Things to consider for 2012 Presidential election

While it is early, have no doubt that there are many issues and factors that are being weighed by all the candidates and President Obama for the 2012 Presidential election. As we enter further into the 2012 election cycle more of these factors will come to bear, and the television ads will flood the airwaves.

As in every election cycle, we at M V Consulting take NO position on any of the candidates or the President. Our election coverage is as unbiased as we can be. We will provide facts, coverage, speeches, and other relevant information in full context so that our readers can make an informed decision in the election booth. Whatever the choice, our ONLY goal is for voters to get out and vote.

One of the immediate things that will be critical for the 2012 election will be the changes in electoral votes due to the Census. Several states have lost votes due to decreases in population, while others have gained. This does change the strategies and some states that were strongholds have weakened.

For Democrats and President Obama – several key States have lost electoral votes and can be a factor. Looking at the electoral math in 2008 compared to what it weill be in 2012 we get the following:

President Obama won 29 states for 365 elctoral votes:
California, Colorado, Conneticutt, DC, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachuecetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampsire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Since that time, New York lost 2 votes. Illinois, Michigan, Massachuesetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania have all lost 1 vote each. Washington gained one, for a net of 6 votes lost.

Critical swing states of Florida and Nevada gained 2 and 1 votes respectively. Iowa and Missouri lost 1 vote, Ohio lost 2.

Looking forward based on the latest Real Clear Politics approval average of 46.6%, President Obama is unlikely to keep:

Colorado 45.2%%
Florida – 45.8%
Indiana – 43.9%
Iowa – 47.5%
Nevada – 47%
New Hampshire – 41.3%
North Carolina – 46.9%
Ohio – 47.4%
Oregon – 47.8%
Pennsylvania – 46.3%
Virginia – 46.6%

We base this in part on the Rassmuessen State by State approval, taking the lowest average and below average States away from President Obama.

The net result is 18 states with a total of 220 electoral votes. That leaves President Obama short of the 270 needed to win by 50 electoral votes.

Often it is believed that an approval rating below 50% for a sitting President bodes ill for his chances in that state. Added to this is the level of unemployment, averaging 8.92% in these 11 states:

Colorado 9.3%
Florida – 11.5%
Indiana – 8.8%
Iowa – 6.1%
Nevada – 13.6%
New Hampshire – 5.4%
North Carolina – 9.7%
Ohio – 9.2%
Oregon – 10.2%
Pennsylvania – 7.9%
Virginia – 6.4%

The combination sets a clear path that the President and Democrats must take if they are to keep the Presidency. Either the Stimulus and the Health Care Reform must immediately improve the household income, quality of life, job growth, and/or decrease the number of mortgage foreclosures OR massive funds must be used to advertise and campaign in these States. At the very least in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Virginia, and Indiana in that order of importence. No less than 3 of these states must be won in order to gain the Presidency.

Wild cards to this outlook are of course out there. There is the potential defection of African Americans from President Obama’s support base, which has been eroding. There is the possibility of unemployment dipping below 8% by the election – without the cause being the loss of unemployment checks to those still unemployed. There is the potential that through revision or removal the Health Care Reform is improved significantly – and President Obama is seen as the cause of these changes.

There is the potential end of military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya – with each cessation leading to a net decrease in activity by Al Quida and other radical terrorist groups. There is the potential for stabilization in the Middle East – again requiring President Obama being attributed with the cause of the stability.

Given the current political environment, with an imminent shutdown of the Government looming, France leading the operations against Libya, turmoil in the Middle East and an international policy that is hesitant to action, and forecasts of continued economic turmoil persisting for years if not a decade, we believe that the abovementioned outlook is most likely.

Lastly, the most critical factor will be who leads the GOP ticket and if there is any significant 3rd Party candidtate (such as a Tea Party candidate) involved in the race. At this time there is no way to quantify this last factor.

