The Upper Chamber

Many have been speculating, particularly after the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Affordable Care Act, how Republicans would be able to fully repeal  the law.  To be completely honest, even with a President Romney, the GOP would likely not be able to repeal the entire law, but only parts of the law that directly relate to the United States budget.  Otherwise, they would need 60 votes, which, at least at this point in the cycle, seems entirely unfathomable. 

Therefore, with the fate of the Presidential election looking more and more like a toss-up, the Senate races are becoming much more important for each of the parties.  Today, I will break down each race and attempt to project the most likely outcome for November.

The Democrats and the Republicans have almost the same share of their respective seats declared “safe”, with the GOP having 5/10 and the Dems 12/22.  However, to complicate problems for the Democrats, they must defend 22 seats this cycle compared to only 10 for the Republicans.  Let’s begin with the seats each respective party is likely to keep.

John Barrasso-WY:  Mr. Barrasso hasn’t served in the Senate long, but Wyoming hasn’t elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1970.

Tom Carper-DE:  There hasn’t been any general election polling in the state, but it is safe to say that Mr. Carper will be re-elected in the Democratic stronghold that is Delaware.

Maria Cantwell-WA:  Washington State has been trending more Democratic for years, and public polling shows that Cantwell enjoys large support in the state.

Bob Casey-PA:  Everyone expected this race to be much closer than it is.  However, Republicans ended up with a lackluster candidate in Tom Smith, and Casey enjoys double-digit leads over his opponent.

Ben Cardin-MD:  Cardin is finishing his first term as Senator for Maryland, and the public still really likes him.  He has a double-digit lead against the GOP challenger.

Bob Corker-TN:  Like in Delaware, Tennessee hasn’t seen any polling, but the fact that President Obama’s name will be at the top of the ballot and Tennessee’s strong GOP history suggests Mr. Corker has nothing to worry about.

Diane Feinstein-CA:  Mrs. Feinstein has represented California since 1992 and has never had a truly difficult re-election.  The state is solidly Democratic, and the Republicans haven’t recruited a formidable challenger.

Kirstin Gillibrand-NY:  In 2008, Gillibrand was essentially picked by President Obama to serve the remainder of Hillary Clinton’s term.  Few expected Gillibrand to be quite the powerhouse she has become, and her polling lead over her rivals clearly demonstrates her broad popularity in New York.

Orrin Hatch-UT:  Mr. Hatch has been fighting for his political life all year, but not from a challenging Democrat; he first had to prevail against insurgent Tea Party backed Dan Liljenquist.  If Liljenquist were to have knocked Hatch off in the primary, Democrats may have at least stood a chance.  However, with Hatch running for another term, they don’t have a prayer at winning the seat.

Kay Bailey Hutchison-TX:  Though the Senator is retiring, Democrats haven’t fielded a strong challenger to whomever wins the GOP primary (Dewhurst or Cruz).  Further, Texas is still ruled by Republicans and 2012 won’t be the year to change that.

Amy Klobuchar-MN:  Though both of its U.S. Senators are Democrats, Minnesota’s legislatures are controlled by the Republican Party and the state has a history of independence.  That is why it is surprising to see Klobuchar polling so well in the state with only four months to go before the election.

Joe Manchin-WV:  This one is something of an anomaly, and truthfully, I initially overlooked it as a “safe” seat.  However, despite how terribly the President is expected to perform in West Virginia, Mr. Manchin, the Democrat is currently polling in the mid 70s.

Bob Menendez-NJ:  For a bit it seemed as though Mr. Menendez would have a tough path to re-election, as he isn’t greatly popular in the state.  However, Kyrillos, the Republican challenger, seems to be even less popular, and, for now, Menendez is leading by double digits. 

Bernie Sanders-VT:  This independent Senator from Vermont is running for yet another term, and all polling shows it is likely Vermont will give it to him.

Debbie Stabenow-MI:  All signs were leading to what looked like a close race between Mrs. Stabenow and Pete Hoekstra.  However, the GOP challenger hasn’t been able to recover in polling since his widely criticized (and racist) ad in February.

Sheldon Whitehouse-RI:  Mr. Whitehouse isn’t a high-profile Senator, and perhaps this is why he is performing so well in his state; he trounces each of his potential opponents in head-to-head matchups.

