Stuart Rothenberg: Can a Republican Even Win in 2008?

[liberalpragmatist]

Can a Republican Win the Presidential Race in 2008?
By Stuart Rothenberg

I find questions about whether Democrats can really win the White House in 2008 almost incomprehensible. The far, far better question is whether the Republicans can win the White House almost two years from now.

As we begin the 2008 election cycle, we all ought to be on the same page when it comes to expectations. Whether you are hoping that Republicans maintain their hold on the White House or believe that it’s important for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office in 2009, it’s pretty clear that the 2008 presidential election is the Democrats’ to lose.

<snip>

Only once in the past 50 years, in 1988, has a political party won a third consecutive four-year presidential term. That’s not an accident. It’s the result of inevitable voter fatigue and impatience, as well as the public’s (and media’s) desire for periodic change

Obviously, Republican George H.W. Bush’s 1988 victory after eight years of Ronald Reagan shows that it’s not impossible for one party to win a third straight term in the White House. But it is inherently difficult to do so, and one would expect it to be even more difficult when the man exiting the White House is widely unpopular. (Before the Reagan-to-Bush handoff, the last time a sitting president was succeeded by a member of his own party was in 1929, when Calvin Coolidge passed the keys to the White House to Herbert Hoover.)

continued...

http://www.rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/

[negativenihil]

1. "Can a Republican Even Win in 2008?"

the short answer? No. Don't even bother running ;)

[MzNov]

2. As it now goes, a republican can't even THINK about winning

in '08 !! :-) Maybe 2108? naahhhhhhhhh


**********************************************
**Edwards/Obama '08**

[WI_DEM]

3. only problem with his analysis is that the dems did win a third

straight victory in 2000 (Gore won popular vote and if Fl had been counted correctly--would have won electoral vote).

[Apollo11]

8. Yes - Dems won in 1992, 1996 and 2000

In Gore We Trust :)
www.algore.com
www.algore.org
www.draftgore.com
www.draftgore2008.org
www.patriotsforgore.com

[HamdenRice]

4. WTF? FDR doesn't count?

What is Rothenberg talking about saying that you have to go back to Coolidge and Hoover???

FDR won a third term and then a fourth term. After his death, and after Truman finished FDR's fourth term, Truman won re-election for a fifth straight term of Democratic control of the presidency.

This guy needs to get his basic facts correct.

[liberalpragmatist]

5. He means through election

Truman first succeeded to the presidency because FDR died. Rothenberg is talking about a situation in which the incumbent completes his term and the successor runs in the next election. Obviously both Truman and Johnson won election in their own right thereafter, but neither got the position first through election.

[NewJeffCT]

6. He's correct

First - he originally said "in the last 50 years" which means, since 1957 when Eisenhower was in office.

And, he said a "sitting president" - Truman became president upon the death of FDR, so he was not technically following a sitting president.

[lancdem]

7. I also remember reading somewhere

that whenever a president has had approval ratings as bad as Bush's (reaching to the low 30s at times), his party loses the WH the next time around.

[Vincardog]

9. With aWoL's ratings reaching to the low 20s the REpukes will all be thrown out

We have to let them stand with their man NOW.

Let every re:puke: who supports the chimps escalation of the illegal occupation go on record and say so now.

Let every re:puke: who agrees with the chimp wiping his ass on our constitution
go on record and say so now.

I am just saying let the neoConvicts stand up and go down with their grinning simian now.