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

Skip to comments.

Take a look at the historical perspective
ALPB Forum ^ | 7 November AD 2012 | Peter Speckhard

Posted on 11/07/2012 7:33:55 PM PST by lightman

Take a look at the historical perspective. An incumbent winning re-election almost always happens. It is expected. It is like a tennis player holding serve.

Since WWII, the POTUS has changed parties like clockwork every eight years. The only exception was that Reagan essentially got three terms (Bush 41 basically being just a continuation) by taking one from Carter. Other than that the pattern is unblemished.

So the real story of yesterday is just how close the Democrats came to blowing it. In every single other instance the party in power increased their margin of victory running for re-election. LBJ crushed in 64 where JFK barely eeked one out in 60. Nixon cruised to a second victory in 72 despite Watergate even.

Reagan incredibly improved on his bloodbath in 1980 by coming a tenth of a percentage point in Minnesota away from a clean sweep in 84. Clinton did much better in 96 than in 92. Bush scraped out a victory despite losing the popular vote in 2000 but won much more easily in 04.

In short, everyone gets more votes once people see them in action for four years.

Obama is the big exception; unlike every other modern era president except Carter (again, counting Bush 41 as Reagan’s third term), he actually lost support by governing (or, if not actually governing, at least giving it the old college try, to be charitable).

A smaller percentage of the electorate voted for him after seeing him in action than voted for him when he had no record to run on. That is unprecedented among incumbents who win re-election. It is telling that right up to election eve nobody knew whether Obama would hold serve.

An incumbent winning a squeaker ought to be chastened by the experience, not chest-thumping. Plus, every congressional district in the nation elected a representative last night, and a comfortable majority chose a Republican, which gives the lie to the idea that the GOP is a radical fringe party. Even Mr. Tea Party Paul Ryan won re-election in a working class district of a reliably blue state.

The Democrats lost three in a row before they splintered in Clinton’s Democratic Leadership Council and Dean’s liberal “Democratic wing of the Democratic party.” If Biden wins in 2016 I’ll concede that the GOP needs to re-evaluate itself, as the Dems did after Bush won in 88.

Until then, I think it is a bit premature to write off the GOP as out of touch for merely having the second best showing of any challenging party in the modern era.


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: election; election2012; obama; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: SunkenCiv

I believe the author was writing of post WWII.


21 posted on 11/07/2012 8:25:05 PM PST by lightman (If the Patriarchate of the East held a state like the Vatican I would apply for political asylum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mhx
Also I expect Obama to be even more of a basket case this term than the last one.

He is the Peter Principle writ in huge, flaming letters. The scandals of the first four years strained at their confinement, held in loosening check only by a deaf, dumb and blind fourth estate, and the willful ignorance of those with authority to do something about them.

obama's capacity for damage is enormous. So enormous that he certainly will not escape the shrapnel when it finally explodes.

Unfortunately, others will be damaged, too.

22 posted on 11/07/2012 8:31:58 PM PST by RobinOfKingston (The instinct toward liberalism is located in the part of the brain called the rectal lobe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Contrary to what we were led to believe by the GOP and what some FReepers claim they saw on the ground in their state, REPUBLICANS WERE NOT ENTHUSIASTIC TO VOTE THIS YEAR.

What I saw in the district by district totals of my red County in a blue state was, overall, 69% turnout; in the most rural GOP districts 65 - 80% vote for Romney with turnout higher than the County average.

23 posted on 11/07/2012 8:32:59 PM PST by lightman (If the Patriarchate of the East held a state like the Vatican I would apply for political asylum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: okie01

“As such, it will no longer be a candidate for repeal, but part of the political landscape.”

This is my huge worry over this loss. It’s aggravating generally, but this seals our coffins for medical care in the future.

Even 100% Repub Congress in 2014 is too late - it’s already started, and politicos never have the gumption to take on the smallest largesse from any law.

Heavens we should deconstruct new government departments and put bureaucrat/stiffs out of work!

We are doomed.


24 posted on 11/07/2012 8:36:46 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr

“About the only pathway to victory I see at this point is for the Left to fragment. A dismal economy might force their various thieving constituencies to fight over the diminishing pie, thus fragmenting their coalition. Its hard for me to see conservatives winning the presidency any other way.”

How about binge on debt money? It’s possible, and while I hope against Obama spending not much worse than before,

He has demonstrated the following tendencies:

1) Welfare is a ponzi scheme: People are ushered in for money for unsustainably high returns. What is normally an investment for someone trying to find a foothold in the career market.

