Gallup 2012 Voter Preference Survey - Obama 5 Point Deficit against Any Republican Candidate – Historical Analysis and Trends suggest GOP Win

This week’s Gallup’s ongoing Voter’s Preference Survey shows the President with a 5 point deficit against any Republican running in 2012, and although the poll has a certain level of statistical uncertainty, (95% confidence that the margin of error is plus/minus 4%), (Gallup poll data here) it has held fairly steady over the past 5 months, with one exception, the percentage of those with no opinion has remained approximately 12 percent, with those preferring a third party or “other” candidate steady at 6%. (See PDF Available in Gallup Article). The pollsters meld those two (undecided/other) giving an impression that 18% remain uncommitted. The pollster is puzzled that 26% of independents show no preference (but does not break out prefer third party/undecided’s), and compares the June results to those of former President’s Bush (both Jr. and Sr.), which is an interesting choice given that the economy at its current state would be most aptly compared to Carter’s 1979 rankings.


Carter in the same months in 1979, had historically low job approval ratings, specifically on the economy and foreign policy, with economy driving the decline due to inflation Daytona Beach Sunday News Journal, NYTimes/CBS Poll

Therefore, should inflation become a factor, coupled with rising gas prices, and the potential for gas shortages, one could expect the President’s 1 point deficit, to become slightly lower against any Republican. That said, given the fact that Obama and his administration have approximately a year to pull a rabbit out of a hat, and right the economy to at the least a trend towards George Bush Levels (unemployment rate at 4.5% in the same time period of 2007, by October of 2008, that rate had risen to 6.8% . (See Housing Bubble) Should the Obama administration bring the unemployment rate in line to 2008 levels, matching former President’s Bush’s worst – the word miracle comes to mind.

However, creating private sector jobs may not be out of the question should the Presidents close association with members of Wall Street, who have played key roles in his election. At the moment, that appears unlikely as his recent quest to recruit the same Wall Street donors who helped propel him to the presidency, was met with resistance (see Obama Gets Snubbed by Wall Street).

Should inflation meet unemployment then the lead for the Generic “Republican” over Obama will widen, and although it is highly unlikely that Obama would face a strong challenge from within his own party (See Kennedy/Carter and most interesting Ford/Reagan Gallup Data in 1978 (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) as his job approval ratings would prevent anyone from mounting a serious challenge (they are not in the 30’s), it is very likely that until all GOP Candidates are declared and the primaries begin South Carolina, a front runner will actually emerge, other than through polls, which, as shown are subject to change.

Therefore, it is hoped that Obama has something up his sleeve in order to right the economy, so that the American public can hope to realize relief from the “non-existent inflation”, high prices at the pump and a general trend towards a misery index, however, historical economic data suggests that a minimum of two years would be necessary to put the economy on a true sustainable recovery with citizens enjoying at the least an improvement in personal economics, specifically those in the “so called” middle class (or what is otherwise known as “Tax Payers” working in the private sector).

Additionally, should a third party candidate emerge, such as happened in 1980 with the three way race between Carter, Reagan and Independent Candidate Anderson, the results might be similar to the Gallup data shown for June (see “other” preference at 6%). In that election Regean had a 9 point lead over Carter, with the Independent Anderson taking 6% of the vote. Although Carter’s approval in the previous year was in the high 30’s, it sank due to the final years melding of continued high unemployment, gas shortages and the staggering rise in inflation. One might suggest that Carter’s poor job performance vis a vis foreign policy played a part, but it was again, the economy that dominated.

Other data to consider: In 2008 Obama bested John McCain by 7.1%, , in the democrat primary, Obama bested Hillary Clinton, not in the primary states, (where she won the popular vote) but in the caucus states where he had a slight better return, giving him 41.8% of the delegates to Clinton’s 39.4% this would have resulted in a delegate vote, however, the use of Super Delegates was employed by the Democrat Party, which gave Obama the nod as the new Party standard bearer

As the economy has driven the winner or loser in almost every election held in the prior century and the current, it is doubtful that this situation will change. As the front runner or front runners emerge from the Republican field, and should the economic data remain the same, it would be a close election, the outcome of which would most probably go to the yet unnamed Republican. Should the situation worsen and inflation factor into the equation in the upcoming months, then one can anticipate a Reagan type lead over the incumbent.

