Washington Babylon — August 25, 2010, 9:11 am

More on Obama’s Chances to Win Reelection

Nelson Hernandez (among others) took issue with my “clever analysis of President Obama’s excellent
chances of re-election.” Hernandez made a number of good points, though he made several comments (for example, Obama has “an insatiable desire to promote socialism”) that make it hard to take him seriously. But here’s an edited version of his email, to which I’ll reply below:

The economy is obviously in dire straits and may well be heading
into a full-scale, big-D Depression which will hit us full force
before the 2012 election. Even the most mainstream economic
commentators are now pretty much throwing in the towel after the
crushing GDP and housing numbers we’ve been hearing lately. In short:
do a little extrapolation on this disastrous economy and tell me that
the Democrats can win re-election in 2012. It’s not a question of
where we are today, but where we will be in two years. It doesn’t
look good.

Silverstein’s breezy dismissal of all the likely GOP candidates
totally fails to take into account the already well-advanced revulsion
toward the incumbent that animates broad swathes of the middle class
and independent voters. It is also very unlikely that youth and
non-black minority groups will mobilize for Obama in the same way they
did in 2008. Americans are in distress and are not going to fall for Obama’s
soaring yet lightweight rhetoric a second time.

Silverstein’s recollection of history is faulty. Mondale was not
the most boring candidate ever; Dukakis was. Mondale was actually one
of the better candidates (in terms of competence) the Democrats have
put up in the last 40 years.

Finally, Mr. Silverstein completely disregards four personages in
the GOP, of which at least one and possibly two will likely be on the
2012 ticket: Gov. Christie (NJ), Gov. Daniels (IN), Rep. Ryan (WI) and
Gov. Jindal (LA). All four of them could and would demolish Obama in
a debate on any topic in different ways: basic principles, factual
analysis, policy analysis. There is absolutely no hope of Obama
besting them in an impromptu discussion.

My reply.

Point One: I generally agree, the economy is very scary and if it drops off the cliff Obama will lose. But in my view, that’s the only way he’ll lose. It’s very hard to knock off a sitting president. Gerald Ford lost in 1976 to Jimmy Carter, but this was the first election after Watergate; Ford was Richard Nixon’s vice president; Ford angered the country by pardoning Nixon; and the American economy was in a terrible recession in the run-up to the election. And even so, Ford came back from behind (at one point by 34 percent) and lost by only two percentage points. A shift of very few votes in Wisconsin and Ohio would have given Ford victory in the Electoral College.

George Bush Sr. lost in 1992 but he had Ross Perot on the ballot; Bill Clinton won with just 43 percent of the vote. And in recent times, that’s it. Sure, Obama could lose but Hernandez’s breezy dismissal of his chances reveals his loathing of the president and sympathy for the GOP.

Point Two: I also agree in part, but see above. I’d also note that Americans fell for his rhetoric the first time, there’s nothing to prevent them from doing so again. Americans have a long track record of swallowing empty, overblown rhetoric (for example, that the GOP is the party with a track record of deficit reduction, even though under Presidents Reagan and Bush it ran up enormous deficits, and Clinton more or less eliminated it.) And underestimating Obama as a campaigner is a mistake Hillary Clinton, among others, has already made. He’s good on the campaign trail.

Point Three: OK, Dukakis was a dog of a candidate but it’s a photo finish with Mondale in terms of dullness. And competent? Mondale was best known as Carter’s vice president, hardly an auspicious record to campaign on.

Point Four: Good luck to those four candidates. If I were Obama I wouldn’t be losing a lot of sleep about any of them. The political scenario for Republicans for 2012 looks to be highly favorable (though obviously a lot could change between now and then), but the party has no charismatic candidate with new ideas, and whoever wins the GOP nomination is still going to have to knock off a sitting president with the powers and perks of incumbency. Possible, but unlikely unless Hernandez is right about the “big D.”

Share
Single Page

More from Ken Silverstein:

Commentary November 17, 2015, 6:41 pm

Shaky Foundations

The Clintons’ so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends.

From the November 2013 issue

Dirty South

The foul legacy of Louisiana oil

Perspective October 23, 2013, 8:00 am

On Brining and Dining

How pro-oil Louisiana politicians have shaped American environmental policy

Get access to 165 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

February 2016

Isn’t It Romantic?

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Trusted Traveler

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Trouble with Iowa

The Queen and I

Disunified Front

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

We Don’t Have Rights, But We Are Alive

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Isn’t It Romantic?·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“He had paid for much of her schooling, something he cannot help but mention, since the aftermath of any failed relationship brings an ungenerous and impossible impulse to claw back one’s misspent resources.”
Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Article
The Trouble with Iowa·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“It seems to defy reason that this anachronistic farm state — a demographic outlier, with no major cities and just 3 million people, nine out of ten of them white — should play such an outsized role in American politics.”
Photograph (detail) © Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Article
Rule, Britannica·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“This is the strange magic of an arrangement of all the world’s knowledge in alphabetical order: any search for anything passes through things that have nothing in common with it but an initial letter.”
Artwork by Brian Dettmer. Courtesy the artist and P.P.O.W., New York City.
Article
The Queen and I·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“Buckingham Palace is a theater in need of renovation. There is something pathetic about a fiercely vacuumed throne room. The plants are tired. Plastic is nailed to walls and mirrors. The ballroom is set for a ghostly banquet. Everyone is whispering, for we are in a mad kind of church. A child weeps.”
Photograph (detail) © Martin Parr/Magnum Photos
Article
We Don’t Have Rights, But We Are Alive·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“If I really wanted to learn about the Islamic State, Hassan told me, I ought to speak to his friend Samir, a young gay soldier in the Syrian Army who’d been fighting jihadis intermittently for the past four years.”
Photograph (detail) by Anwar Amro/AFP/Getty

Amount by which the number of government jobs in the U.S. exceeds the number of manufacturing jobs:

5,129,000

The sound of mice being clicked may induce seizures in house cats.

In Turlock, California, nearly 3,500 samples of bull semen were stolen from the back of a truck.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Two Christmas Mornings of the Great War

By

Civilization masks us with a screen, from ourselves and from one another, with thin depth of unreality. We habitually live — do we not? — in a world self-created, half established, of false values arbitrarily upheld, largely inspired by misconception, misapprehension, wrong perspective, and defective proportion, misapplication.

Subscribe Today