The unity pony being dead, Obama's gonna need a war or a second 9/11 to win in 2012
And so, doubtless that will magically happen, as Broder suggested long ago.
* * *
Anyhow, shocker, I know, sit down for this one, but the people Obama threw under the bus are dubious about voting for him again. AP-GfK polling:
—White independent voters, who divided their support evenly between Obama and McCain in 2008, may be the president's biggest challenge now. Just 3 in 10 white independents say Obama deserves to be re-elected and only 41 percent say he understands the problems of people like them.
Fifty-six percent of all whites approved of how he was doing his job in the first three months of his presidency. But that support has fallen, with only 36 percent now liking how he's doing his job, while 59 say Obama deserves to be voted out of office.
The outlook is negative for Obama among white voters in the Midwest and West, regions where so many electoral votes are at stake.
More than 6 in 10 white voters who did not graduate say the president deserves to be voted from office, while 53 percent of white college graduates say as much. ...
Shills like Amanda will yammer about racism, and no doubt that's a [n unquantifiable factor, such claims being based mostly on the self-regard of the "creative class"] factor, but I'd suggest "white independents" is a proxy for the working class "bitter"/"cling to"s that Obama threw under the bus and out of the party in 2008.
—Women no longer are a bright spot for Obama.
At the 100-day mark of his presidency, they gave him significantly higher approval ratings than did men, 68 percent to 60 percent. That's since fallen dramatically.
Stupak Amendment. Favreau eruptions. And the grotesque and vile misogyny of Obama's 2008 campaign is a cancer.
—Younger voters and liberals are showing doubts about him, too.
For the younger voters, jobs and debt. For both younger voters and liberals, the dawning and/or denied realization that hopey change was a con.
The poll interpretation in the post is heavily skewed toward the "strong leader" -- ie, "man on the white horse" (Bloomberg, Petraeus) -- perspective, which of course is what Versailles wants, but it's interesting nonetheless.
For Obama in 2012, lots and lots of lovely billions in
bribes campaign contributions will be necessary. But not sufficient. Already in 2011, his campaign is running on Kool-Aid fumes. Kinetic events won't be sufficient; he'll need a real war. Would the Army comply? Doubtful. That leaves an attack...
NOTE I've got to stop writing about the horse race and start wriing about non-violence again. This stuff isn't good for my heart, in both senses, and the elites are going to do what they do anyhow.