Roger Wicker-MS:  Mississippi is the last place Democrats will pick up a seat.  Move along.  Move along. 

The remaining races will be placed in order with increasing likelihood of changing party:

Daniel Akaka-HI:  The retiring Senator is leaving an open seat and a (small) chance for former Republican Governor Linda Lingle to take the seat that has long been held by Democrats.  However, she will have an uphill climb: the two Democratic challengers are each leading Mrs. Lingle by about 10%.  However, if the primary were to get too bloody and the party not heals before the election, the former Governor would have a chance to pull off a major upset.

Sherrod Brown-OH:  At the moment, Brown seems to be in a favorable place.  He is leading his GOP opponent, Josh Mandel, by about 10%, while the Republican has had weeks of bad press and just doesn’t seem to be ready for the limelight.  However, Ohio will be an extremely competitive state in November, and it is likely the gap will close in the coming months.

Joe Lieberman-CT:  No sitting Senator has upset both sides of the isle as much as Mr. Lieberman, and after this year, he will be retiring from politics.  The race to succeed him is relatively close, given Connecticut’s strong Democratic background.  Linda McMahon, the candidate who lost to Richard Blumenthal, is trying her luck again, this time most likely against Democratic Rep. Chris Murphy.  Polling has the Democrat with a 9-point lead, but Mrs. McMahon has a lot of money and name recognition that could work to her advantage in the fall.  This is one race that could heat up very quickly and put the Democrats on the defensive.

Jon Kyl-AZ:  Though Mr. Kyl is retiring, Republicans have a deep bench in Arizona, and Rep. Jeff Flake is currently leading Democratic challenger and former U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona by an average of about 7%.  However, if President Obama is to invest as heavily in Arizona as some campaign officials are projecting, Mr. Carmona’s chances at winning could be buoyed, and the Republicans will at least have to spend money to keep the seat from flipping. 

Dick Lugar-IN:  Unlike Senator Hatch of Utah, Mr. Lugar didn’t survive his primary battle with Richard Mourdock.  That is only good news for Democrats, who have a fairly strong challenger in Joe Donnelly.  Whereas Lugar would have likely cruised to victory, the race between Mourdock and Donnelly is quite literally tied, according to two polls.  However, President Obama isn’t expected to run nearly as well in Indiana as he did in 2008, and that will likely have down ballot effects on the Democrat.  The seat will likely remain in GOP control.

Bill Nelson-FL:  Florida is yet again a swing state, and both Senate candidates will be affected by the Presidential campaign.  Currently, Mr. Nelson holds a six-point lead over rival Connie Mack, but that is likely to narrow as the general election campaign heats up.  Nelson isn’t overwhelmingly popular in the Sunshine State, though neither is Mack.  The Democrats are currently favored to keep the seat, but a strong performance by Mr. Romney in Florida could spell the end of Nelson’s political career.

Dean Heller-NV:  Heller hasn’t been Senator for long; he was appointed just a year ago when Senator John Ensign resigned amid growing scandal.  This seat is competitive because Nevada as a state is competitive and the Republican Party in the state is in shambles (remember Sharron Angle circa 2010?).  Still, Heller has an average lead of 4.7 points on Democrat Shelley Berkley, one that is likely to shrink, especially if President Obama wins the state in November.  Look for more polling in the coming months, but for now, it’s advantage GOP.

Jim Webb-VA:  Virginia will likely host the most competitive Senate race all this cycle.  The race has remained deadlocked for the past 18 months.  The winner will most likely be based on who wins the Presidential election in the state.  If Obama wins Virginia, so does Kaine.  If Romney wins, so does Allen.  In that respect, perhaps it’s constructive to look at recent polling in the state on the Presidential level.  President Obama is currently leading by about 2.5%, a small lead that could be reversed with just a couple polls. 

Jon Tester-MT:  The Republicans in Montana are doing everything they can to tie Tester to the President, especially on issues like Obamacare and the economy.  However, Senator Tester is holding on to a miniscule 1-point lead against his Republican Danny Rehberg.  However, Montana is very likely to swing for Romney in November, and Rehberg will likely benefit from down-ballot spillover.  Tester needs to build up a lead larger than 1% before November; otherwise, the GOP will likely flip the seat.

