5 lessons for candidates in final stretch
Surveys contain some wisdom about what will shape the last days of the race -- and potentially decide who occupies the White House.
By Josh Boak and Eric Pianin
The presidential campaign has entered its final stretch, which means no more debates but plenty of speeches and endless hours of TV ads await in the final sprint to the Nov. 6 election.
President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney have wrestled each other into a statistical tie, according to most national polls. Those surveys contain multiple lessons about what will shape the final days of the race -- especially in Ohio, Virginia and a handful of other key battleground states -- and potentially decide who occupies the White House.
Here are five of the most important lessons gleaned from that data and reports from the field:
1. Saying you have a plan is more important than what your plan says. Obama published on Tuesday a 20-page booklet, "The New Economic Patriotism: A Plan for Jobs & Middle Class Security."
The glossy is no "Dreams of My Father." Spoiler alert: It repackages his existing promises to create factory jobs, cut oil imports in half, improve education, and reduce the projected budget deficits. But the compilation responds to Mitt Romney's critique -- and questions by the media, including The Fiscal Times, his rather vague agenda for a second term. Its existence is more critical than its originality.
Similarly, Romney touts his own five-point plan for the economy, even though it does not, as currently explained, show how it's possible to simultaneously cut taxes, increase military spending, create 12 million jobs in four years, and eventually produce a budget surplus.
"If we've got any math teachers out there, you can go ahead and look at this plan," Obama said yesterday, while holding up his own booklet at a Florida event. "And you'll see that the numbers work. I won't be running the okey-doke on you."
But unlike wonky journalists, voters tend not to dig through the economic proposals by presidential candidates. That's why both Obama and Romney can gloss over the specifics of how they'd resurrect an economy that, while no longer in recession, is still in the doldrums.
"I put out a five-point plan that gets America 12 million jobs in four years," Romney said at the Oct. 16 presidential debate on Long Island, just a few hours after the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler debunked the math.
Voters feel pretty confident that they know what both candidates would do in the Oval Office, even when the ideas are either warmed-over or partisan boilerplate. Few details seem to be needed beyond Obama pledging to raise taxes on Americans making more than $250,000 a year in order to shrink the deficit in a "balanced" way, while Romney claims he would lower taxes and bolster spending on national security.
The NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey released Monday found that 57% of voters understood Romney's plans, while 61 percent felt they had a sense of what Obama would do in a second term.
2. Real-world events matter. Support for Obama's foreign policy has been evaporating over the past month, a dramatic reversal of an advantage that previously looked insurmountable for Romney. Obama held a 15-point margin on global affairs in September, according to polling by the Pew Research Center. His lead narrowed to four points this month, 47% to 43%, Pew reported last week.
It remains to be seen whether the Monday night foreign policy debate will reverse the slide. But what appears to have led to the change was the death of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans in a terrorist assault this past Sept. 11.
Those four murders undermined a credibility that Obama built with the raid killing Osama bin Laden, the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq, and putting in place a 2014 exit plan from Afghanistan.
Plenty of other issues, such as China and Iran, have shaped public sentiment on international issues. However, a separate Pew survey showed a marked split with independent voters disapproving of how the administration handled the attack in Benghazi, Libya. It was not, as originally claimed, caused by a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim video produced in the U.S. Among independent voters who follow the news, the disapproval was 59% to 29%.
3. Demographics are destiny. If the current trends continue, the election will highlight sharp political, gender and racial divides—such that neither candidate will be able to claim a resounding mandate.
White independent conservatives and white evangelical Christians, groups that were previously suspicious of the former Massachusetts governor during the GOP primaries, according to an analysis of the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, have abetted Romney's surge in the polls.
The gap has widened to a point that it could cost Obama reelection. The nation's first African-American president defeated Republican John McCain four years ago with about 43% of the white vote -- which in total makes up almost 70% of the electorate. Recent polls show that Obama's support among whites has dropped dangerously to only 36%.
Obama's hopes for reelection hinge on an eight-point advantage over Romney among women voters, a startling 45-point advantage among Hispanics, and an overwhelming majority of black voters. But Romney has chipped away at that critical edge Obama enjoys with women voters, as his message on the economy appears to be having a greater impact than the president highlighting his support for reproductive rights issues and equal pay.
4. It's all about turnout. Earlier in the election, some Republicans complained that the polls were skewed toward Obama because they were weighted more toward Democrats. The lesson here isn't about conspiracy, but the turnout needed to drive enough supporters into the voting booth and secure victory.