Thus we believe that the 2012 Presidential election will be one in which soundbite television ads and out-of-context quotes will likely be rampant. This means that for voters to make sounds decisions it is vital actual facts, voting records, and results be known before voting. Only then will an informed decision be possible.

Only your support allows us to provide election coverage, political event coverage, and our political commentary. Visit Alchemy at World of VASS, and/or World of Vass – help keep us going. We appreciate your support.

About the Author

Michael Vass
Born in 1968, a political commentator for over a decade. Has traveled the U.S. and lived in Moscow and Tsblisi, A former stockbroker and 2014 Congressional candidate. Passionate about politics with emphasis on 1st and 2nd Amendments.

2 Comments on "Things to consider for 2012 Presidential election"

  1. Comment as found at African American Political Opinion

    Francis L. Holland said…
    If the Democratic Party believed that in the 2012 presidential election:

    “for voters to make sounds decisions it is vital actual facts, voting records, and results be known before voting. Only then will an informed decision be possible.”

    The Party that most believes that, usually the Democrats, is the party that has won only four out of the last ten presidential elections.

    This contest (“the word ‘race’ is too ambiguous in this context) will be based on “soundbite television ads and out-of-context quotes” as well as the demeanor of the candidates. The ticket of the Republicans will also determine the degree to which they, themselves, shoot themselves in the face through the choice of their candidate choice and running mate.

    We can only hope that they choose Sarah Palin, so that “The Star” can have a field day tearing her false family facade to shreds and publishing distasteful family details that will ultimately make Palin unelectable.

    The media will treat Palin fairly, by going after every negative nugget they can find, just as they did with respect to Obama. However, Palin’s history has considerably more negative nuggets and none of them have been explored to the degree that they would be if she were the presidential candidate.

    If the other Republican candidates had any sense, they would be developing a Palin dossier right now and threatening to release it to the media unless Palin backs out of the race.

    The problem with this approach is that ALL of the potential Republicans candidates have clearly disqualifying skeletons in their closets, and publishing them all would amount to mutually assured self-destruction.

    So, the Teabaggers will probably get their way and nominate someone so far out of the realm of reality that the Republicans couldn’t even win against . . . the reemergence of Michael Dukakis. Well, that might be a slight exaggeration.

    Obama has a strong ground team that will play the electoral map flawlessly, with a plan to get the numbers they need.

    The question remains, “What nutjob will the Teaparty pick to run against President Obama. Maybe they’ll pick Donald Trump, whose dating and reckless business history, along with bribes made in connection with his construction projects, will make him wish he had never run in the first place.

    By June of 2012, Donald Trump would be bemoaning the shreds of his biography and blaming the media (instead of his own history) for utterly discrediting him.

    April 29, 2011

  2. Francis,

    Wow. Amazing how there was not one shred of fact (well you got the names right), voting record, or valid logic in your response.

    Fact, Sarah Palin has been attacked, as well as her family, virtually every day since before the 2008 election.

    Fact, President Obama has many views and questionable people in his past that was not explored by the major media – even up to today.

    Fact, President Obama MUST run on the actual success and progress of the laws and programs he has put in place. To date none have acheived the goals and targets HIS Administration stated to the American public.

    Fact, members of the Tea Party are as honorable and justified in their opinion as you are. We are all Americans, and free to think and vote as we wish. Even if some of those thoughts are based on heresay (that is directed at your comment Francis, not the Tea Party in general).

    You wanted an opportunity to bash Sarah Palin. Fine. But you added nothing substantive to the article I wrote. Well except in perhaps proving how out-of-context and biased the 2012 election may be.

    I suggest to readers, that rather than falling for the emotional and irrational trap that Francis and others make, you actually look at the campaign promises, voting records, and actual success/failure of each candidate – Democrat and Republican.

    If you do that, and vote whomever you find to be the best choice based on that logic, things in the nation will improve. Or at least will be more likely to.

Thank you for lending your voice. We appreciate hearing what you have to say.

%d bloggers like this: