General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor the Romney campaign, it’s forever 1980
By Greg Sargent
Romney campaign pollster Neil Newhouse is out with a new memo arguing that despite whatever convention bounce Obama is getting, Mitt Romney is going to win the presidential race. The crux of his case is that the Obama economy is simply too horrible for the President to have any chance at reelection and that the campaign will unfold as the 1980 campaign did:
The stakes are very high in this election, and voters understand the future of our country is on the line. This may be lost on those living within the hyper-political world in and around the Beltway, but it is not lost in communities in battleground states. In short, the Romney-Ryan campaign understands Americans struggling in the Obama economy will determine the outcome of the race, and once the preponderance of information about the Presidents failed policies combined with Mitt Romneys vision to strengthen the middle class are communicated,our nation will move in a different direction....
Political campaign historians will recall President Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan by a near double digit margin late in the fall in 1980. In that race, the voters made their decision based on the key issues confronting the nation and it determined the outcome. On the economy, the most important issue of this race, Mitt Romney leads by 51%-45%, according to the most recent CNN/ORC poll.
It is stunning that the Romney campaign continues to rely on this flawed historical comparison. First, the polling. Despite the mythologizing to the contrary, Gallup polling shows that Reagan was leading Carter heading into the conventions. John Sides has suggested Reagan may have actually led throughout most of the race. By contrast, as Alex Burns puts it, were now less than 60 days from the election and Romney hasnt established a decisive lead in a single swing state. Spot the difference there?
There are plenty of other key differences. The economy was in worse shape in 1980 than it is today. Jimmy Carter could easily be criticized for mismanaging the economy and foreign affairs, given the Iranian hostage crisis. Obama, by contrast, consistently polls better than Romney on national security. Whats more, as Reagan biographer Craig Shirley has explained, the electorate of 1980 is vastly different than it is today. Far more states were in play, and Dem swing voters the so-called Reagan Democrats formed a much bigger chunk of the Democratic Party, making a late break of such a significant magnitude much more feasible than today. The electorate is far more polarized and the map far narrower this time around.
Ed Rollins, who worked on the Reagan campaign in 1980, notes yet another key difference: Romney is not Reagan, and Obama is not Carter. As Rollins says of Romney: On his best day, hes not a Ronald Reagan. Carter was partly undone because of his debate performance; thats less likely to happen to Obama.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/for-the-romney-campaign-its-forever-1980/2012/09/10/d9e02e86-fb57-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_blog.html
Mitt, no one likes you! Now, release your tax returns.
Response to ProSense (Original post)
savalez This message was self-deleted by its author.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)If the 1980 electorates looked like the 2008 electorate in terms of race Carter would have probably eked out a plurality win.
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)Right in the middle of the debate, a long breakdown of some kind had them standing at their podiums...
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts).
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)Maybe I just confused my own black out with the one from 1976.
Sorry.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)He was pro choice, pro ERA, and pro affirmative action. He even wrote an amicus brief on behalf of his alma mata, University Of Michigan, in their landmark affirmative action case that went before the Supreme Court.
I don't know where he would fit in today's Repub party.
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)He was a very strong speaker and he was very comfortable in his own skin which didn't come across during his presidency. I think those few stumbles that Chevy chase made a career out of also made it hard for him and he was connected to Nixon so that probably played into it as well.
Plus he was a coalition builder. He was, remember, the Minority Leader in the House when Nixon picked him for VP after Agnew went to jail.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)He also entertained Muhammad Ali at the White House who was still somewhat controversial. He wasn't the almost universally loved figure he is now.
And he also entertained George Harrison too...
And he had a pretty daughter, Susan...
BumRushDaShow
(128,527 posts)Much of Obama's tactics have been like Raygun except tweaked for Democrats. Raygun's "stay the course" and "recovery is just around the corner" seemed to work for his follower's ears.
So basically, Rmoney and Lyin Ryan are on the other side of that equation with the "doom and gloom" strategy.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,966 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts).
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)But he was one and done.