This is why TV viewers get barraged with advertisements. It's why Obama opened 122 local campaign headquarters in Ohio, compared to 40 for Romney in the Buckeye State. AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka blogged recently that the union will knock on 5.5 million doors and make 5.2 million phone calls before the election.
Consider the Fox News survey of 1,130 likely voters in Florida that was released last week. It found Romney was ahead 48 percent to 45%, almost the exact opposite of its results from last month.
Did Romney gain momentum from the president's pathetic showing at their first Oct. 3 debate? Of course. But what also changed was voter identification. Between September and October, the share of self-identified Democrats fell to 40 percent from 42 percent. Republicans increased to 39% from 37%.
If Democrats vote at their September levels, the Fox News poll would instead show a dead heat of 46% to 46%. These polls are guides, not just forecasts.
5. Pivotal moments count the most. Campaigns are often an endless loop of zingers and blathering about talking points, but then there are shocking moments that can dramatically transform the race. The opportunity for these moments becomes increasingly rare as the election nears, but the pressure involved in cementing a win means another trip-up could easily happen.
While historians no doubt will spent years analyzing key moments in the 2012 campaign, the four that stand out most deal with the vagaries of the unemployment numbers, Romney's 47% comment, the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya and the first of the three presidential debates.
A string of positive government employment reports at the start of the year helped Obama make the case that the economy was turning around. But by June the economy had increased payrolls by a measly 45,000 -- nowhere near what was needed to keep up with population growth -- and the Romney campaign gained traction, while Obama stumbled.
Romney's luck quickly soured, however, with the unearthing by Mother Jones magazine of a surreptitiously videotaped speech he gave to a group of fat cat donors in May.
For nearly a year, Romney had vigorously fended off the criticisms by Democrats and Republicans alike that he was essentially a super wealthy former businessman out of touch with average Americans, even as a slew of public statements, such as knowing the owners of NASCAR teams, indicated the stereotypes were somewhat accurate.
The videotape of Romney dissing the 47% of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes and are dependent on government programs validated that unflattering portrayal for many and nearly shattered any hope he had of overtaking Obama.
Obama enjoyed a substantial bump in the polls after a highly successful late summer Democratic national convention in Charlotte, N.C. But the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, coming on the heels of anti-U.S. demonstrations throughout the Middle East, generated friction.
It was Obama's miserable showing in the first of three presidential debates that ultimately set the course for the final days of the race. Romney came across as sharp and forceful, while Obama buried his arguments in awkward pauses and a passively aloof manner of speaking.
The popular blogger Andrew Sullivan summarized the showdown in a mid-debate tweet: "This is a rolling calamity for Obama. He's boring, abstract, and less human-seeming than Romney!"
The president put Romney on the defensive in the second and third debates. But polling suggests that the damage was already done, and that Obama's forcefulness at best may have slowed Romney's surge in the polls.
Josh Boak is a National Correspondent at The Fiscal Times. Subscribe to The Fiscal Times' free newsletter.
More from The Fiscal Times
- Obama Tops Romney in 3rd Debate as Eyes Turn to Ohio
- Election Cliffhanger: Polls Show Obama/Romney Tied
- Why Barack Obama Will Win the Election Easily
- The 19 Richest People in Congress
Romney’s Plan to let GM & Chrysler go through bankruptcy like 7-Eleven, Macy’s, and Continental Airlines was intended to allow Detroit to come out of Bankruptcy stronger.
Obama did take GM & Chrysler into Bankruptcy. As the shareholders of GM's common stock know quite well, with Obama's plan, they lost everything they had invested. You cannot tell them Obama did not take GM into Bankruptcy.
The truth is that, even though there were significant differences between Romney’s suggested/recommended bankruptcy plan and Obama’s executed Bankruptcy plan, both plans had the end goal for bringing Detroit (GM & Chrysler) out of bankruptcy with the American Auto Industry much stronger and better able to compete with foreign auto manufacturers.
The truth is that Romney’s sincere intent was to save Detroit, not destroy it. To claim anything else defies logic.
Obama’s assertion that Romney wanted to bury Detroit is an unethical attempt to gain political advantage by presenting a distorted/unrealistic interpretation of Romney’s intent.
The only true definition of a noble act is doing something for others for no reson than it is the right thing to do. Politicians are incapable of such acts because their first concern is ALWAYS how will it affect reelection chances. Its as if no one in modern Washington ever read JFKs PROFILES IN COURAGE. if they did they have chosen to ignore the substance of character and integrity detailed about the figures in the book. Their great sacrifice and willingnes to put their personal and political well being at risk to do the right thing should serve as a model for effective government but we have slouched downward into a sleazy collective of governing bodies rampant with corrupton, payoffs, vote buying through subsidies,tax breaks and entitlements that have brought our country to the brink of collapse, financially and morally.
I am beginning to think Jesus, Mohamed, Budda, Ghandi and all other great historical figures all together wouldnt be able to turn this ship in the right direction.
Republican, Demacrat, Independent, Athiest, Christian Jew, black, brown, yellow, red, male, female, male, crossgender, genius, idiot-we are all in this deeply together and have NO chance with the current factionalism being purposely practiced by our leaders.
In Clinton's dismissal of the email referencing terrorist related information found on Facebook, she appears to be trying to defend the Administration’s initial public characterization of this tragedy as riot triggered by a u-tube video.
In the 2nd Presidential Debate, Obama already admitted he knew from day one that it was a terrorist attack. He actually claimed, that in his speech in the rose garden the day following the attack, he had said that it was a Terrorist Attack. That is on the record and cannot be disputed. Obama declared that when he made that speech in the Rose Garden, he knew the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. His own words spoken in the debate are the proof.
When listening to a recording of what he actually said in that Rose Garden speech, it may not be clear that his words about Terrorism were talking about the Attack in Libya. But according to the words he spoke in the Debate, when he made that speech in the Rose Garden, he did know it was a Terrorist Attack. That cannot be denied.
So, given that Obama already admitted that he (and therefore the Administration) knew it was a Terrorist Attack on day one, why is Clinton trying to dismiss any information that leads to the same conclusion?
Maybe she is still trying to defend why for two full weeks after the attack, the Administration, including Clinton and Obama, were publicly calling this attack a riot, triggered by a u-tube video, and continually stated that they did not know if it was a Terrorist Attack.
Maybe she thinks America has forgotten the Obama already admitted he knew it was a Terrorist Attack back when he made that speech in the Rose Garden.
Well, there are many Americans who have NOT forgotten. We now know, for certain, that the Administration was misleading us during those two weeks. By Obama’s own words, we know that they knew it was a Terrorist Attack, yet for over 14 days they kept feeding us the line about the video and saying they did not know if it was a Terrorist Attack.
Why all the deception? Even now, after Obama’s admission, they still continue the deception. Why?
Democrats believe (they say) in helping the common man. The problem is they want to help by stealing from others by forcing them to pay taxes (and pocketing some for themselves). They want to force people to accept everything they believe in but they do not believe in free thought. For all their talk, they do not really believe in free will. You only have free will if you think like they do.
Republicans believe (they say) in morality & family values. Great ideals but they want to decide “What is a family”. They say they believe in freedom but they want to restrict what you can see, read and hear. They believe in free will but don’t trust you to use it properly. You should be free to be irresponsible, free to sin, but you must also be prepared to accept the consequences of your actions.
Libertarians believe in free will, and they show it. You can live as you choose as long as you don’t harm others. You have the freedom to choose to help those that you feel are in need. You are expected to help your fellow man but you are not forced.
If you do something wrong, it’s your problem and your responsibility to make it right. You are free to worship in your own way or not. You are free to express your thoughts and feelings and no one is allowed to stop you because they are offended. If they are offended they can choose not to watch read or listen. That is their choice.
My take on the last debate:
Obama was true to form. First he claims that everything Romney says is a lie, then he says anything he can think of to impugn and degrade Romney by making false or ridiculously absurd statements, and then he topped it all off by rudely interrupting Romney with a frequency that clearly violated the Debate Rules he had agreed to.
Yes, Obama's behavior was a model for the kind of man we need as our President, Right????
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Breaking up big banks is an untested solution to the too big to fail problem that attempts to isolate and dismantle large, troubled institutions while protecting the rest of the economy.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
[BRIEFING.COM] The major averages spent the entire session in a steady downtrend, but despite persistent selling pressure, today's losses were limited in scope. The Dow, S&P 500, and Nasdaq shed between 0.2% and 0.3% while the Russell 2000 lagged, falling 0.9%.
The underperformance of the Russell 2000 was likely owed in part to tax-loss selling, which tends to pick up this time of year. Small-caps often feel that pinch in a stronger fashion than large-cap issues since individual ... More
More Market News
|There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.|