Scott Brown-MA:  There is no race Democrats and liberals are more excited about (including the Presidential race) than the Massachusetts Senate race.  Liberal champion Elizabeth Warren is facing off against Senator Brown after he has been in office since early 2010.  The race is currently tied, and has been for a while.  However, if polling still has the race tied by Election Day, Warren wins.  Why?  For the same reason Rehberg wins in Montana: down-ballot spillover and overall state dynamic.  Scott Brown will likely be a one-term Senator. 

Kent Conrad-ND:  Senator Conrad is yet another retiring Democrat this cycle, and, initially at least, the seat was expected to be an easy pickup for Republicans.  However, Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota’s former Attorney General, has run a smart campaign and is only down by 3 points to Republican Rick Berg.  Again, because North Dakota is expected to vote for Romney by a large margin, Heitkamp will likely lose unless she can take the lead in the state by a few points.

Herb Kohl-WI:  Former Republican Governor Tommy Thompson is running in hopes of securing the seat being vacated by Senator Kohl in November.  Currently, polling has Thompson leading Democratic Representative Tammy Baldwin by about 9%.  However, Thompson isn’t guaranteed to survive the primary, as he has taken a number of positions at odds with the ever-growing conservative base in the state.  If Mark Neumann were to defeat Thompson in the August primary, it’s jump ball for the general election.  Until then, however, the GOP is looking like they will pick up the seat.

Clair McCaskill-MO:  There is perhaps no greater imperiled incumbent than Mrs. McCaskill.  Not only is she representing an ever-increasing conservative state, but she has also had her fair share of scandals and controversies since being elected in 2006.  Further, she is a fervent supporter of the President’s, which does not sit well with many of her constituents.  Luckily for her, the GOP primary is downright bloody.  If she survives, it will be because the Republicans beat themselves up too much to credibly convince the electorate they would be better than Senator McCaskill. 

Olympia Snow-ME:  The Republican Senator from Maine is retiring, and with the announcement came an even larger one: a three-way race.  Former Independent Governor Angus King is enjoying massive leads in the state against Democrat Cynthia Dill and Republican Charles Summers.  All indicators lead to a King victory, and the Democrats have essentially given up on the race, instead all-but supporting King.  Both sides will court him heavily to caucus with them in the Senate, as he could be the deciding vote on who obtains the majority.  He has openly said that he supports Barack Obama, and most analysts, myself included, believe he will caucus with the Democrats.

Ben Nelson-NE:  After deciding there was no way he would win, Senator Ben Nelson decided to call it quits.  The GOP will almost assuredly win the seat, as Republican Bruning is leading the Democrat Bob Kerry by double digits. 

To conclude, it seems as though the Senate will likely be very stable.  According to this analysis, the Democrats will probably pick up two seats and the GOP will pick up five.  That will give a net +3 seats to the Republicans, dividing the chamber 50-50.  However, it is entirely possible that, if Democrats were to have a really good night, they could net +4 seats, bringing their majority to 57-43.  Conversely, if the GOP were to truly outperform on election night, it is not improbable for them to pick up a net of +9 seats, which could sway King to caucus with the Republicans, bringing their majority to 57-43.  The most likely scenarios are obviously somewhere in the middle, with 50-50 Battleground270’s current projection.

Who Won the Week? (June 24-30)

This past week has probably been the most consequential thus far throughout the entire campaign.  Oddly enough, the main player and newsmaker was neither of the two candidates.  The Unites States Supreme Court ruled on a number of cases this week, most notably the Arizona immigration law and the Affordable Care Act. 

On Monday, in what was seen as a big win for the administration, the Supreme Court struck down three of the four challenged sections of SB1070, the Arizona immigration law signed by Gov. Brewer in 2010.  The provision the court saw as constitution was the so-called “show me your papers” section, which states that Arizona police officers may inquire the legal status of a person if there is reasonable suspicion the person may be illegally in the country.

This provision has essentially been the heart of the legislation and has also sparked the most fury from those who believe the law will lead to racial profiling.  However, the high court mentioned in its opinion that the law would be struck down if cases arise in which racial profiling has been used.

To get to the politics of the decision, this is a clear win for the Obama team and bad news for Mr. Romney and his campaign.  To be honest, it’s not clear if anything could be deemed a win for Romney on the subject of immigration, as he is desperately trying to peel away Latino support for Obama while vocally supporting the Arizona immigration law, which Hispanics loathe. 

