American President Will Pass Re-Election “Indicators” with Difficulty: Obama's Candidacy Vulnerable

Some of the most insightful political analysts believe that the chances for an American president’s re-election can be determined by examining three key indicators: job, approval, unemployment and GDP growth. If these three elements are calculated, then the election outcome is clear.

According to this theory, and after examining data from the past 40 years, it is apparent that there is no reason for excessive optimism on the part of Barak Obama’s staff. The American president governs during a historically poor period for the U.S. economy. However, his popularity could be even worse, and many things can change in 12 months. The 45-46 percent approval rating that Obama received recently is a little higher than his third-quarter average in 2011. The most significant factors in his re-election are his momentum heading into the 2012 presidential election and the name of his Republican opponent.

For example, after about one thousand days into their terms, according to Gallup, Presidents R. Nixon and R. Reagan had modest approval ratings (49 percent) — roughly one year out from their re-election triumphs in 1972 and 1984, respectively. The fact that they competed against McGovern and Mondale, two weak candidates, played a significant role in their re-elections. Bill Clinton belongs at the same category: He had an approval rating of 49 percent one year before his 1996 victory over Bob Dole.

The most important lesson comes from George Bush, Sr. He was at his highest in the opinion polls (62 percent) one year out from his 1992 loss, but Gulf War victory euphoria vanished because of public dissatisfaction over the recession. Unemployment in 1991 was 7 percent — two points lower than it is now. GDP growth in the third quarter of 1991 was 1.7 percent — up from negative 1.9 in the first quarter. The 2.5 percent GDP growth in the third quarter of 2011 seems comparatively very good. However, Clinton managed to conduct a successful campaign against Bush over the 1992 recession, despite a 4 percent increase in GDP that year.

Among such statistical evidence, Barak Obama seems to balance precariously. Given the historically high unemployment rate, it’s amazing that his job approval rating isn’t lower. Obama’s personal approval rating remains high — nearly 70 percent. However, the latter makes him vulnerable to Mitt Romney’s rise in the polls, arguing: Nice guy, good family, but it’s time to give someone else a chance to turn the economy around.

The anemic economy shows signs of recovery, but not quickly enough to considerably increase consumer confidence. Also, the continuous economic turmoil of the EU threatens to “cancel out” any hope for recovery. While unemployment will hopefully decline to 8 percent or even lower, it’s hard to imagine the kind of GDP growth that boosted Reagan in 1984 or Clinton in 1996. “The worst is over” is not a very inspired re-election slogan.

Similarly, the recent bump in approval ratings that Obama has enjoyed — from 41 to 45 percent — is no reason for celebration in the White House. Three factors could make it fade, but they are liable to change. The first is vindication of his intervention in Libya (foreign policy is an unexpectedly bright spot for this administration). The second is the dispute and chaos among Republican candidates. The third is the positive economic data (even if not excessively good).

There is no need for a crystal ball or huge quantity of data to say that the 2012 presidential election will be very close. By any historical measure, Barak Obama will be a very vulnerable incumbent. Nevertheless, he has endured against strong “economic winds” without his popularity being completely destroyed and, furthermore, he has the advantage of a very weak Republican field. But it is a fact that if one week is a long time in politics, then one year is a life-time.