2) Deficit: Unless Obama radically turns back on spending via vetoes and contesting bills with Congress, he will, as of next year, have a debt equal to all of our economic production ($16 trillion).

3) War: If Obama tries to simply look tough with Iran, via increased graduation of military force, he will add a minimum of 300 billion to the total budget annually, make that more if we actually engage in a war.

4) Debt interest: You have the problem of how immense the interest on the National Debt is. It’s already just $450 billion at lows of 2.8% annual interest rates, which means that soon the interest will become an elephant in the room.

Then there’s so much more regarding the National Debt, but the problem is, with inflation, bankruptcy in California, plus perhaps as high as 25 to 30 trillion in debt, as the deficits are expected to rise with the added cost of Obamacare and existing compounded interest on our debt, we’re all going to be in serious trouble, and Obama will be eventually be limited either because we’ve fallen into the debt trap with foreign investors, which is why they loan us, or additional inflation from adding money to circulation.

A combination of inflation and/or debt limits will ultimately cut into the leftist selling point of giving away the freebies by sheer force of circumstance.

Even worse is the fact that incomes all across the board are taking a cut.

In short the left is going to be left to either start refusing their own freebies and self-destruct against the rage of their useful pool of payees, or they will simply be rendered ineffective by lower currency values.

Either way, the government isn’t really likely to have a last laugh on this one, they’re digging a really deep ditch for short-term gain. I hope and pray that Obama gets a clue as to the potential cliff our nation is headed and uses his icon status to try and change his path, and our nation’s path, however, I sadly admit that the choice is his, and if he does, well, sadly enough, a new America, or hopefully a new sane government comes up, because this insanity is simply self-destructive.

Regarding those disenfranchised, make sure to keep the private charities working overtime over the next few years, because starting with the aftermath of Sandy, they need it now, and there’s no telling how much harder they’re going to need some serious help from the rest of us from subsequent disasters in coming days, months, and years.


25 posted on 11/07/2012 8:43:29 PM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: lightman

RE: What I saw in the district by district totals of my red County in a blue state was, overall, 69% turnout; in the most rural GOP districts 65 - 80% vote for Romney with turnout higher than the County average.

Maybe the enthusiasm was isolated to a few counties here and there.

Otherwise, here’s the puzzle -— WHY DID McCAIN GET MORE VOTES in 2008 THAN ROMNEY in 2012?

2 MILLION MORE !!

What happened to these Republicans in 2012?


26 posted on 11/07/2012 8:44:19 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Maybe they voted for Palin rather than for McCain...and Ryan is no Palin.


27 posted on 11/07/2012 8:47:49 PM PST by lightman (If the Patriarchate of the East held a state like the Vatican I would apply for political asylum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Yeah, that was an astounding piece of sophistry, leftist in enormity. The author manages to dismiss evidence against his thesis by saying, “Oh, that doesn’t count. It was just Reagan.”


28 posted on 11/07/2012 8:48:33 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: lightman

He said the incumbent was almost always reelected, and he’s quite simply full of it, including from WWII on. FDR’s fourth term was Truman’s first partial term, and he was eligible to run for a second time in his own right, but turned it down. That’s the guy’s first eight years. While in office, Truman busted a couple of nationwide strikes, in one case at least using the US Army to do it. During the first Berlin Crisis (the other two happened during the Bay of Pigs and the Missile Crisis) he told the USSR and the world, “We are going to stay, Period.” During his campaign against Dewey he did a whistle-stop tour, and at each stop he had a shill in the audience (someone on the campaign staff) who would whip up crowd enthusiasm at a rehearsed time — he’d yell, “Give ‘em Hell, Harry!” He spent his remaining years carping about every Republican politician who’d ever lived.

Eisenhower served eight years, and ran as a Republican because it was a better fit for him, but also because he was concerned about the two-party system. That’s one.

JFK-LBJ, eight years, no incumbent POTUS.

Nixon-Ford, eight years; Nixon won reelection, but didn’t serve his entire second term.

Carter, four years.

Reagan, eight years, that’s two.

GHW Bush, four years.

Clinton, eight years, that’s three.

GW Bush, new century, but eight years, that’s four.

Obama’s five.

Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, four out of twelve.


29 posted on 11/08/2012 4:02:15 AM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

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