However, the decision was a win for Mr. Obama on two fronts.  Not only did the government essentially win the case in court, it also brought the attention back to the (still legal) “show me your papers” portion of the law.  Obama was again seen as fighting for the Latino community while the perception held that Mr. Romney doesn’t understand their problems.

But Monday was a pinprick compared to the explosion later in the week.  Anticipation had been building for months with observers, myself included, guessing how the Supreme Court may rule on Obamacare and what the implications would be in each scenario.   

Ever since the oral arguments in late March, pundits and politicos had been gravitating toward the near unanimous conclusion that at least part of the ACA would be found unconstitutional.  On Intrade, an online bettors market, the odds of the individual mandate being struck down rose to over 75% the night before the decision was announced.

Let’s just say that the other 25% made a lot of money on Thursday.  In what will be remembered as one of the landmark Supreme Court decisions in U.S. history, the high court ruled 5-4 that the entire law was constitutional.  What’s more, conservative Chief Justice John G. Roberts sided with the liberal members of the court (for the first time in seven years) to give the ruling a non-partisan skew. 

In the wake of the announcement, it was immediately clear who was to benefit most, politically.  The President was able to keep his signature legislation.  Further, a conservative member of the court validated Obamacare.  Progressives seemed more fired up about the law than at any other point since it was signed into law.

Mitt Romney lost a main argument he was testing out before the ruling was made: that President Obama wasted the first year of his Presidency focused on an overreaching, unconstitutional law.  Romney was going to make the claim that Obama is an ineffectual President. 

There are probably still more examples Mitt can use to make that claim, and he likely will.  Further, Mr. Romney’s supporters have likely never been more fired up about electing him in November.  Sure, they don’t’ really like him much, but they loathe the President, and that energy will likely prove useful as the general election campaign heats up. 

Finally, on to polling.  As I noted last week, with the exception of the Bloomberg poll, which gave the President a commanding 13-point lead, the average of the polls had essentially remained about the same, with the President inching up only slightly.  However, this week’s polling has shown a pretty clear shift away from Mitt Romney and towards Mr. Obama. 

The RealClearPolitics average now has the President up by 3.7%, the largest margin Obama has had since April.  What’s more, even Republican-leaning pollsters like Gallop and Rasmussen are now showing the President with a lead (albeit small).  It will be interesting to see if Obama also gets a slight bounce in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decisions this week. 

Who Won the Week?  President Obama

Who Won the Week? (June 17-23)

Last week was a mixed bag for each of the campaigns.  The media seemed to focus on only two issues: immigration and Fast and Furious.  Let’s begin with the former. 

In what had become a painful week for Mr. Romney on the topic, the back-to-back candidate speeches at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) conference didn’t help the candidate.  During his speech on Thursday, Mitt Romney stopped short of endorsing the President’s immigration policy, only to tell the Hispanic crowd that he would replace the policy with his own.  However, he failed to outline even the skeleton of such a plan, and his speech was generally poorly received. 

On Friday, President Obama greeted the same community (and more) and cast himself as one of them: as a fighter for their rights and values against an obstructionist Congress.  Played back to back, there is no doubt of whom the Latino community is supporting. 

To back up this assertion, polls came out at the end of the week showing the President has an even larger lead among Latinos than he did in 2008.  With a growing lead like that, it will be hard for Romney to win in key swing states that will decide the election.

On the second issue of the week, a Republican-controlled House of Representatives panel voted to hold Attorney General in contempt over him (and the administration) not providing some documentation sought by the committee.  The Obama administration claimed executive privilege on the specific documents. 

Up until then, the Fast and Furious issue, as it is called, had not really reached the mainstream media.  However, it is now front and center. 

Oddly enough, the Obama administration and Democrats seem to be happy to see the GOP-led House focus on the issue, and the Republican leadership has been reluctant to make the issue a big deal.  Perhaps Boehner sees it as a distraction from talking about the economy or the Democrats see it as a prime way to display how radical the Tea Party has become.  

I’m personally not convinced this is a win for the administration, as it tints Obama with scandal in an election year, even though perhaps there is no scandal at all.

Polling:  This past week brought a poll by Bloomberg putting the President 13 points above Mitt Romney in a hypothetical matchup.  That single poll, which is likely an outlier, has increased Mr. Obama’s lead in RealClearPolitics’ average to 2.6% from 0.7% last week.  However, if we were to not include that poll, the President would only lead Mr. Romney by 1.4%, making the race still a statistical tie. 

Who Won the Week?  Tie

The Upside of Losing and the Downside of Winning

Since the New Deal era, the party that has controlled the White House has shifted quite regularly, and with the shifts has come a somewhat predictable pattern.   For the most part, as shown below, a party will retain the White House for two terms, after which it will shift to the other party.  The two obvious exceptions are in 1980 and 1988. 

Year	President	Party
1945-1948	FDR/Truman	Dem
1949-1952	Truman	Dem
1953-1956	Eisenhower	GOP
1957-1960	Eisenhower	GOP
1961-1964	JFK/Johnson	Dem
1965-1968	Johson	Dem
1969-1972	Nixon	GOP
1973-1976	Nixon/Ford	GOP
1977-1980	Carter	Dem
1981-1984	Reagan	GOP
1985-1988	Reagan	GOP
1989-1992	Bush I	GOP
1993-1996	Clinton	Dem
1997-2000	Clinton	Dem
2001-2004	Bush II	GOP
2005-2008	Bush II	GOP
2009-2012	Obama	Dem

It is still unclear as to if the pattern will hold, giving President Obama a second term, or if 2012 will be an exception.  However, the winner of the 2012 election will surely give some evidence as to who will win in 2016, and possibly claim the White House for eight years.  Further, the party in power typically loses seats in Congress in the midterm elections.  Let’s examine the two scenarios:

Obama Wins

This is the scenario conservatives have nightmares about.  But should it be?  Firstly, if President Obama wins a second term, he will very likely have either one or both houses of Congress controlled by Republicans, meaning nothing that passes is going to be overwhelmingly progressive.  If anything, because he won’t have another election in four years, Obama may feel freer to compromise more with the GOP in order to get big things done.  After all, as I noted in an earlier post, Presidents want legacies. 

Further, if President Obama wins a second term, Republicans will likely have a much greater chance of winning in 2016; possibly with control of both houses of Congress.  The GOP Presidential candidates in 2016 are expected to be much better than 2012’s Tea Party crop and could include such rising stars as Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, and Bob McDonnell. 

Even though the Democrats would probably have a very strong candidate in Mrs. Clinton, Martin O’Malley, Andrew Cuomo, or Elizabeth Warren, they would each be tethered to Obama’s popularity, which by 2016 may not still be holding up in the high 40’s.  The situation could very much resemble President Bush’s in 2008 when Barack Obama was able to tie his opponent to the unpopular President. 

Finally, if President Obama’s popularity were to continue to wane after the election, as most second term Presidents’ approval does, the U.S. Congress could see an even larger share of its seats filled with Republicans.  This likelihood would prevent President Obama from making any headway on issues progressives care about. 

Romney Wins

Let’s start with this simple fact: Romney is an extremely weak nominee.  He is about as exciting as Bob Dole and has enough political and personal baggage to keep TSA agents busy for a long time.  However, despite all this, Romney is tied with or very close behind the President in most national polls due to the slow economic recovery.  In short, Romney could win, but it won’t be because people really want him to be President. 

Therefore, in four years when Romney is running for re-election, the public likely won’t change their minds much and will be ready for someone new.  In this scenario, Hillary Clinton will almost assuredly run and will probably be the Democratic nominee.  Her current approval ratings are in the high 60s.  That, and the possibility of electing the first woman President will give Democrats the White House yet again.

To further complicate Romney’s chances of winning a second term, it’s quite possible he will have a serious primary challenger.  There are a lot of Republicans, including elected officials, who just feel kind of ‘meh’ about Romney.  Unless he were to prove to be the second coming of Ronald Reagan, he will likely be challenged in a primary.  Historically, Presidents who have faced serious intra-party challenges have gone on to lose in the general election.

Finally, with regards to Congress, the public will most likely keep the trend of voting for the party out of power in the midterm election.  It’s possible Democrats could take control over both houses.  Romney would then be forced to work with a Democratic Congress, and would therefore be signing more progressive laws than if he had a GOP controlled Congress. 

Conclusion

I do not have a crystal ball, nor are all of these scenarios set in stone.  There are various factors that could change things.  For example, Obama or Romney could preside over a strong economic recovery over the next four years, making it much more likely that the Democrats or Mr. Romney, respectively, will win the White House in 2016.  

Additionally, one should not look at these predictions and forget about all of the positives of winning and negatives of losing.  Supreme Court judges will be appointed, laws will be passed, and wars could be started.  Elections have consequences.  

Who Won the Week? (June 10-16)

There seems to be a pattern emerging week by week.  Ever since the primaries effectively ended, Mitt Romney has generally not been the one making news.  After months of repeated gaffes like “I like to fire people” and the “NASCAR” line, Mr. Romney has finally learned to keep his mouth shut, or at least to stick to the script.

Instead, the candidate usually driving the news cycle (for better or for worse) has been President Obama.  This week was no different.  However, this week, unlike the past couple, Mr. Obama and his team finally seemed to find their footing.

On Thursday, President Obama sought to lay out his economic message in Ohio.  While Obama offered no new policy plans or initiatives, he framed his message to appeal to those who still believe President Bush is most to blame for the country’s economic conditions.  Thankfully for President Obama, 68% of the country still believes that, according to a new poll. 

Mr. Romney also gave a speech in Ohio not far from the President.  However, Mr. Romney’s message seemed to be overshadowed by the Obama campaign’s large event.  This alone would not have constituted a bad week for Mitt Romney: cue the immigration announcement.

The next day, President Obama announced that his administration would allow children of illegal immigrants who were under 30 years old to apply to stay in the country for another two years.  Mr. Obama stated that his hope was there could be a more permanent solution legislated within that time frame.

This announcement made a bad problem worse for Romney.  There was no question the GOP nominee would begin with a deficit of support among Hispanics, especially after the strict immigration laws that have been passed in states like Arizona and Alabama. 

However, this move by the Obama administration will almost assuredly grow his margin among the Latino populations, provided Mr. Romney doesn’t split with his base and support the President’s decision.  Even more importantly, the Hispanic vote is key to winning some swing states such as Nevada, Colorado, and Florida. 

Since Friday, Mr. Romney has been on the defensive when asked if he supported the President’s decision or if he would continue the policy if he were to become President.  He has yet to offer a clear answer, except to claim that President Obama is playing politics with policy. 

Polling:  This is a bright spot for Mitt.  Both Gallop and Rasmussen have consistently had polls showing Romney beating the President in a head-to-head matchup, while other polling agencies give Obama only a slight lead.  Essentially, the race is a statistical tie with Mr. Obama leading Mr. Romney by only 0.7%.  Obviously, polls from individual states matter more than national polls, and Obama is doing better on the state level, at least in those that matter most.

In the end, Obama reversed the bad news cycle that had been giving his campaign headaches for the past two weeks, and he has now put Mitt in a tough position.  It will be interesting to see how Mr. Romney deals with the immigration announcement.  If anything, this could mean a better shot for Marco Rubio in the VEEP contest…

Who Won the Week?  President Obama 

Who Won the Week? (June 3-9)

This past week has been brutal for President Obama and his re-election team.  In fact, there was very little good news to counter the negative storylines breaking through. 

To begin, the dismal jobs report that was released on June 1 was still the focus of all the talk on the Sunday shows and drove the overall storyline of a weakening economic recovery throughout the week.  To make things worse, news out of Europe has continued to be poor as Greece and now Spain are grappling with how to solve their debt problems.  For Mr. Obama, there is potentially nothing worse for his re-election, as well as the U.S. economy, than the collapse of one or multiple countries in Europe. 

However, not all was bad on the economic front; the Dow had it’s largest weekly increase of the year, and finance ministers in Europe decided to let Spain borrow 100 billion euros. 

Further, President Obama’s campaign had believed it was coming out with very solid fundraising numbers on Thursday, touting a $60 M haul from May.  That total was a 37.6% increase from April’s total of $43.6 M. 

However, for the first time since 2007, Mr. Obama was beaten by his opponent in fundraising.  Not only was he beaten this month, he was clobbered.   Mitt Romney managed to raise a whopping $76.8 M, which was a 92 % increase from last month! 

Finally, the gaffe of 2012.  As the President was outlining the tumultuous situation in Europe to the press, he answered a question on how the public sector was doing with respect to the private sector.  Obama remarked, “the private sector is doing fine”. 

