbats, to use Scabbers's favorite term - that's the rat from Harry Potter for all you ignoramuses out there :-)

- NR409654

September 14, 2011 at 12:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Apparently no one has informed the voters that Obama is a shoo-in. Silly voters! They are always the last to know these things.

- mlottman

September 14, 2011 at 12:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If anyone knows, please tell me someplace other than Chicago where the Obama organization is humming like a Jag, volunteers purring in with a sense of purpose to keep this administration's programs and policies going for another four years. None of the polls Noah cites speak to what happened yesterday in NY9: people staying home. I'll vote for Obama, but I do not want to. Every time he opens his mouth I care even less about him being reelected. None of the Republicans are attractive to me, but if Romy gets nominated, the people who put Obama over the top on 2008 might vote for Romney or stay home in 2010. They will rightly wonder, "What's the difference?"

- SFergessen

September 14, 2011 at 12:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I would imagine the Obama campaign will kick into high gear after Labor Day...2012, not 2011.

- nayyer_ali

September 14, 2011 at 12:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm waiting for the next debate where we get to see how many of the GOP candidates file out of the new Fiat 500 on stage. Michelle climbs out of the top and begins to juggle kittens in a state of clown-rapture and kills them to the total shock of the crown until they realize she's dressed as her favorite killer clown 'Pogo the Clown' aka John Wayne Gacy. Hermain Cain pops out next and starts to make balloon pizza slices for the crowds and then passes out from hyperventilating into the balloons. Ron Paul follows behind the car on his unicycle of libertarianism and falls off into an indiscernible pile of polka-dots, red shoes, wheel spokes and blood because his safety-regulation free unicycle exploded and his guts are punctured by the seat-post. The circus crowd hoots and hollers in laughter as Ron dies from lack of medical attention. Rick "santorum" Santorum explodes from the trunk of the car in a flurry of confetti and foam bubbles in a clownish satire of his name-as-sex-act-byproduct. Rick is then caught in the third ring of the circus dry-humping Newt's poodle. Gingrich then tumbles out of the car dressed as Napoleon with make-up and foam nose. He does countless summersaults around the car until he pukes from dizziness. We've seen this show before in 2005, 2008 and now 2012. He tumbles out of the big-top after wiping the vomit from his breast coat, followed by three prancing ladies riding cock-horses. Romney, after trying to get out from the car on the passenger side, tries the driver side and soon find he must exit from the secret compartment from under the hood. The crowd cheers and laughs when they realize his pantaloons are snagged on the car's hood latch and his is now doing cartwheels pant less. The frilly-bottomed underpants he sports have an over-sized band-aid on them and Romney runs in various directions looking for his pants and trying to get the band-aid off his behind to no avail. Meanwhile, out of the darkness and into center-ring, a midget cowboy-clown rides in on his miniature horse and starts firing off his cap-guns into the air. The crowd cheers as he feigns shooting to death all of the clowns one-by-one. Each one fainting in mock death. Perry pulls out his lasso and chases Romney around the ring. This way and that way until he gets him lasso'd and tries to hog-tie Romney up. Perry pulls a hot iron out of his hat and tries to label Romney with a brand he stole from the lazy-flip-flop ranch out of Loco, Tejas. In the other ring, John Huntsman, dressed as a 19th-century ring-leader cum mim, with hat in hand, pantomimes his sadness and dismay at the ugly clown-show that The Coch-Brothers & Teaparty Circus 'The Craziest Show On Earth' hired to entertain the crowd.

- singlspeed

September 14, 2011 at 1:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Vox_mater writes: "I'm afraid that's wishful thinking, Sophia. Obama's approval rating with the middle-of-the-road Independent voter has fallen to a new low of 39%. He needs us in order to win in 2012." Bullseye. Obama won for 4 reasons: 1) Unprecedented support from independents (which normally lean right, but bent left in '08) 2) Record-setting youth voter turn out (which leans left) 3) Record-setting black voter turn out (which is left) 4) Unexcited repub electorate We definitely have #4 happening again this time around. It's dismal. In 2008, if Obama didn't have such strong numbers in 1, 2 and 3, he would have lost to McCain. Romney will do better than McCain. McCain did poorly in the debates and his age was a factor. And Palin hurt more than she helped. If Romney picks someone that isn't a punch line for VP, then I think repubs have a pretty decent shot assuming the status quo continues.

- seattleeng

September 14, 2011 at 1:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In which I agree with Seattle Engineer! Time makes strange bedfellows in politics. Of course, a somewhat revived economy by 2Q 2012 and a successful Obama fight for a jobs package (not necessarily in that order) would make Obama much harder for Romney to beat.

- wildboy

September 14, 2011 at 2:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nay-bob, are you really this stupid? The poll also asks whether SSN is a ponzi scheme and if you believe in evolution. I know you have no clue regarding poll design -- but this poll was designed for a certain outcome. I could design a similar poll with biased unrelated set-up questions that would generate a +15 win for Perry. How about "Given Solyndra bankruptcy and $500M in Obama-aided loan defaults to be borne by taxpayers, do you believe that Obama's green energy plan is a good idea" Clueless liberals. Also, Nate thinks the Dems in trouble.

- mr_rationale

September 14, 2011 at 2:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For a commentator, Mr. Noah seems to have a very short memory. The last time around when we had a Democratic President (Carter) running for a second term (1980) in a recession economy the Democratic President also polled well while the Republicans were going through their primary process. Today, just as 32 years ago the Republicans were also going through an intensive soul search as to the direction of party. Today, just as 32 years ago, the incumbant President and the media critics dismissed the Republican contenders. I could go on and on an on.... The fact that any potential Republican candidate is polling as well against an incumbant President, as we currently see, is very meaningful and should be troubling to all Democrat partisans.

- garyrozen

September 14, 2011 at 3:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'll see liberalreformer's small criticism and raise it by whatever the game's limit is. Noah's post is essentially nonsense. It's taking now and projecting it to a year from now. Wait till the Republicans get their nominee--I think it's going to be Romney--and barring them choosing someone incredibly hapless, like a Bachmann, which is highly unlikely, let the race get deeply underway and then revisit this post to see how silly it is. I fear that the tendency to cheerlead here may overtake dispassionate analysis, albeit from a particular vantage point.

- basman

September 14, 2011 at 4:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's best not to count chickens before hatching. [One of our (real) chickens, though already hatched, just died.] However, the Republican candidates at the moment smell like the conservative equivalents of Mondale, McGovern, Carter, etc. It's imaginable to me that somewhere there is a clown who might also be an intelligent and competent person who might make a good President as well. Some people can multi-task. Some people are good at more than more than one job. However, I doubt the present crop of GOP candidates make that cut.

- skahn

September 14, 2011 at 4:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I disagree. Romney if he's nominated stands a decent chance to be your next president.

- basman

September 14, 2011 at 8:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Am I the only one who thinks this piece is written somewhat satirically? Fact is, we are all in deep trouble, aren't we. Obama isn't lucky at all; look at this mess - but the Republican response is so appalling...in fact, it's contributing to the mess. On the other hand look what just happened in Weiner's district - Democratic since the 1920's. Oy. NOW I am mad at him. People in his district took the opportunity to "send a message to Obama." Swell. He just had to twitter...

- Sophia

September 15, 2011 at 12:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...Am I the only one who thinks this piece is written somewhat satirically?... Sometimes to ask a question is to answer it.

- basman

September 15, 2011 at 1:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

today's poll by anyone is not conclusive. In September 2007, did not the polls conclude that the 2008 contest would be Hillary versus Giuliani? GOTV in 2012 - who will have the intensity factor? BTW, I have been following NY9 since 2008 when it had the lowest voter participation (about 35% versus NYC at 50%) in America. Voters stay home when they think their vote is meaningless. and Sophia, the voters in NY9 are mostly working-middle class Catholics with about 30% Jewish, of whom apparently 40% really ARE upset over NY's same-sex marriage. Turner won it in Brooklyn. I do not like to call anyone a clown, but Weiner really made that impression as a talking head - what, people think only Republicans are clowns? No monopoly there...

- K2K

September 15, 2011 at 10:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr_rationale, do not call me stupid, I do not call you names. Polls can be manipulated with leading set up questions obviously, but that would not bias results if the questions were asked after the elections questions had already been asked. So the Ponzi scheme question, which was asked toward the end of the poll does not bias the Obama/Perry question. Asking about evolution is not a misleading question, that is a major dividing point between religious conservative and the rest of America if you haven't noticed. Secondly, did you see the Bloomberg poll that came out today? Same result. Obama beats Romney by 4 and Perry by 9. They didn't even bother to poll the other Republicans, but I doubt if any of them would have done any better. Try again.

- nayyer_ali

September 15, 2011 at 1:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nate Silver's take is 2012 will be much like 2010, give or take a few seats. That can't be thrilling news for Obama. The only thing that will rescue Obama at this point is a recovery. Fortunately for him, I agree with some analysts that say robust recovery is right on schedule for next year, as high as 5% annual growth. Even that might not save Obama, but it sure couldn't hurt.

- Tgossard

September 15, 2011 at 2:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm no analyst, bien sur, but the numbers indicate that this is a classic recovery post-recession, the only difference being the length of time. I hope their right, but I don't see why not.

- Tgossard

September 15, 2011 at 2:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Silver's blog post http://goo.gl/3Ctrm

- Tgossard

September 15, 2011 at 2:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tgossard: Where ya' been? Good to see you again here.

- basman

September 15, 2011 at 3:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close