Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why 2012 Is Not 2004
The Wall Street Journal ^ | May 30, 2012 | KARL ROVE

Posted on 05/31/2012 5:47:24 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican

President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney may be dead even in the polls, but some pundits insist the president will prevail on Election Day because 2012 is the new 2004.

The story line is President George W. Bush had roughly the same numbers at this point in 2004 that Mr. Obama has today. Mr. Bush went on to win a narrow victory by building a massive ground game that focused on the GOP's base and by relentlessly attacking his opponent, Sen. John Kerry. Mr. Obama is executing the same strategy. What worked for Mr. Bush, the theory goes, will work for Mr. Obama.

The only problem is the theory is based on a false premise.

There are some similarities between 2004 and 2012. Mr. Obama's current job approval and personal favorability ratings are roughly the same as Mr. Bush's in 2004. So are the head-to-head matchups: In mid-May 2004, Mr. Bush trailed Mr. Kerry in Gallup, 46%-48%, while in the most recent Gallup tracking Mr. Obama is tied with Mr. Romney, 46%-46%.

There are crucial differences between the two elections. It is a myth that 2004 was all about maximizing Republican turnout. The Bush campaign also successfully sought to win as many independents as possible and to poach elements of the Democratic coalition. In the end, Mr. Bush received 44% of the Hispanic vote, carried the largest share (24%) of the Jewish vote for any Republican since 1988, nearly erased the gender gap with 48% of the women's vote, and was supported by 11% of black voters, up from 8% in 2000.

If Mr. Obama makes this election mostly about energizing the Democratic base—as he clearly intends to—he will further alienate swing voters who elected him in 2008 and then turned on his policies with a vengeance in 2010.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2004; 2012; backstabberromney; backstabberrove; bho2012; romneycare; romneycare4ever

1 posted on 05/31/2012 5:47:38 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Bush had a successful 9/11 response, a good economy and at that time, a strong position on foreign policy and way.

Obama has a disastrous economy and not much else to run on. He’s completely lost the independents. Even if he is fortunate enough to motivate his base to match the enthusiasm of 2008, he cannot recapture the independents and does not have a demotivated opposition this time. This is definitely not 2004.


2 posted on 05/31/2012 5:56:17 PM PDT by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
The first sentence needs another comma:

President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney may be dead, even in the polls.

3 posted on 05/31/2012 5:56:29 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

This claptrap from the guy - Rove - who a month ago said Romney was the one in serious trouble if the election were held that day Obama would win easily. Can we do a graphic of Karl Rove’s likeness as a weathervane?


4 posted on 05/31/2012 5:59:32 PM PDT by antonico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

This claptrap from the guy - Rove - who a month ago said Romney was the one in serious trouble if the election were held that day Obama would win easily. Can we do a graphic of Karl Rove’s likeness as a weathervane?


5 posted on 05/31/2012 5:59:32 PM PDT by antonico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper
Obama has a disastrous economy and not much else to run on. He’s completely lost the independents. Even if he is fortunate enough to motivate his base to match the enthusiasm of 2008, he cannot recapture the independents and does not have a demotivated opposition this time. This is definitely not 2004.

If that's true, and I don't dispute it, why then do so many Freepers assume a Romney defeat?

6 posted on 05/31/2012 6:01:12 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: luvbach1

Because their guy didn’t win the primary. So obviously Obama’s going to win.


7 posted on 05/31/2012 6:03:01 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Rove’s a has-been, maybe a never-was.

Whatever is going to happen, it’s not going to be predicted by Karl Rove.

Isn’t he well-off enough to retire? He really should retire.

Go fishing, Karl.

Leave us alone.


8 posted on 05/31/2012 6:06:28 PM PDT by samtheman (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2888480/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antonico

Rove was right. Back then, Obama would have won, according to the polling. The numbers are what they are.

I’m with Rush on this one and I happen to think that this won’t even be close, but the polling is currently showing us otherwise. Rove knows that the trends are showing a momentum swing towards the republican camp but all that can change with the events.

I expect stat heads and numbers guys like Rove to analyze this every week and report the findings along with how they “feel”.


9 posted on 05/31/2012 6:09:01 PM PDT by newnhdad (Where will you be during the Election Riots of 2012/2013?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

I suspect 2012 will be 1932, but in reverse.


10 posted on 05/31/2012 6:11:16 PM PDT by Publius (Leadershiup starts with getting off the couch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Rove is a fat-faced nobody...FOKR


11 posted on 05/31/2012 6:12:08 PM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GGpaX4DumpedTea
Rove is a fat-faced nobody..

How far he's fallen. Back in 2004, the consensus on FR was that Karl was "magnificent".
12 posted on 05/31/2012 6:23:49 PM PDT by Signalman ( November, 2012-The End of an Error)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

And Kerry was a sorry excuse of a candidate. Bush should have beat him even handier than he did. I don’t care for Romney, but so far he looks like he’s going to make a game of it.


13 posted on 05/31/2012 6:23:49 PM PDT by murron (Proud Mom of a Marine Vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Apples and oranges here, as we’ve never had an incumbent and obvious-to-many marxist out to destroy this nation. That said, 0’s path to winning is only by treachery. The ends justifies the means, and he certainly has a bunch of hidden committees figuring out what kind of crisis to foment, and the timing rollout, to maximize his chances. Along with the usual voter fraud and boxes of ballots to be found on election eve.


14 posted on 05/31/2012 6:30:25 PM PDT by C210N ("ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate" (Breitbart, 2012))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Signalman

“Back in 2004, the consensus on FR was that Karl was “magnificent”.”

I remember that...and I do not retract my previous comment :)


15 posted on 05/31/2012 6:35:16 PM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Publius

>>>I suspect 2012 will be 1932, but in reverse.<<<

I’ve had the same suspicion, although perhaps it’s just hopeful thinking.

I see Obama as the end of the line of the New Deal. Obama has tried many FDR tactics, including attacking the Supreme Court, flooding the executive with alphabet agencies and programs, spending to “prime the pump,” creating a “brain trust” of helpful “czars” to assist his program, and unrelenting leftist hatred of the rich, the Constitution, and tradition. Obama is seemingly hellbent on instituting FDR’s Four Freedoms, for instance. Obama’s also using Bush as his own personal Hoover. The trouble with all this politically is that the problems today are the creation of New Deal (and Great Society) policy.

So we have Romney. A rich guy. A flip-flopper. Not really a conservative. Someone from the Northeast, from a rich family. FDR was seen as a lightweight himself at the time, and there was a lot of mistrust and suspicion of the guy by the Democrats. When he got into office, though, there was a whirlwind of change.

My hope is that Romney, if elected, will metaphorically rip off his suit and institute a conservative revolt. It would be a surprise, but the spring of 1933 was a surprise, too. Romney’s past may not tell us much when he steps into the Oval Office and has the power of the presidency at his fingertips. At least I hope so. And as I’ve been told in the past, hope is not a strategy.

God help us.


16 posted on 05/31/2012 6:46:37 PM PDT by redpoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: redpoll
FDR didn't know what his "New Deal" was during the campaign because no one had told him. He had actually run to the right of Hoover on fiscal issues. But just days after the inauguration, he faced the collapse of the banking system, and that pushed him into action.

I'm anticipating that within 60 days of Romney's inauguration, we'll witness something similar. Romney will have to blaze ground different from FDR and his followers because it was their solutions that caused these problems.

I suspect there will be a total paradigm shift and a total break with the past. Can mild mannered Clark Kent Romney rip off his suit to become Superman? We'll see.

17 posted on 05/31/2012 6:53:52 PM PDT by Publius (Leadershiup starts with getting off the couch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: luvbach1
If that's true, and I don't dispute it, why then do so many Freepers assume a Romney defeat?

Because they really, really hate Mitt Romney.

18 posted on 05/31/2012 7:07:12 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: C210N

Obama is running as a self-acknowledged leftist.

The last two guys to do that were Mondale and McGovern.


19 posted on 05/31/2012 7:09:42 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Ah STFU Rove, you magnificent bastard.

Remember how that phrase used to be slung around FR day in, day out?
20 posted on 05/31/2012 7:15:19 PM PDT by mkjessup (Eternal Vigilance (aka FReeper Tom Hoefling) has my vote for President in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

Of course, neither of those two had the advantage of running as an incumbent...


21 posted on 05/31/2012 7:21:07 PM PDT by C210N ("ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate" (Breitbart, 2012))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Gee....that’s quite a screed from a nobody guy (or gal) but then this is kinda like a blog so anything goes.

When you’re making mid-six figures on your political smarts, get back to me. Until then I’ll consider the words of the guru over yours.

:)


22 posted on 05/31/2012 7:51:08 PM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad

“Rove was right. Back then, Obama would have won, according to the polling. The numbers are what they are.

I’m with Rush on this one and I happen to think that this won’t even be close, but the polling is currently showing us otherwise. Rove knows that the trends are showing a momentum swing towards the republican camp but all that can change with the events.

I expect stat heads and numbers guys like Rove to analyze this every week and report the findings along with how they “feel”.”

_________________________________________________________________________

Then how does Rove help himself by having to change his tune about what’s happening? If he has no idea what the pulse is from one month to the next, he’s no more an analyst that just a copy reader. He sells himself on his “expertise”, and expertise in analyzing trends isn’t to just parrot data from one month to the next. he just reads the latest batch of polls and then goes on TV and sells the results he reads as though he himself had been wise to it all along. After all, this facet is what compels Fox News to pay him big bucks - they’re buying his alleged expertise in being able to be IN FRONT of the curve, which he almost never is. If he has to keep changing his point of view based on the last month’s polling he’s not an analyst - he’s just a reporter. The difference between Rush and Rove is that Rush hasn’t budged much from his belief that Obama is in serious trouble and always has been. Rove is the weathervane I think he is, swaying with what he reads and sells the results as though he was able to predict it all along.


