Skip to main content

Nope. But she can make it close. Maybe a little too close for the comfort of some Democrats.  

As I watch the rise and rise of Michele Bachmann, you will be seeing more and more a trend of people saying, "Hey, she just might be the nominee"  and if she wins the nomination there will, of course, be much prognostication from the national media about her chances of winning.

Kossacks will inevitably scoff at this kind of talk, and even entertain thoughts of a 48-49 state sweep by Obama in such a hypothetical matchup, but here's the thing. GOP nominee Lady Blah Blah will get that automatic conservative love instantly. I love 538 and electoral-vote.com and just like crunching numbers, and so one thing is plainly visible right now: Any Republican Candidate Gets an Automatic Thirteen States Right Off The Bat.

Texas, Idaho, Alaska, Utah, Wyoming, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Kansas,
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and the Dakotas. I don't have hope of seeing any of these states turning purple any time soon. Their state legislatures and voting histories bespeak a strong red tide.  (I know people like to hold out hope for Texas sometimes, but that's a pipe dream. Yes, he lost by "only" 11 points in 2008, which signals room for growth, but he'd lose by way more if the election was held today.)

So this means that any mongoloid troglodyte run by the Repubs is guaranteed 104 electoral votes.   (Note: I'm using the latest EV totals. The ones that states were granted/denied by the 2010 Census)

So sorry guys, but even with Lady Blah Blah or Caribou Barbie or Senator Man-On-Dog on the GOP ticket, the best Obama can do is 37 states.

It's nice to dream of a Dem getting a vote total like Reagan in '84 or Nixon in '72, but unfortunately the numbers just aren't on our side. If the Republicans ran a grapefruit that had NRA, Pro-Life and "Don't Tread On Me" decals stickered on it, THAT would win 12 states. (*note: This is actually a step up from Sarah Palin, seeing as how the grapefruit probably has a firmer grasp of history, or at least would know to say silent about what it does and doesn't know)

Now, IF Michele Bachmann wins there are some "tough nut" states that could possibly, I repeat, possibly switch at least for just 2012. Georgia, Nebraska, Arkansas, West Virginia,  Montana, Missouri, Arizona and South Carolina are all in this list. Many of them are Carter/Clinton states, i.e., states that voted for southern governors Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, but are red otherwise. I believe that in this case, Bachmann's batshit-ness will be sufficient to make up for Obama's lack of southern bonafides.  

(South Carolina, could, possibly and amazingly, be in play based on dissatification with nominees. Missouri, thanks to Eric Cantor's sorry-but-no-ER-aid-if-it-doesn't-balance-the-budget paygo philosophy could finally tip over to the D side)

There's a greater point to this.

This is why the GOP can be so batshit crazy and suffer no repercussions. They can threaten succession, threaten women's health, voters' rights, unions, and the poor, and suffer no pushback.

This is why they can mouth bold-faced lies, and then say "Oh, well, it wasn't meant to be a factual statement" and it barely registers as a blip in the mass media.

They walk in to any election, automatically knowing it's 104 EV's without having to lift a finger. No trips, no posting bills, no TV ads needed, no nothing. Then you pile on that second state of "Carter/Clintons" I mentioned and that's another 65 EV's usually gained with minimal effort.

If Bachmann is the nominee, it's going to be a somewhat easy path to re-election for Obama but it won't be a cruise to the finish line.

It's not like Election Night won't be fun though; leading up to the election the media will do their "oh, we're fair and balanced" thing as usual and artifically inflate the numbers of the teabaggers, and pump Miss Glassy Eyes into Real Contender Status with lots of "She...Could...Go...All...The...Way!" forecasting. And then a 37-13 lambasting would be sweet indeed.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Texas could flip (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    polecat, chimpy

    Sound crazy?  The Hispanic vote is going to catch up with the R's there eventually.  I think it's more likely to be in 2020 or 2024 and maybe the R's will have figured out pissing off the fastest growing constituency in the country is bad politics, but I'm not sure they're that smart.

    If we don't stop them here, then where? If not now, then when?

    by nightsweat on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:19:40 AM PDT

    •  Is it possible, sure. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy

      But I don't find it probable and I will explain it to you as it has been explained to me.

      Many of Texas' Hispanics/Latinos, like Cubans in Florida, identify heavily with the Republicans.  They equate  family values and self-suffiency with the GOP and therefore, vote heavily on the R side.  

      Furthermore, a good percentage of them are NOT in favor of Immigration reform, being for more tightly controlled borders. Again, I don't live in Texas, this is how it's been told to me.

      So Texas, which will be if it is not now, a minority-majority state, looks to stay red for cycles to come.

      The Republican Party is Michael Douglas. The Tea Party is Glenn Close

      by Jank2112 on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:46:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not quite (0+ / 0-)

        The Cubans in Florida vote republican because of the policy towards the Castro regime. They also tend to be coming from the former ruling/bourgeois class in Cuba with very conservative values, socially and economically.

        The hispanics in Texas are mainly Mexicans, like in California. True they tend to be somewhat socially conservative, but also often vote their economic interest and have none of the liberal=communist/the state is evil scare that the Cubans have. Mexico, and most other Latin American countries do have strong leftpopulist movements/traditions, and less of a tradition of voting on social issues than is common in the US.

        In California the immigration debate years ago has firmly landed the hispanics in the Democratic camp as Republicans has made themselves unelectable by this group. In Texas especially Bush had some success appealing to them partly on social issues and partly on a relativel immigrant-friendly rhetoric, but the current republican leadership seems to be loosing them in their angling for the white xenophobic vote. Obama won the latino vote in Texas handily, though not as loopsided as in California.

        In some respects you have a picture looking like the afroamerican population just less pronounced. It tends to be somewhat conservative on social issues too, but economics and civil rights/race issues land them on the Dem side. For the hispanics this dynamic is playing out to different extent in different states, but it is a general trend. Even in Florida as generations pass latinos are trending left, currently to about the point of parity (with other latinos and young cubans making up for the very conservative older generation).

        As for Texas the decisive factor is just as much that a smaller part of the latino population is elilgible to vote - underage or non-citizens - and of the eligible ones, fewer by tradition do.

        So while I agree that 2012 is way to early to get at swing in Texas, it will swing at some point - unless the republicans get their act back together with this group, and it doesn't look like happening.

  •  Jank - it does not matter (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ColoTim, FG, chimpy

    She will not be the GOP nominee. However, I think you will likely see her as a strong candidate for the VP slot.  The more likely GOP candidates for POTUS need someone on their wing who can deliver the tea party and religous right.  I still think that Huckabee is the most likely number two, but he and Romney have issues.  

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:22:05 AM PDT

    •  Disagree (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy, FiredUpInCA, oldcrow

      She can do this. Right now the polling is mainly off of her name recognition and good looks. (:P)  But I believe these numbers could become substantive.

      Remember, this is the party that nominated Sarah Palin for Vice President, and Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell for the Senate.  A Bachmann nomination is, to me, the next logical progression.

      Remember, being grounded in reality is NOT a pre-requisite for winning a GOP nomination.

      The Republican Party is Michael Douglas. The Tea Party is Glenn Close

      by Jank2112 on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:49:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Jank - its' not going to happen (0+ / 0-)

        The polls show that the GOP voters are willing to overlook most anything to nominate the candidate with the best chance to beat the President. As the primary season heats up in 2012 I don't think that Bachmann will poll well against Obama, and she will fall out of favor. She just makes too many gaffs in public. However, the ticket will need a tea party and religous right element and she can fill that spot.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 08:35:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  In addition to your (6+ / 0-)

    solid analysis, there's another important point that often gets overlooked: most political scholars believe that the nominees simply don't make that much difference.  It's a controversial point because there's no way to test it in a controlled environment -- we can't go back and rerun 2008 to see if Romney would have beaten Obama, or if Clinton or Edwards might have lost to McCain, etc.  But there are abundant, well-supported reasons -- bolstered by all of the available data we've ever assembled to test it indirectly -- to believe that factors like the economy and approval of the current president trump candidate personalities, issue positions, etc., in the minds of swing voters.  (I'm happy to provide references if anyone's interested.)  

    Now, could someone like Bachmann be the true test of how far a party could push to the extreme and still perform up to expectations?  And could the previous poli sci be uninformative because no party has ever nominated that much of a wingnut?  Yes indeed.  However, if you pay careful attention to her recent performances (and as a scholar of this shit, I have to listen to her -- I need hazard pay!), she's moved swiftly and starkly away from her previous loony positions, and is setting up to be an all-purpose, mainstream Republican.  YouTube is our best friend on that count, but it can only take us so far if Obama's swimming upstream against a bad economy.  So anyone counting on her imploding in a general election is playing a seriously dangerous game.  

    Clever sig forthcoming.

    by cardinal on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:24:17 AM PDT

  •  Romney's effect in the South (8+ / 0-)

    will be interesting to watch.