154 Billion Dollar “Job Creation” Packages Narrowly Passes House – Pelosi Pins Democrats 2010 Hopes on Jimmy Carter Strategy.

Nancy Pelosi hopes 150 Billion Dollar Job Stimulus will Save Congressional Jobs - including her own - image opinoneditorial.com

From Bloomberg: The House narrowly passed a bill authorizing 154 billion dollars in additional debt for a job creation package yesterday. The vote, (roll call here) was 218 for, 214 against, on a Bill that is designed to extend unemployment benefits, maintain jobs in the public sector and “create” jobs through construction projects that are hoped to be ready for 2010.

Flashback to the 1977 Job Creation “Stimulus” Package that Jimmy Carter and his comrades in Congress pushed through in roughly the same fashion. Carter’s plan called for spending 30 Billion (1977), and included a scheme to create 800,000 jobs over a two year period. Yes, jobs were created, however, so was an unsustainable rate of inflation that broke the back of the middle class – it was deemed “the misery index” and included of all things, tax cuts, to those earning the least (or those who would be entitled to full refunds regardless).

30 years later, Democrats are praying that this new plan works. House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, needs a boost as falling poll numbers indicate that she may be either demoted or retired in 2010, along with a good percentage of her “flock”. An article in Politico indicates that several of Nancy Pelosi’s troops are announcing retirements (Brian Baird (D-WA), at a time when she is convinced that if the White House and Congress can boost the economy in any way it would affect “job creation” (or saved jobs) in Congress. Nancy calls this “full campaign mode”. In other words, if the people believe that jobs are will be created, and hopefully ignore the increased debt ceiling (which will have to be paid back by – the taxpayers at some point over several generations – unless tax cuts, generous tax cuts, are put into place and there is complete halt to more government programs) and happily vote the incumbents back into office.

Nancy is taking a risk in that the public is ready to party like its 1979 – with or without a Ronald Reagan. Should this bill sustain those public sector jobs, and extend unemployment benefits, while putting a road construction plan into place, it may indeed save and create jobs, but the risk of increasing inflation as the dollar is weak at present is palpable. (Increasing the debt ceiling will only shove it further down the proverbial latrine.) While the rank and file begin to pay $10.99 for a pound of hamburger, and wonder how they will make ends meet, (inflation!), the blame is going to be planted squarely on the shoulders of those who voted “yea”. Those who did not, including 40 some odd “blue dog” democrats (those who know their jobs are on the line), are hoping that the Democrat Brand is not so tainted that they lose their seats by virtue of association.

To Recap, in order to try and save their political hides, the Democrats in Congress (and assuming the White House) put the country’s already diminished fiscal health at great risk by creating a job creation/stimulus package, ramming it through the House (which, incidentally happened exactly that way under Carter, and historically failed) – just in time to “look good” for the 2010 elections. Words fail those who cannot comprehend the lack of common sense, and lack of understanding in general of the basic of our economy, that have been displayed by this Congress, who, since 2006, has done nothing but drag our nation further downward – not for love of country or some misguided ideology, rather for self-interest.

Recommended Interesting website: Teabombs Worth a visit. The premise: individuals create accounts which allow them to vote for incumbents with less than savory records (Nancy Pelosi is currently leading the pack), they can then vote for their challengers as well. The end result, those who “win” – will be targeted – by funds given to the challenger in order to bolster their campaign. Currently, Pelosi is in first place, followed by Boxer and the infamous Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Chris Dodd, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters, Arlin Specter and Sheila Jackson Lee round out the top ten. The top three challengers: Liz Carter (vs. Hank Johnson, GA), John Dennis (vs. Nancy Pelosi) and Earl Sholley (vs. Barney Frank). If one thinks that this is a partisan website, think again, Republican’s who have exhibited less than stellar fiscal records can be found amongst the incumbents listed. That said this may be predictive of those in the top 10, as far as job preservation and creation are concerned.

Way to Go Joe – Biden Acknowledges Stimulus Guessing Game

Vice President, Joe Biden - image: Time.com

From Time Magazine: Vice President Joe Biden, in a recent appearance on “Meet the Press”, put forth the notion that everyone involved in the stimulus “guessed wrong” (key quotes from Time follow):

"No one realized how bad the economy was. The projections, in fact, turned out to be worse. But we took the mainstream model as to what we thought -- and everyone else thought -- the unemployment rate would be."
"Everyone guessed wrong at the time the estimate was made about what the state of the economy was at the moment this was passed."
"The bottom line is that jobs are being created that would not have been there before."
"Can I claim credit that all of that's due to the recovery package? No. But it clearly has had an impact."

Therefore, based upon the Vice-Presidents take on the out-of-control government spending, it was a “guessing game”, based on a model of assumptions. Moreover, those who feel that Barack Obama and company are studiously moving the country to the left, may be in error, because, based on what Biden has to say, they are instead, floundering about, taking stabs at what they “think” might work. Herein lays the problem, although it is apparent that the President is to the left of center, with a Vice-President that is somewhat of a “loose cannon”, most view the man as competent, brilliant in fact – surrounded by brilliant people who will make good sound decisions in order to further American interests – so say the media, and those pundits that pontificate on certain cable networks. That said, what appears to be the case, and may more likely be a fact, blinded by a Progressive education that gave former President Jimmy Carter, sainthood status, no one in the administration bothered to research historical data, and therefore, the results of overspending, bailouts and stimulus – and the outcome are predictable.

Had anyone with an ounce of sense, gone back over what had happened in the past 40 years, with clarity of mind and lack of political rhetorical think – the situation America is now facing would have been a shade different – the nation needed deeper tax cuts, allowing banks, and auto-makers to fail, so that in the long-run, the healthier businesses (note: political ties to each and every one of those institutions that were given aid), would have risen – the others would have become “history”, and the nation would have recovered rapidly – specifically the private sector. It is a proven economic model, while the current model is proven as well, to be somewhat disastrous, economically.

Rushing forth in panic, driven by political ideology with no sane historical references, is what has happened to our country – according to Joe Biden. Ironic is it not? Historically, those that rush blindly into situations of an economical nature (See Carter, “inheriting” a fiscal disaster from his predecessor and the response which caused the coinage of a new term “Misery Index”), serve one –term in office. Therefore, those who are caught in the middle of this – the unemployed, those who are sick at heart at what has happened to our nation in such a short period of time – should take heart – in a mere three years the polls will once again be open, and someone, man or woman, will step forth, offering advice of an historical nature, that will of course, sound very good to those masses who are beaten down by high inflation, out of control taxation from federal and state administrations, and the result will be – predictable. Although one cannot look for another “Reagan”, as that would be counter-productive, one can bet the house that a new conservative (notice no mention of Party Politic) one who is fiscally grounded, will lead the nation forward in 2012. For those who feel they should have looked harder at Clinton instead of blindly following the “American Idol” of presidential candidates, keep in mind, packaging is what it is, packaging - the more attractive the package, the harder one must dig to find out what that “package’ actually has accomplished – and then, take a look at the other package – the one that may have some “baggage”, but has a clear record. Simple lock step, slogans, should not shape a campaign, unless of course, there is more than rhetoric to substantiate the slogan. Therefore, the privilege of going to the polls to vote and hire a new administrator for the country (which is what the President’s function is – a CEO so to speak), requires some dedicated research on the part of those who actually wield a vote.

In retrospect, therefore, the blame should not be placed on the shoulders of Barack Obama, as President, he is doing what he can, in order to move the nation forward – the blame should rest with those who put forth a candidate of limited experience, undermined a candidate who had the right experience (Clinton), and packaged this candidate so well, that the nation surely would “purchase the goods” so to speak, and then, the blame also lies with those who voted blindly, on rhetoric or on endorsements. Case in point: a family member who, one would think, given gender and age as a factor, would have naturally supported Hillary Clinton (while this blog clearly supported Mike Huckabee, another moderate – but conservative with a proven governing record), however, true shock and awe were in store, when this dear person said when queried who she would support: “Obama (breathlessly) – Caroline Kennedy endorsed him!”. Now, a short six months later, buyer’s remorse, and the inability to look the family conservative in the eye, has set in. Therefore, a lesson of sorts to conservatives everywhere, regardless of Party (yes there are conservative democrats), be kind to those who were blinded by packaging and endorsements and offer to help make more educated choices in future elections. Additionally, send a note of thanks to Vice President Biden; he is truly the gift that keeps on giving.