For much of 2011, when pundits claimed President Obama's re-election prospects were poor, one area in particular was frequently cited: Obama was struggling with independents, with whom he'd done quite well in 2008. If the president has lost the independents, the argument goes, he's lost a chance at a second term.
Putting aside the fact that independents are not a single, like-minded group of voters, the observation was not without merit. National candidates who struggle with this constituency generally fail to win, and there was evidence that Obama's support with independents had slipped.
Over the last several weeks, however, that slide has reversed course. Much of this has to do with an improving economy -- Obama has seen his standing improve with nearly all groups -- but it also has something to do with a trend Republicans should find disconcerting: independents don't seem to like Mitt Romney at all.
Take the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, for example. A month ago, Romney led the president among independents, 46% to 39%. As of this week, the numbers have flipped, and Obama now leads Romney among indy voters, 49% to 38%. That's a dramatic shift in a very short period of time.
A Pew Research Center poll from earlier this week showed a similar trend -- Romney has gone from a 10-point lead over the president among independents to an 8-point deficit in just a month.
TPM put together this chart to help drive the point home: the more independent voters see of Romney, the more they like Obama.
TPM
Without more data, it's hard to say with confidence exactly why independents are turning on Romney so quickly. It could be any number of factors -- the flip-flops, the campaign strategy based on attack ads, the out-of-touch gaffes, his layoff-driven riches -- and most likely, it's a combination of all of these.
Whatever the reason, the evidence suggests it may be a time for a reevaluation of GOP assumptions. Republicans have generally accepted as fact the notion that Romney is more electable than his rivals precisely because he can appeal to independent voters, but recent trends point in the opposite direction.
Leave a Comment:
here's the thing; Willard hasn't made a case for himself. he's spent a ton of money destroying others. the bits and pieces that have gotten out about Willard - folks don't like him...period.
and, the President's team hasn't even truly begun on Willard....that's what makes this even more fun.
"it's hard to say with confidence exactly why independents are turning on Romney so quickly. It could be any number of factors --..."
1) The fact that the GOP candidate field is bereft of IDEAS!
2) The GOP war against women!
3) The GOP field hasn't offered a QUALIFIED CANDIDATE!
4) The GOP wants to take US back to the "stone age" - yabba,dabba, doo!!
5) The GOP is singing the same song, that hasn't worked since RAY-GUN tried it the first time!!
Or it could be that independents are realizing that Mittens is just your average middle class quarter-billionaire @sshole.
I would think independents would be against the right wings assault on liberty also. Not to mention the Republican strategy of ignoring the voice of the people. I doubt any truly independent voter likes the idea that we must do as the government says rather than the government should do as we the people say.
While this poll looked at voters who formerly said they supported Romney, I think it might go deeper than just a "what's wrong with Romney" question. Isn't this often the situation in American politics? Voters who occupy what they see as "the middle of the road" select candidates that they think are not too extreme, and they bounce between Democratic and Republican candidates as the situation dictates.
That's fine if you have an Olympia Snowe (ME) or a Joe Donnelly (IN) to satisfy that preference. But now that Romney is losing support, who can they go to among the Republicans? They can pick a more extreme conservative (and that's how people like Gingrich or Santorum paint themselves, using religious extremism on the one hand or baiting invective on the other). Or they can select a candidate that presumably some of them did in the 2008 election (that's why states like mine went blue for once).
... and the fact that housing construction is up, unemployment numbers are down, and the overall economic situation appears to be stabilizing doesn't hurt either. Rather than buying the claim that Obama "hasn't done enough," now they can actually point to signs of improvement and say that Obama is the person they'd rather bet on for this particular race.
He IS more electable than his rivals because he can appeal to independent voters. Mitt appeals to some, while Santorum and Gingrich appeal to none.
This seems to be as good a post as any to say this. DEMOCRATS: The GOP has been putting itself on the edge of a cliff for quite a few years now, but incredibly, they obviously don't know it. For the sake of all of us, please give them the push that will make all of us a lot better off--including the Republicans! Make them rise from the dead, hopefully into something respectable, instead of enabling them, as you've been doing for way too long. You can't work with people whose only raison d'etre is to destroy you and impoveris nearly everyone else. You've got the kind of principles to do what this nation needs if we're going to get well. I'm one independent who has been very Democratic since I started paying strict attention seven or eight years ago; please give me reason to stay that way, and not advocate for a third party! Have the guts to do what needs to be done; you'll likely never have an easier time--with perhaps the exception of 2009. You totally blew it then; please appreciate how lucky you are to get another shot so quickly!
Totally agree with you, Pete. Welcome to the party of conscience.
I have been voting since 1972 (McGovern) and have never understood why any woman would ever vote for a Republican much less be one.
The situation has gotten so bad that everyone needs to understand that any vote for any Republican in any county, city, state or national election further enables the assault on women's, children's and human rights. Here is hoping the DNC, DCCC, DSCC and Priorities USA get out this message.
Ha ha. Some of us know about the Gillespie and Welch book.
Until Romney had to campaign for the nomination, he was "more electable" - at least for national office, if not for the governorship of MA. My personal belief that much of his vaunted "electability" is due solely to his governorship of MA - not known for producing rigidly doctrinaire conservative Republicans and THAT was what appealed to so many "independent" voters when they were polled.
However, that governorship was over ten years ago and, unfortunately for Romney, to get a chance at national office now, he first has to satisfy enough of the Republican right-wing in state primaries to even get the nomination. Needless to say, today's Republican primary voters don't do NON-rigidly doctrinaire conservatists.
They call them RINOs...
Improving economy and birth control demagoguery. And what Zora said.
Most people aren't thinking about presidential politics yet...and don't know what policies would really work to help the economy...but they understand birth control.
REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS AREN'T IMPEACHING OBAMA BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL PLAYING BALL TOGETHER. The vast majority of our "representatives" belong to America's one party system, that party being the Council On Foreign Relations, America's shadow government (learn more these judeo-communists at http://jbs.org).
Fax or email your Congressman and Senator today, and order them to begin impeachment proceedings against Obalmy whose come closer to Hitler than any President we've had. He's a threat to our very way of life. Hitler rammed through the Enabling Act; Obalmy just did the same thing - only he called his version The Detainee Security Act. Hitler then declared martial law, outlawed all rival political parties, and began murdering or jailing everybody who spoke out against him. OBAMA COULD BEGIN DOING THIS BEFORE WE KNOW IT! LET'S KEEP AMERICA THE EXCEPTION TO THE TYRANNIES OF THE LAST CENTURY.
DEAN BERRY MINISTRIES: "When the government outlaws 'terrorism', it's planning something for which 'terrorism' is the only recourse. Obviously."