    There are many, many evangelicals down here who have absolutely no desire to vote for a Mormon. That doesn't mean they will vote for Obama, but some of them will likely just stay home if Romney is the nominee.

    •  It depends. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bawbie, chimpy, ozsea1, oldcrow

      Southern evangelicals had a long history of extremely low voter turnout before the religious right movement, so perhaps there could be some reversion to that.  But no faithful Fox News viewer or talk-radio listener, regardless of their opinion of Mormons, will stay home after listening to their favorite outlets tell them for 9-10 months that voting against Obama is one of the most important things they'll do in their lifetimes.

      Clever sig forthcoming.

      by cardinal on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:27:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cardinal

        a lot of people around here don't get this. The evangelicals will show up for Romney simply because of the economy more or less.  They could care less about his religion when it comes to money which is the realer ruler of their lives.

        It's the policy stupid

        by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 12:00:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  disagree (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    camlbacker, chimpy

    I think Texas may be in play if Bachmann was the nominee.
    Also Alaska would probably be in play but the rest would probably stay red no matter who the nominee is.
    No way Bachmann is going to be the nominee, the GOP insiders will take her out. If the GOP tanks the economy I think they get the blame. No way the big money backing the republicans will allow them to tank the economy because they get hurt also.

    •  I'm not confident "the big money backing the (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy, ozsea1, oldcrow

      Republicans" will be able to prevent them from tanking the economy - I think the Tea Party will be stepping in the way and preventing them from lifting the debt ceiling and I'm not sure the Democrats will come around in time.

      I think the Tea Party can wind up sinking the Republicans and the Economy and America all at one time.

    •  Fu**ing Eric Cantor has already taken (0+ / 0-)

      'position' in the 'market' against the bond market, as if he expects to profit from a default. The farce is strong with them, for sure.

      May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

      by oldcrow on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 01:37:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Right now... (0+ / 0-)

      If Sarah!(TM) was the GOP candidate, she'd lose Alaska. I think that indicates that Alaskans are on to her. Since she and Bachmann are analogous, I think that a Bachmann candidacy would be at greater risk than might be apparent, in AK. Drawing the analogies would be easy. And, AK is an electorate that is... distinct and different from the rest of the US. The way that various groups and interests line up is different. AK is far more on the federal teat than most, and the cut everything idea doesn't play quite as well in AK. My sister's family's Alaskan, and my BIL is very Republican--but he curls his lip in scorn and disgust for... well, most of the GOP candidates, and particularly Palin and Bachmann.

      "Be just and good." John Adams to Thomas Jefferson

      by ogre on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 03:58:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What would a Bachmann run do to leg races? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    oldcrow

    She will have even more than a ton of money behind her thanks to the Supreme Court's decision yesterday, along with Citizens United.  What does that do to the eager right who will come out en masse to keep the House right and turn the Senate right?

    What then?

  •  2 out of 3 Times Repubs Have Won With Whackjob (4+ / 0-)

    paired with a puppeteer.

    Last time they lost with an especially implausible puppeteer, an especially implausible whackjob, and ongoing global financial crash.

    They could win with their old 1-2 combination several ways this time --and it's much easier to imagine by 2016-- either in the 1-2 or the 2-1 positions.

    I have full faith however that Democrats will prepare for the 1964 Goldwater race again.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:26:15 AM PDT

    •  They had better not, this will be a grueling (0+ / 0-)

      slugging match, with Fox ,the big (sneaky) money, and the hallelujah chorous all screaming at level 11, with Bachmann in either of the slots on the Rethug ticket. Read Bill Prendergast's diary on the effect Batshitwoman could have on the 'down ticket' side.

      May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

      by oldcrow on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 01:45:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Similarly, there won't be any 1972s or 1984s. (4+ / 0-)

    This country is a great deal more polarized today than it was between 1950 and 1996.  The number of swing voters is probably below 20%, and the number of states that are truly in play has plummeted.

    Massachusetts, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Maryland, Delaware, Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington State, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington DC and probably Maine would vote for a Democratic grapefruit over anyone with an R after their name.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:33:23 AM PDT

    •  I wish this was true... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jank2112

      but I don't think it is. It might be true for Hawaii, DC, California, and Vermont, but not for those others states, where Republicans still regularly run competitive state-wide races -- actual Republicans, not the "Democrats" that sometimes win in Southern states.

      There isn't a "left" equivalent to the unthinking, extreme-right Republican base. And I agree with the poster: it's exactly the reason why they're able to be so extreme.

      Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com

      by BrentHartinger on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:45:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  State-wide races are NOT national races. (0+ / 0-)

        Hawaii had a Republican governor until last year.

        People in one-party states frequently elect candidates from the other party, in order to check the power of the incumbent political machine.  That's how Massachusetts ended up electing Republicans.

        And what makes you think the Republican base is "unthinking" when they vote for Republicans?  They have their values, just like we have ours, and they vote for them.

        Politics works the same way for the "good guys" as it does for the "bad guys."

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:05:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Right. (0+ / 0-)

        Thank you. Dems will NOT nominate a grapefruit, or a  Dennis Kucinich under any circumstances whatsoever.  

        Howard Dean may well be the most extreme candidate the party has ever flirted with nominatiing since the 60s.

        (and yes, my tounge is firmly in my cheek as I say "extreme" )

        The Republican Party is Michael Douglas. The Tea Party is Glenn Close

        by Jank2112 on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:53:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  When Was the Last Time? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    amk for obama

    That someone who was not already in the White House, a vice-president, a senator, or a governor was nominated by either major party?

    Gen. Eisenhower - 1952.

    And he was a rather accomplished general.
    To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen -
    "Michele Bachmann ain't no Eisenhower."

    The primary process, media, and most importantly, money -
     have made it so in all campaigns since WWII.

  •  Hubris (5+ / 0-)

    Don't get over-confident.....Obama can lose in 2012.  Regardless of who the Republicans nominate, we need to take nominee seriously and fight as hard as possible to defeat this person.

  •  Bachmann is just a distraction (0+ / 0-)

    I fear the nomination will go to Rick Perry - and one might well consider him even more hideous than Bachmann - and that will make it a completely different ball game...

    We're shocked by a naked nipple, but not by naked aggression.

    by Lepanto on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:51:51 AM PDT

  •  See this diary on teh crazy (0+ / 0-)

    One bitter fact is two bit hacks populate the third rate fourth estate who are truly the fifth columnists. So, how did Obama piss you off today ?
    Call the media when they Lie

    by amk for obama on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 10:58:41 AM PDT

  •  The grapefruit should run as an independent. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FiredUpInCA

    Considering how annoyed most Americans are with our entire government, it might just win.

    "We live now in hard times, not end times." Jon Stewart

    by tb92 on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:44:55 AM PDT

  •  Obama (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ozsea1

    is not going to carry AR, GA, KY, or WV even if Bachmann is the nominee. Obama lost those states in '08 and it's unlikely that he'll carry them in '12 because of the economy. He's not going to carry SC either. That's just a pipe dream.

    He'll more or less carry the traditional "blue" states he did in '08 with the possibility of some blues becoming red this time because of the economy.

    It's the policy stupid

    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:56:17 AM PDT

  •  Overconfidence will be your doom. (0+ / 0-)

    Do not underestimate Crazy Eyes Bachmann. She's far more determined than Palin ever was.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    The Republican Party is now the sworn enemy of the United States of America.

    by TheGreatLeapForward on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 12:15:05 PM PDT

    •  She is also a prolific fundraiser, and (0+ / 0-)

      a surprising number of people will vote for her no matter what. I volunteered for the DFL in her district. Trust me, there are a lot of republicans just as baschizzle as she is, and even more who blindly vote party line.

      Still, if she does well enough for long enough, then she will not fall back and run for the House again. She would probably run against Franken in 2014.

      Supply follows consumption. You cannot stimulate consumption by crushing the consumer. Deal with it.

      by Zera Lee on Wed Jun 29, 2011 at 01:21:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  She is a fierce advocate. Obama, not so much... (0+ / 0-)

    Like her or not she has a set of beliefs that are strong and she is gonna fight for them in a consistent manner. Obama, not so much with his admiration for bipartisanship and giving away his toys before negotiatons even begin. It may be a mistake to want Bachmann as the repub nominee.

  •  Sound analysis... but... (0+ / 0-)

    I'm not sure I care that Obama wins 35, 36 or 37 states.  I don't think I'd care if he only won by 1 electoral vote.  Having said that, I don't see any of the current crop of clowns from the GOP challenging the president to that level at all.  Not Romney, not Pawlenty, not Perry and certainly not Palin, Santorum, Cain, Huntsman or Bachmann.

    IMHO, local Republican governance (or lack thereof) from legislatures to governors, has doomed the 2021 GOP presidential candidate (barring an uncharacteristic and massive mistake by President Obama).

    In 2010, I paid more taxes than General Electric.

    by GrogInOhio on Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 12:37:28 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site