13 keys to the white house: Obama got re-election in the bag

[hater]

as you see, for those obsessed with economy, economy is only 2 of 13 keys to the white house in an election. I agree with this analysis

DISCLAIMER:
only thing that would change the outcome now is a major terrorist attack, major white house scandal, major economic crash(like another real estate crash) or Chuck Norris running for the GOP

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/was...to-win-in-2012

Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama.

1. Party mandate: After the midterm elections, the in bent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Says Lichtman, “Even back in January 2010 when I first released my predictions, I was already counting on a significant loss.” Obama loses this key.

2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the in bent party nomination. Says Lichtman on Obama’s unchallenged status, “I never thought there would be any serious contest against Barack Obama in the Democratic primary.” Obama wins this key.

3. In bency: The in bent party candidate is the sitting president. Easy win here for Obama.

4. Third Party: There is no significant third party challenge. Obama wins this point.

5. Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.”

6. Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Says Lichtman, “I discounted long term economy against Obama. Clearly we are in a recession.” Obama loses this key. [Read: Seven Ways Obama Can Gain Credibility on Jobs.]

7. Policy change: The in bent administration effects major changes in national policy. “There have been major policy changes in this administration. We’ve seen the biggest stimulus in history and an complete overhaul of the healthcare system so I gave him policy change,” says the scholar. Another win for Obama.

8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Says Lichtman, “There wasn’t any social unrest when I made my predictions for 2012 and there still isn’t.” Obama wins a fifth key here.

9. Scandal: The in bent administration is untainted by major scandal. “This administration has been squeaky clean. There’s nothing on scandal,” says Lichtman. Another Obama win.

10. Foreign/military failure: The in bent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any major failure that resembles something like the Bay of Pigs and don’t foresee anything.” Obama wins again.

11. Foreign/military success: The in bent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. “Since Osama bin Laden was found and killed, I think Obama has achieved military success.” Obama wins his eighth key.

12. In bent charisma: The in bent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Explains Lichtman, “I did not give President Obama the in bent charisma key. I counted it against him. He’s really led from behind. He didn’t really take the lead in the healthcare debate, he didn’t use his speaking ability to move the American people during the recession. He’s lost his ability to connect since the 2008 election.” Obama loses this key. [See political cartoons about President Obama.]

13. Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any candidate in the GOP who meets this criteria and probably won’t.” Obama wins, bringing his total to nine keys, three more than needed to win reelection.

[101A]

Obama has had, by any measure, a horrible presidency to this point. His unpopularity is at an all time high, unemployment is headed even higher with news today...and the "national" policies he has pushed through a unpopular. , look at what just happened to the NY seat yesterday that Dems have held since the twenties!

Analyze all you want, if the Republicans put up a decent candidate, Obama will get thumped. He IS Carter v. 2.0 WITHOUT the peace accords!

That said, the Republicans do not have a decent candidate in the mix to this point. I'm almost beginning to think they don't WANT the WH - it's the Dems turn to have the figurehead.

[MannyIsGod]

A horrible presidency? I don't know about that. I do know the economy is ed which is the biggest factor in how the public perceives the political process. I think George Bush's first term was FAR worse than this one.

I think Obama has had an average presidency so far but to call it horrible is completely out of line.

I also disagree with the OP. Anyone saying this election is in the bag has not been paying attention. Its a complete toss up at this point which when you take in how bad the economy is actually proof, IMO, that Obama's presidency has not been perceived at horrible at all.

[101A]

I do know the economy is ed which is the biggest factor in how the public perceives the political process.

Which is exactly what makes this presidency "horrible". What other kind of measure is there other than the public perception of the political process?

Historians have there own judgements and scales, but those measurements are for later. For now, facing reelection with this scoreboard? Bad presidency.

[MannyIsGod]

Except that the economy being ed is not a result of his presidency. You can say the perception of his presidency is horrible if you want (although even that would be a stretch - the poll numbers show what I said before - average) but perception of his presidency and the actual presidency are two completely different things.

[Creepn]

So if we had a republican candidate instead of Obama, the economy outlook would've been better?

Also why wouldn't America vote for the president that made the decisive decision to attack on allied soil to get OSAMA BIN LADEEEEEEEEEEN. The man responsible for 9/11? The man who wrecked up our economy? OSAMA. BIN. LADEN!

[101A]

So if we had a republican candidate instead of Obama, the economy outlook would've been better?

Also why wouldn't America vote for the president that made the decisive decision to attack on allied soil to get OSAMA BIN LADEEEEEEEEEEN. The man responsible for 9/11? The man who wrecked up our economy? OSAMA. BIN. LADEN!

Because the Americans who decide the elections (about 20% of the electorate) don't vote by thinking and reasoning, they vote by feeling. As in, how do I feel right now: "Am I better off now than I was before Obama, or do I feel I would have been without Obama"? , Bush I was only, what 18 months removed from winning one of the most decisive, lopsided, hugely popular military victories in history before he got thumped by Bill Clinton.

[101A]

So if we had a republican candidate instead of Obama, the economy outlook would've been better?

Also why wouldn't America vote for the president that made the decisive decision to attack on allied soil to get OSAMA BIN LADEEEEEEEEEEN. The man responsible for 9/11? The man who wrecked up our economy? OSAMA. BIN. LADEN!

Our (the World's) economy was wrecked by a bunch of dishonest, greedy, reckless bankers/investors and their willing accomplices/friends in government (from all sides). You know, all the people who are still in power both in, and out, of government.

[hater]

to the doubters:
the 13 keys predictor has NEVER BEEN WRONG. It has predicted correctly since Reagan.

[ManuBalboa]

lol. If you think Obama will be the favorite in this election you are a delusional fanboy. He is a weak leader and the economy is still .

He ran an absolutely amazing fking campaign in 08, it was impressive. But it was entirely built on fairy dust. He won't be able to use any of that nonsense now that he actually has something people can judge him on.

His 08 election was historical because of race. Now that the wave of white guilt has passed people will be left with a lackluster in bent and nothing more.

[nkdlunch]

so the predictor is 7-0 that's impressive. but who knows

this election is 2004 all over again. The current president sucks but the opponents suck even more so. it will go down to the wire.

[nkdlunch]

lol. If you think Obama will be the favorite in this election you are a delusional fanboy. He is a weak leader and the economy is still .

He ran an absolutely amazing fking campaign in 08, it was impressive. But it was entirely built on fairy dust. He won't be able to use any of that nonsense now that he actually has something people can judge him on.

EVERY political campaign is run on fairy dust

[Creepn]

Because the Americans who decide the elections (about 20% of the electorate) don't vote by thinking and reasoning, they vote by feeling. As in, how do I feel right now: "Am I better off now than I was before Obama, or do I feel I would have been without Obama"? , Bush I was only, what 18 months removed from winning one of the most decisive, lopsided, hugely popular military victories in history before he got thumped by Bill Clinton.

Clinton just had that kind of Charisma to pull it off. As the OP stated as a keypoint, none of those opponents have that charisma to do that so I dont think Obama should worry too much about that.

Since feeling is the case, you don't think the American people should feel safer than before? Before the decisive Osama attack, he also ordered the rescue of that dude from the Somali pirates and there has been a couple of attacks foiled as well. The man has clearly shown he would make tough military decisions to protect Americans. I also don't sense the worldwide hate of Americans that I felt in the Bush admin, although I'm sure it's still there.

I just don't think he's that horrible of a president people make him out to be and like you said, his presidency is not the cause of this economic turmoil we're going through.

[101A]

How do you score "Third Party" as a win for Obama?

Is it strictly a win for the in bent if there is not third party? Because such a party could come from the left, or, more likely it would seem this time, from the right. A third party (A Tea Party Candidate, for instance) would be a significant win for Obama, while a third party Green, or Socialist Candidate would most definitely be a loss).

[coyotes_geek]

5. Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.”

6. Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Says Lichtman, “I discounted long term economy against Obama. Clearly we are in a recession.” Obama loses this key. [Read: Seven Ways Obama Can Gain Credibility on Jobs.]

???

This whole thing looks pretty arbitrary. It's basically just a glorified superbowl prediction via a position by position "analysis".

[101A]

Also, rating short term economic outlook as tossup is mighty optomistic.

[101A]

Scandals are raising there heads....Solar, tampering with congressional witnesses....just give the GOP congress some time, there will be something.

[boutons_deux]

solyndra is very probably a Repug-fabricated slander, wasting the police/FBI time, with which they will drag it out for months to slime both Barry and global warming.

What’s Happening With That Solar Company Scandal?



http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/...eres-our-guide

=========

Repugs will do anything, All Politics All The Time, except govern,

[Vici]

Love how Obama is responsible for the economy of the last 10 years. It's like people blaming Bill Bellicheck on the Browns sucking ass.

[Jacob1983]

How much money could America save if the two wars ended? Why doesn't Barry do that? Wouldn't that help the economy?

Barry is a loser because he still gives a about being liked and popular.

[Wild Cobra]

to the doubters:
the 13 keys predictor has NEVER BEEN WRONG. It has predicted correctly since Reagan.

There is another indicator that was never wrong.

No in bent ever won reelection with an economy/unemployment like we currently have.

[Wild Cobra]

to the doubters:
the 13 keys predictor has NEVER BEEN WRONG. It has predicted correctly since Reagan.

LOL...

Great track record. Only 6 elections, 4 presidents..

Excuse me if you hear me laughing too hard.

It completely ignores the one that has never been wrong, that I previously mentioned.

[hater]

There is another indicator that was never wrong.

No in bent ever won reelection with an economy/unemployment like we currently have.

Reagan had similar job/economy numbers.

Bush had similar disaproval ratings.

[hater]

LOL...

Great track record. Only 6 elections, 4 presidents..

Excuse me if you hear me laughing too hard.

It completely ignores the one that has never been wrong, that I previously mentioned.

please post another methodology that even came close. thanks.

[hater]

There is another indicator that was never wrong.

No in bent ever won reelection with an economy/unemployment like we currently have.

some more education: