Home > Politics > Obama’s Constituency Problem

Obama’s Constituency Problem

From guest columnist, The Hippie Conservative:

If you’re a confirmed democrat, you’ve probably been hearing a lot about the weak Republican field of candidates. You’ve also most likely heard that the front runner Mitt (Williard) Romney, is not enjoying the full throated support of the Christian right that makes up a large part of the Republican Party. Assuming that you believe that Fox News is populated by xenophobes, the odds are you really haven’t heard much to make you believe that Barack Obama is in any trouble at all in this fall’s 2012 election.

You would be dead wrong.

In fact, it’s hard to find a single constituency that President Obama is doing as well with as he was in 2008. Liberals are disenchanted with his non confrontational style, moderates are disappointed with his hard left turn on social issues, fiscally conservative Dems and independents are shocked by his spending habits, Jews are down-right scared of his Mid-East foreign policy, blacks expectations were set far too high, whites are leaving in droves and Hispanics are still waiting in the wings struggling with immigration issues vs. their other beliefs and concerns.

In this piece, I’ll try to set the stage for what you should expect this fall. Keep in mind though; fall is an eternity away in the political world. Gaffes can be made, situations can and will change. What I’m going to give you is a snapshot in time as I see it.

Of all the problems that President Obama is facing in this reelection, none is as troublesome for him as the economy and gas prices. I tell people ad nauseam that Barack has two numbers he had better fear-8 and 3.  By that I mean 8% unemployment (no president since FDR has won with unemployment over 7.2%) and $3.00 a gallon gas. When President Obama took office, he made the mistake of soothsaying that the unemployment rate would not go over 8% if he were granted his $787 billion dollar stimulus program. (It’s been above 8% for more months than any other presidency since Roosevelt) It’s not so much his prediction that’s going to get him in trouble, as the reality that things have gotten worse, not better under his watch. (Unemployment was at 7.3% when he took office.) The blame game is easy to play (and certainly he will,) however, not everyone buys into excuse making, especially those who have lost their jobs. When people are suffering, they want results, not excuses. Gas prices are another major problem. Older people remember when an appeasement policy in the Middle East along with market meddling under Jimmy Carter lead to higher gas prices. Younger people only know that these prices are killing their pocketbook. Gas prices were at $1.85 when Barack took office and will certainly be over $3.00 and maybe over $4.00 by November. Again the Dems will try to pass the blame, but the Obama foreign policy of supporting the Arab Spring and his anti hydrogen rhetoric will certainly be pointed out as a cause by the Reps.

On a recent trip to a friend’s Jewish wedding, I found myself sitting at a table with 10 Jews of mixed gender and age. I was under strict orders from my wife to not discuss politics (This is a standing order for me at functions since the “Open House Incident”). However, without any prodding by me, the conversation turned to Israel and The Obama Administration’s policy on the Arab Spring. One elder man commented that “If Obama gets 4 more years, there will be no more Israel.” The entire table nodded in agreement. President Obama has been losing the Jewish vote steadily since his election. It’s no secret that Barack and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have had some friction over Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, borders, and the handling of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The lost votes are bad enough, but add to that the influence that the Jewish community has both in the media and the Democratic Party and a real problem immerges.

On white folks, it gets complicated.

Candidate Obama saw a surprising amount of support from the white community in 2008. White males, like myself, voted for Barack at about  41%. Before Obama, no Democrat since Jimmy Carter had earned more than 38 percent of the white male vote. , white females went even higher. The most recent poll numbers I’ve seen has President Obama at a mere 36% for white voters. Clearly the shine has come off the apple. The reasons vary but here are some of the ones I’ve been hearing; White people love to show how far they’ve come in conquering their past racial failings. Obama gave them the perfect chance to demonstrate that at a time when their frustration with Bush and the Republicans was at the peak. Now, they view it as a job done and no longer feel the need. Also, they once viewed Candidate Obama as a man who shared his white and black heritage equally. From the “Beer Summit” on, they have come to the opinion (fairly or not) that President Obama is far more concerned with how he’s viewed by the black community than the white. Articles like this are reaffirming this belief.

Now, by the poll numbers. In a head to head against Mitt Romney, (his most likely foe), Barack comes out within the margin of error with some polls showing either Mitt with a slight lead or Barack. The ominous number for the Obama reelection effort however is the undecided (about 10%). These people historically do not go with the incumbent. Think of it like this; we’re already in a relationship with President Obama and the question is whether or not you want to continue this relationship. If your spouse or boss responded to that question with “undecided”, would you consider that a good thing? Certainly not. I generally view Republicans as having a disadvantage in the Main Stream Media, therefore, when elections come around they stand to gain ground when their message reaches people who have only heard the MSM opinion. Media outlets have to run their ads by law. This can’t bode well for the Dems who have had a lock on most messaging outside of Fox News.

The situation is still fluid and many things can happen. A split vote due to an independent run by either Donald Trump or Ron Paul could throw a wrench in the works for the Reps and all but guarantee a win for President Obama. War, economics or a terrorist attack can change things as well as scandals. But as of now, I would have to bet heavily on a Republican win. Perhaps a good tactic for the Dems would be to point out that with the Senate race leaning towards the Republicans taking control (23 of the 33 seats up for grabs are Democrat seats), winning the presidency would mean absolute power for Republicans. The American people historically do not like absolute power and embrace divided government. I wouldn’t count on them using that tact though, since absolute power is always the goal of either side. It’s still 9 months until the election, so hold on people…its’ going to get nasty.

- H.C.

The Hippie Conservative blogs at  http://thehippieconservative.blogspot.com/

Categories: Politics
  1. Mike
    January 20, 2012 at - | #1

    Nothing to fear, HC. The GOP doesn’t have a credible candidate for 2012 presidential race. Not saying this will be smooth sailing for Obama, because it won’t. But the field of Republicans is pretty pathetic. Their political catechism — cut taxes for the super rich, deregulation of shrewd businesses, cutting down the size of the government, trickle-down economics which has been tested and failed, — is spelling their doom. It’s becoming glaring clear even to a 4th grader that this approach to the economy is a failure.There’s no more message for now to put across to the American people, so they’ve got to somehow appeal to those who strongly felt that the OVAL office should be solely reserved for a white skin. They may succeed in short run, but this success would eventually spin-out the third or even fourth political party In America.

    • thehc
      January 20, 2012 at - | #2

      Hey mike,
      Have you ever thought about just taking one or two steps closer to the middle? Sigh. The only thing that’s failing right now is Keynesian Economics. And it’s not just failing here, it’s failing worldwide. I know that the Liberal Creed on any issue is, “It failed because it wasn’t broad enough, we didn’t spend enough, or there was too much opposition.”, But, at what point do you realize we don’t have unlimited funds, you can’t force everyone to subjugate themselves to your way of thinking and you’ll always have opposition? I’ve spent a lot of time on Occupy sites discussing these issues and it always ends with “Just take the money from the rich.” How they propose to take their money without them moving it overseas with 10 keystokes is a mystery. Raising the top tier of income taxes 5% (a higher rate than before the Bush tax cuts) would only raise $110 billion a year. Less than 1/10 of the deficit. You love to criticize, but please enlighten me Mike, how do you maintain these debts? How do you get enough money from the rich to end our problems that are growing every day? This isn’t 1972 anymore and you couldn’t even do it then. I voted to hire Obama on false promises of being fiscally conservative, I’m firing him for how he behaved for the first two years when he had utter and complete control in both houses (a super majority in the Senate). Unless there’s a split Republican vote, a major event or scandal, President Obama will go down as the second coming of Jimmy Carter. I will however, save this exchange. Who knows? I could be wrong. You didn’t make a very good case though on where Obama will get the votes, only a assessment of the Democrat opinion of people they already hate. Thanks for the other side just the same:)

    • Mike
      January 25, 2012 at - | #3

      Let’s see…

      1. Osama Bin Laden…check 2. Unemployment rate 8.5%…check. 3. 1.6 million jobs created with no GOP help…check … 4. 22 months of job and economic growth with no help…check 5. Ended war in Iraq …check 6. DADT repeal…check 7. not one tax hike in 3 years….check 8. Brought out of rascism in the GOP…check 9. Still carry 80% of the black vote…check 10. Same wife for 15 y…ears with NO marital affairs…check 11. Can flat out sing…check 12. Save auto industry and 1.5 million jobs…check 13. Assisted in ousting Ghaddafi…check 14. Only active President to receive Nobel Peace prize while in office…check 15. Mortgage modification to prevent home owners from losing their home…check 16. STILL fighting for middle class families…check 17. Reform affordable healthcare…. check

      Despite what the GOP would have you believe the President has been doing these things and more without the help of most.

      Obama 2012 ~

  2. thehc
    January 25, 2012 at - | #4

    Hey Mike,
    You didn’t even try to answer my question and instead went into a tirade. But ok, I’ll play. 1)OBL. 1/2 a trillion dollars and 3000 lives later, yea! we killed one man. 2) LOL. It started at 7.3% when he was inaugerated. Your parading it getting worse? 3) Same period under Reagan-7.5% at inaugeration to 8.0% Jan, 1984 3 years = +0.5, your guy? 7.3% to 8.5%= +1.2%. (http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm) twice as bad. 4)Your not even creating the 400,000 jobs a month needed to break even. 5)He simply followed the timetable Bush set up, but OK, I’ll give you that. 6) Could not care less, but ok. 7) Depends on what you call a tax. My health care went up 9% in one year-the single largest rise ever. 8) Your party has been singing that song since the Dixiecrats stopped running the KKK. 9)OMG! It’s actually over 90% That’s an acheivement?? Blacks voting for blacks? 10) KUDOs for the Obama Family. He should make himself more of an example. 11) One line of Al Green does not make you a singer. 12) Remember that the next time a union contract get nullified, it’s roots grew there. 13) War number 3. 14) Without doing anything by his own admission. 15) A good plan. 16)I’m middle class and pay my bills-he ain’t fighting for me. 17) Another good question you won’t answer- If it’s so great, why not have it in effect BEFORE the election so he can run on it Hmmmmmm.

    Fun game Mike. Still waiting for how your going to get this money from the rich.

    • Mike
      January 31, 2012 at - | #5

      Maybe I’m not focusing on your question because it’s silly to begin with. If you think any of the loons in the GOP clown car have a shot at winning, I can’t do anything for you.

      • thehc
        February 1, 2012 at - | #6

        Hey Mike,
        Or…. you simply know that my “silly” question cannot be answered in a way that fixes our debt problem. Math does not lie. I’m really hoping that your not one of the millions who try to ride the system rather than be self-supporting. Dependency atrophies. This free ride is coming to an end and those that believe otherwise are fooling themselves. As for the election, I’ll see you in November. Certainly it’s too early to be sure.

    • thehc
      February 3, 2012 at - | #7

      Mike,
      On #4, the number should be 200,000 not 400,000 a month. Sorry, at least I correct my own mistakes. Still, the point is the same. That would be 2.4 million jobs a year or 7.2 million jobs over 3 years he’s been in office, just to break even.

  3. Miss KD
    January 27, 2012 at - | #8

    Do Republicans really want to win the White House? Because at the rate they’re going, they might as well just start endorsing President Obama. They are all but handing him his second term on a silver platter. Not that I’m complaining. The last thing we need in office right now is one of those nuts in the White House.

    • J. Alex
      January 27, 2012 at - | #9

      But you have to admit, Miss KD…this is at least turning into a contest. At first, we only had one GOP candidate who was untrustworthy, disingenuous, and arrogant. Now we have two! LOL!

  4. thehc
    January 27, 2012 at - | #10

    I’m amazed at how confident everyone is that President Obama will win despite maintaining any constituency. Is this all based on the belief that the GOP candidates are so weak? In all my political life, which covers 10 elections, I’ve never heard the main stream media say a Republican was a good candidate. Ever. Remember how stunned all of you were when Bush Jr. won? Why do you still believe the MSM when they are always on the side of Democrats?

  5. thehc
    January 27, 2012 at - | #11

    *that was supposed to read ” despite NOT maintaining any constituency.

  6. Darren
    February 1, 2012 at - | #12

    A few things to address from this article. As noted by others Obama doesn’t have a weakened constituency, as the author suggests. Especially when you compare him to the current field of Republicans. Outside of the current field of candidates, who else could make a run? Christie??? Too much negativity to look at regarding his governorship. Rubio? Not ready for primetime (although you could have argued that about Obama as Hillary found out that might not mean much), Jindal?, Jeb Bush (no way a Bush wins so soon after his brother and his dad).

    Obama only appears weak because the economy is not growing yet. Most people (who are not in the Beltway or part of the Tea Party) understand that these are issues that no President could control. Other than that, he has been reasonably effective in the face of a GOP determined to obstruct at every place possible.

  7. thehc
    February 1, 2012 at - | #13

    Hey Darren,
    Thanks for your comments, but I think your missing a few things here. First, I’m not just saying that President Obama has a constituency problem, I backed it up with polls via my links. Should I be suprised that Dems and the mainstream media think that the Rep candidates are “weak”. No, I’m not. After all, you were all dead sure “W” would not be reelected. All Rep candidates are weak to you guys. Hell, I bet your confused as to how ANY of them get elected. You should at least consider that your candidate may not be as strong as your media would like you to believe. As far as anyone else entering the field-that’s nearly impossible. You have to register in advance as a candidate in most states, and that ship has already left. It’s nearly impossible to win with the very few states left you could register in. I guess the Republican Party could suddenly change the rules, but I would put the odds of them getting the states’ GOP to go along at near zero. I know the Dem talking points are that the economy was in such bad shape that no one could have fixed it, that there are too many outside factors and the Reps have ruined all Barack’s wonderful plans. However, the truth is; he had an absolute majority in Congress for two years. Most Presidents don’t get that much power. He outspent any President in history in his effort to fix the economy and the results are minimal at best. BTW, I voted for President Obama in 2008.

  8. thehc
    February 3, 2012 at - | #14

    Hey all,
    More proof of what I’m talking about-http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2012/02/rocky-terrain-obamas-electoral-college-map-grows-steeper.php
    keep in mind, I’m giving you stats, not opinions.

  9. Andre
    February 7, 2012 at - | #15

    Let me put it this way: Mitt will probably take the Republican nomination. This is the same dude who won the governor’s gig in liberal-as-hell Massachusetts as Republican Mormon. It’s not smart to sleep on him.

  1. March 28, 2012 at - | #1

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 768 other followers