The 2008 followed the analogy of the1980 election. 2012 will follow the 1984 analogy.

[bluestateguy]

I spoken of this before:

Country in a mood of malaise, lousy economy, inflation (if not as high as 1980), high energy prices. Yet the election remains close in the polls. That was also case in the 1980 campaign. In 1980 Reagan did not blow it open until the last weekend before election day, and the final debate may have had a lot to do with that.

more

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6731927

In Reagan's first term, the economy worsened in 1981-82, even though inflation dropped quite a bit. Reagan's approval rating began to drop in late 1981, and throughout 1982. Hypothetical polls between Mondale and Reagan in 1983 showed a Mondale win. But GDP came roaring back in 1983 and 1984, and by early 1984, it was clear that Reagan would win. It was only a question of how much. In November, 1984, unemployment was still a bit high, but personal incomes and GDP were much higher. Reagan won 49 states against Walter Mondale.

Obama can duplicate this feat in 2012. The Republican nominee in 2012 will be their Walter Mondale: an old guard politician from the "old" order of the Reagan-Bush orthodoxy; someone who is captive of all of the interest groups of the Right and has no charisma.

Obama will enjoy a honeymoon in the first half of 2009, even as the economy seems likely to worsen in 2009. Later in 2009, Obama's approval ratings will drop, perhaps to below 50%.

Obama has more charisma than Reagan, and a core of committed supporters who will walk through the coal fires for him. If he can get this economy moving in the right direction again--mind you not total prosperity--with growing GDP, lower unemployment and looser credit, then the fundamentals are in place for him to win a Reagan 1984 style landslide.

[Alexander]

1. The only question is, who is the GOP's Walter Mondale?

I hope it's Palin, Jindal or some other far-right lunatic.

[Gman]

3. Palin! LOL!

Sorry, Fitz. I worked my ass off for you in 1984.

[Gman]

2. Or 2012 will follow the 1956 or 1996 analogy

along with 1984.

2012 will NOT follow 2004 because Bush lost. 2004 was more like 1992.

[Zynx]

4. Presidents who are elected when things are bad rarely lose.

This is true in other countries too.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

9. what about jimmy carter?

[Zynx]

10. The economy was turning around in 1976 and posted two good years of growth in 1977

and 1978.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

12. yes but didn't it get bad the year before the election?

I wouldn't know, I wasn't born yet.

[Zynx]

13. The economy was bad in 1974 and early 1975, but had improved by 1976.

Things weren't great, but they weren't terrible either. They had gotten bad by 1980 with 12% inflation and high single digit unemployment. That's why Carter lost, Reagan won, and Reagan won bigger in 1984.

[Sebastian Doyle]

5. Maybe the Repukes can literally repeat history and run Ferraro as their candidate?

Obviously she has no interest in being a Democrat anymore.

[eleny]

6. He can run on slogans relating the Republicans making us slide back away from growth

The Republicans won't make progress easy since they know how to use their minority rights in the Congress. But perhaps Obama can urge Dem leadership to call their bluff and make the Repubs filibuster the old fashioned way. Put up or shut up.

Obama's bully pulpit will be interesting to watch. I'd love to sit there watching C-Span as McConnell reads the Old Testament start to finish with a thermos on his desk.

:rofl:

[wyldwolf]

7. I can see that playing out, but they may try to avoid another Dole..

... and find their Clinton or Obama.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

8. do you think it depends on how well the economy is doing by then?

[BlackmanX]

11. Actually the 2008 election was alot closer to 1968 than 1980

You had 1 of the major parties visibly break up while at the same time there is a war on that the president-elect will have to withdraw from which will require a large amount of skill. Obama is in a position closer to a Nixon circa 1969 or with the bad economy FDR circa 1933. Obama is going to have to create more inflation because of the large sums of money he'll have to dump in the economy to get things going again.

[bluestateguy]

14. Then maybe 2012 will be like 1972 (with the parties reversed)

And that would be fine with me, though I would urge Obama not to order a burglarly of RNC headquarters.