Juan Pablo Rivera Garza
Reporter
In 2008 Barack Obama rode into the White House with a landslide victory unseen since the days of Reagan, now he looks like the weakest incumbent since Jimmy Carter. Can he win next November? It’s a good question, right now polls point to an extraordinarily close race between Obama and GOP front-runner Mitt Romney, but he still triumphs over Herman Cain and Rick Perry relatively easily.
The point is, Barack Obama’s re-election is going to be based on the Republicans choice for a candidate. Mitt Romney may have a lot of shortcomings and flip-flops on many key issues, but he could definitely beat Obama in the race for President. All other Republican candidates are either too extreme or do not have the election infrastructure to win a national campaign.
But what about the fact that the nation’s unemployment is stuck at 9.0%? Even Jimmy Carter, regarded as the weakest Presidential incumbent in modern history had only around 5% unemployment. How can Obama win then? He better hope that the Republicans nominate an extreme fringe candidate (i.e. Cain or Bachmann) and that the economy improves. Painting the Republican party as a tea-party lapdog and as the party of “no” can possibly bring him to win again. I wish that the conditions were different, that Obama would be able to stand up against a competent Republican candidate and still be very strong, but the polls say differently. In the end of the day, Obama has changed various different policies, whether it is his successful national security policy or his health-care reform accomplishments, but as James Carville most famously said, “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Nice points. Personally, I can’t imagine that the American people will find Romney personable or genuine enough to elect. He has some decent ideas but he can at least fake that he’s a human being and not a politician!
Nice piece, but neither Cain nor Bachmann are “fringe candidates.” Furthermore, what are the other Republican nominees lacking in terms of infrastructure? I thought Cain’s the one who didn’t have a war room to respond to the mounting scandal in time. That would clearly leave the well-lubricate weather vane Romney with the only legitimate campaign, right? So why can’t he make 30%?
I personally dont find ^taylor personable or genuine enough to elect.
@dylan Bachmann has lost a large amount of her staff in New Hampshire recently, and she seems to be relying greatly on Iowa right now, where she is barely cracking over 10% in the polls. The other candidates other than Romney or Paul are lacking in money and staff. Look at Gingrich he suffered a mass staff walkout at the end of the summer. My point is, if the candidates can build a campaign machine that is strong then they can definitely fight Romney much more effectively.
But on a more serious note, I think the best chance Obama stands lies with the fact that the Republican party may very well implode upon itself. Many candidates such as Perry and Cain have made sprints for the front of the polls, but quickly brought into check by extremist views or ethical flaws that have been exposed. While its true that Mitt has shown longevity atop the polls, I think all of the fluidity within the polls will hurt the strength of all candidates, and eventually, the party will have a hard time getting behind any singular candidate
when Ron Paul falls into the category of candidates who ARENT short on staff or funding, then you know your party is a mess.