23 posted on 05/31/2012 8:30:26 PM PDT by antonico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Karl Rove: Best known for taking what should have been two landslide victories and turning them into the narrowest of escapes. Seriously, George W, Bush should have won 2000 and 2004 easily but Rove’s bungling almost cost both elections.


24 posted on 05/31/2012 8:35:41 PM PDT by OrangeHoof (Our economy won't heal until one particular black man is unemployed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Signalman
How far he's fallen. Back in 2004, the consensus on FR was that Karl was "magnificent".

That was then:

Photobucket

This is now:

Photobucket

25 posted on 05/31/2012 8:41:12 PM PDT by Bush_Democrat ((xDem now) - Breitbart sent me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: C210N
Of course, neither of those two had the advantage of running as an incumbent...

This is true.

The last few 'Rats who managed to actually become incumbents all pretended to be much more centrist than they actually were (Obama, Clinton, Carter).

Of the three, Obama is the one who has really let the mask slip as he heads into his re-election campaign.

My point is that self-acknowledged leftism has been abandoned by the 'Rats as an electoral strategy for decades, and for good reason.

26 posted on 05/31/2012 8:58:59 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: antonico

Karl Rove is as useless as an old bag filled with silly gas.

Oh ....


27 posted on 05/31/2012 10:43:24 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Scores of millions will NOT vote for Bishop-backstabber
Milt Romney, the presumptuous author of RomneyCARE,
but will in its stead write in the name: Gov. Palin.


28 posted on 06/01/2012 2:58:16 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
Scores of millions will NOT vote for Bishop-backstabber Milt Romney, the presumptuous author of RomneyCARE, but will in its stead write in the name: Gov. Palin.

Then scores of millions will do for us what they did back when they voted for the hand grenade with big ears and gave us Bill Clinton and then claim, in their smug self-righteousness, that they were doing the moral thing.
29 posted on 06/01/2012 3:07:54 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: citizen

If you’re going to judge political smarts by paycheck size then you should start following Opra.


30 posted on 06/01/2012 3:42:09 AM PDT by samtheman (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2888480/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: citizen

As many have pointed out over the years, here in FR and elsewhere, the guy with “political smarts” transformed a landslide in 2004 to a near-defeat.

Maybe I’m wrong in believing that’s what happened (though I don’t think so), but I’m not alone in believing that’s what happened.

Your reverence for his “political smarts” is based on what, exactly?

How much money he’s made?


31 posted on 06/01/2012 3:44:58 AM PDT by samtheman (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2888480/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: citizen

And BTW, for the record, my post #8 was not a screed, it was just a simple post, with an opinion that you obviously didn’t like.

Here is screed:

a : a lengthy discourse b : an informal piece of writing (as a personal letter) c : a ranting piece of writing

I have written screeds here in FR, but post #8 is hardly a screed.

You should read more; it might do you some good.


32 posted on 06/01/2012 3:49:58 AM PDT by samtheman (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2888480/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
aruanan:
"Then scores of millions will do for us
what they did back when they voted for the hand grenade with big ears
and gave us Bill Clinton and then claim, in their smug self-righteousness,
that they were doing the moral thing."

You are blaming the victims of Team Romney.

Have YOU forgotten Mr. RomneyCARE's Dirty Tricks in 2008?

"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"

"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"

"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"

"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"

"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"


And THAT is the tip of the proverbial iceberg:

Novak: "Fred Thompson drop-out rumors traced to Romney campaign"

Said Novak: "The rumors were traced in part to Mitt Romney's campaign,
trying to stir up strife between McCain and Thompson
."


"Despite outspending his rivals by huge margins throughout the primaries,
(Mitt Romney, Carpetbagger UT,CA,MA,NH,Mexico) lost Iowa, South Carolina, Florida and California.
The only primaries he won were in Michigan, where Dad was governor; LDS states;
and a few states on Super Tuesday in which his California-obsessed rivals
couldn't spare the cash to advertise.
Only John Connolly in 1968 had a worse cash-to-delegates ratio.
And John McCain rightly did not like Romney's tactics during the primaries.
(W)hen (Romney's early leads) started slipping away, he resorted to unfair,
distorted, scorched-earth negative ads, betting that his opponents couldn't
afford to spend enough for the truth to catch up to his charges."

[Romney: A Mistake for McCain, 7/23/2008, Dick Morris]

33 posted on 06/01/2012 4:40:24 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Signalman
...the consensus on FR was that Karl was "magnificent".

Now he's just a bastard.

34 posted on 06/01/2012 6:21:54 AM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson