Might We See a Landslide?

American Thinker ^ | June 21, 2012 | Bruce Walker

[kingattax]

We have grown unaccustomed to presidential landslides. The three most lopsided presidential races since 1988 fell short of the conventional definition of a landslide, which would be a ten-point difference in the popular vote between the winner of the election and the next-closest candidate. Obama in 2008 beat McCain by seven points and carried 28 states.

Clinton in 1996 beat Dole by eight points (although Clinton did not even get a majority of the popular vote) and carried 31 states. George H. Bush had a seven-point advantage over Dukakis in 1988 and carried 40 states. A quick perusal of the electoral maps in each race shows a closely divided nation and no real mandate for the victorious candidate.

But that landslide drought could end this November. Economic conditions produce landslides -- prosperity propelled Reagan and Eisenhower, for example, to huge re-election wins in 1984 and 1956. Economic distress affects voters even more.

Only once has a president persuaded Americans to re-elect him in grim economic times: FDR in his 1936 landslide re-election.

[G Larry]

The RCP “average” is useless...

BUT...

If you isolate the LV (Likely Voters) polls, you can learn a lot!

Thus, I stand by my assessment!
If you have “better” data, please share.

[Night Hides Not]

It would have been far worse had Sarah not been on the ticket. There was no enthusiasm at all for McCain.

There is no enthusiasm for Romney. That would change if Mitt started going after Obama like he went after Santorum, Gingrich, etc. He's shown no sign of that.

[Wings-n-Wind]

Might we see a landslide??

********

**************

Yup.....
I think so...

[Ingtar]

Don’t hate him; don’t believe it; don’t expect him to win.

[wxgesr]

Never forget about the (R)s inevitable wasy of screwing up a soup sandwich.

[luvbach1]

Demographic changes are making voters less responsive to policy failure.

That's an understatement.Obama voters don't care what his polices are; that is, if they are even aware of them beyond what's in it for them.

[muawiyah]

Absolutely ~ it's possible Romney is a fair reflection of the Mittbot attitude ~ that Obama is so bad no one could have missed that and will vote for any opponent.

I really don't think doctrinaire leftists or professional criminals think that way ~ they assume they can steal back any losses they personally might incur.

Obama still has his 69 million votes as far as those polls go.

[SgtHooper]

Bingo! Not a landslide, since the number of bloodsuckers has grown substantially since those elections, and will do whatever they can to continue their lifestyles.

[wiggen]

I told people in Feb that Wisc and Mich would be in play. Watch. Coal companies stocks are down 60-70% in the last 12 months. Mines are closing. All those union guys that voted for him even though he said he would destroy their industry will take that quote a little more seriously. Coal miner. His wife. Kids. Its far more more than 1-1 voting. His base isn’t as fired up this time around either.

[Night Hides Not]

I really don't think doctrinaire leftists or professional criminals think that way ~ they assume they can steal back any losses they personally might incur.

40+% will vote for Obama...he's their sugar daddy, and they're voting their self interest. The Mittster has to give the average voter a real reason to vote for him, and it can't simply be because he's not Obama.

I'm still holding out hope that it will turn out like 1980, i.e. the turn of sentiment in the weekend before the election.

That's when the average voter asks themselves, "does the incumbent deserve another four years?"

[muawiyah]

Not to worry ~ the Obots still respond to policy failures. But it depends on the policies. I'm sure you imagine its foreign affairs, employment, prices, housing ~ but if you have a significant voting block with a history of deep poverty they may look at DIFFERENT policies than you do.

Recently some blacks have begun saying "Obama has done nothing for us", which is true. They're mostly right back where they were in the 1950s. A half billion bucks given to Vann Jones does nothing to stir the broad masses!

A payoff to the USPS that keeps rural (almost totally white operated) post offices in businesses might PO urban blacks where the USPS continues to be a MAJOR employer of higher skilled black employees. Obama sure blew that one ~ USPS is closing fewer places, but guess what ~ they have high percentages of black workers.

That's a theme for some Republican campaign ads, but does that get to the youth?

A lesson USPS is important to black voters. It's only 1/5 as important to white voters. We should have been on top of that one.

You may have noticed that Mitt hasn't made very many speeches that deal with specific polices as they might relate to various interest groups. Did you suspect that maybe he actually has nothing to say?

I do!

[muawiyah]

We lost 60% of our national wealth and you continue to imagine anyone thinks they're riding high.

Get with the picture or this election will be just a big mystery to you as it plays out.

[Political Junkie Too]

My Rasmussen poll model currently has Obama and Romney deterministically tied at 269 each, but Romney currently is at about a 24% chance of winning.

It's still too soon to tell where the polls are going to break. Many states are within the margin of error.

What's sad is that the Senate seems to be slipping from GOP control, according to the Rasmussen polls. The GOP better get on top of this fast, so they don't come out of the summer behind the curve.

-PJ

[null and void]

What’s a 20 point difference? A lahar?

[matthew fuller]

Day by day Obama looks more and more like Hoover or Carter, only without the inherent decency of those two men.

[LS]

Actually, my comment was quite brilliant. The fact is that an electoral landslide is what DOES happen when you have this kind of approval number. Look at the historical numbers when the loser got 43% of the vote.

[null and void]

With a bow to Nathan Hale, I only regret that I have but one vote to give for my country.

I take it you aren't a Democrat...

[rogue yam]

the number of bloodsuckers has grown substantially since those elections, and will do whatever they can to continue their lifestyles.

Some of the bloodsuckers are wising up that there is a maximum sustainable rate of bloodsucking before the host dies and the bloodsuckers starve.

Seriously.

[Joe Boucher]

His last few pressers he seemed to me to be on something.
Obozo losing it???

[LS]

No, that’s simply not true. I encounter plenty of people who voted for Obama and who now will vote for Romney. In addition, in 2008 you had high turnout among blacks and youth. I can say with great confidence as a college teacher that there will be a huge drop off in the second group, and we have good evidence that the black vote will revert to 2004 levels. Finally, despite the concerns about Romney, I don’t think GOPers will stay home or switch as they did in 2008. Example: in 2008, we examined a precinct in suburban Dayton that should have been close to 100% GOP-—about 1/6 voted for Obama. One GOP officeholder learned that 4 of 5 of her kids voted for Zero. That stuff will not happen in 2012. And, yes, that stuff adds up to a crapload of votes.