Anyone who’s ever seen an attack ad will be able to envision this quote being used relentlessly against Mr. Obama throughout the next few months, much like McCain’s “the fundamentals of he economy are strong” quote was used to portray McCain as out of touch.  The President quickly admitted he had misspoken, but by then, it was too late.

To be fair, Romney made a couple of mistakes of his own.  On Friday he seemed to endorse the idea of decreasing (or at least not increasing) the number of teachers, firefighters, and cops.  But that statement paled in comparison to Mr. Obama’s, and the media barely noticed it.

This is the kind of week that gets Democrats really nervous about November.  They were outraised, on the defensive regarding the economy, and gave Republicans a ready-for-TV attack ad that is sure to be potent.  President Obama and his team better step up their game, because they are losing badly.

Who Won the Week?  Mitt Romney

The Gay Marriage Announcement

To preface this post, I meant to write it right after the President announced his support for same sex marriage.  Actually, I originally was planning a piece on the politics of announcing his support and whether or not he should do it.  However, the President beat me to that post, and finals, graduation, and moving have kept me from any posts since. 

Let me also say that I may be a bit biased in this article; I am a gay man who is currently engaged and hoping to be married at some point in the near future.  I will do my best to keep this post as unbiased as possible. 

There has been a lot of speculation about how President Obama’s announcement will affect the outcome of the election and whether it will help or hurt him.  The general consensus has been that we don’t know yet.  However, I’m going to disagree with that conventional wisdom.  Obama’s announcement, though very poorly timed, will help his re-election bid, and here is why.

America’s public opinion of same-sex marriage has shifted dramatically in the past couple decades.  In 1996, when Gallop started tracking the public’s views on gay marriage, only 27% of people supported the idea while a whopping 68% were opposed.  Even in 2008, the last time Barack Obama ran for president, the level of support was at 40% as opposed to 56% opposed. 

While that 16% spread may seem like a dramatic improvement as opposed to 1996’s 41% gap, it seems much less remarkable when looking at the overall trend line.  From 2004 to 2010, the level of support (and opposition) has remained remarkably constant, ranging between 37-46% in favor and 53-59% against. 

However, a notable shift occurred sometime between the polling in 2010 and 2011.  For the first time in its history, the polling found that a majority (53%) of respondents were in favor of same-sex marriage while only 45% were opposed.  Similarly, the poll in 2012, which was taken immediately following the President’s announcement, found that 50% were in favor and 48% were opposed. 

While at first glance it may seem as though less people now support gay marriage than in 2011, the change is likely due more to statistical noise.  More importantly, the overall trend line clearly shows an evolving public: one that will soon be strongly in favor of same sex marriage and one that will vastly outnumber opponents. 


Which leads me to my next point: President Obama wants to have a legacy, as all great Presidents do.  In terms of civil rights, Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation; Harry Truman integrated African Americans into the U.S. military; Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1965. 

Barack Obama has already done more for the gay community and gay rights movement than any President in history by extending hate crimes to include gays, refusing to uphold the constitutionality of DOMA, and repealing the military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law.  By supporting marriage equality, he is became the first President and Presidential nominee to do so.  Even if Mr. Obama is defeated in November, he will still have carved out a lasting legacy for his support of gay rights.

Finally, President Obama’s announcement will help to advance the mobilization strategy his campaign is using this fall.  Just eight years ago, President Bush also used this wedge issue to excite his own base in his own mobilization efforts.  Unfortunately for the GOP, gay marriage is now an issue that has more fervent support among the Democratic base than it has fervent opposition in the Republican base. 

Specifically, support is highest among younger, more educated Democratic voters.  Coincidentally, these are the same voters who need to be highly engaged in the grassroots efforts of the campaign.  Exciting these voters about their candidate gives a jolt of energy to a campaign, making door-to-door canvassing and phone banking seem more worth it to volunteers. 

Further, one of the President’s strongest and most reliable voting blocks is the gay community.  Until his announcement, many wealthy gay donors were holding back from giving to the campaign.  It isn’t clear yet (and won’t be for another week or so when the May financial disclosures come out) if the President’s support for same sex marriage has changed the money dynamic, but I would be surprised if May was not a strong fundraising month for team Obama. 

So will the President be hurt in some swing states by this announcement?  Possibly.  Will the added excitement of his base be a benefit in others?  Probably.  Will President Obama truly give himself a positive in civil rights?  Absolutely.