Obamanomics: America really ISN’T GROWING (that much)

Economic growth is like gravity for campaigns: poor Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth sinks an incumbent while strong growth is a boon.

Check out http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=274 for a ton of historical data.

We’re talking about “real” GDP growth, not “nominal” GDP growth.   Real GDP growth is an apples-to-apples comparison that factors out inflation.    Example: the Obamanomics crowd is all giddy over the 3.85{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} nominal growth measured in the second half of last year.  In reality, the real growth rate was 1.55{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} (less than half of the nominal rate).

The rest of what Obama is taking credit for was inflation – the ever shrinking value of your money.  This isn’t the only time we see undue credit being given.  See how the unemployment rate has gone down while even more people don’t have jobs. (President Obama: “America is back!” Guess again: More than 40{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} of Americans aren’t working.)

Looking at the 3rd and 4th quarters of presidential election years going back to ‘48, you see a clear impact:  When a party kept control of the White House, real growth averaged 4.45{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222}.  When it lost control, the average was 2.40{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} .

That amounts to a 46{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} difference in real GDP growth between winning and losing an election.

Again, during the last half of 2011, the REAL growth in GDP was a paltry 1.55{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222}, firmly in the realm of the “losers.” It also puts the President almost three points shy of the average winner in terms of real GDP.  Not good for Obama.

Several examples from the winners circle:

–    Clinton crushes Dole in ‘96 (4.2{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} 2nd half growth)
–    Reagan wipes out Mondale in ‘84 (6.25{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222})
–    LBJ drubs Goldwater in ‘64 (5.9{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222})

Along with a couple of losers:

—    Nixon didn’t win the White House after Ike in ‘60 (1.18{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222})
–    Reagan beat Carter in ‘80 (-0.85{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222})
–    Obama beats McCain after eight years of “W” in ‘08 (-1.95{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222})

Seems like some elections have generated some urban myths: were the winners THAT good?  The losers THAT bad?  Or, were the election results just a reflection of our economic times?

Sometimes even poor 2nd half growth can’t sink a decent candidate or boost a lame challenger.  Bush 43 was a full one-and-a-half points under the average winner and still won.   Eisenhower demolished Stevenson in ‘56  with economic growth at 1.3{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} – the worst measured for a successful presidential re-election.   Eisenhower won 41 out of 48 states and 57{09f965da52dc6ab4c1643a77bd40d1f729d807040cd8db540234bb981a782222} of the vote; was he that good or was Stevenson that terrible?

Absent a record economic turnaround, lackluster growth leaves the President in dire need of a harsh attack machine; he needs Americans to prefer joblessness over a Republican’s presidency.

Even that won’t be enough.  Obama will make use of his vast campaign wealth, trying to destroy the GOP nominee and overcome the worst economic growth an incumbent president has faced since Jimmy Carter.

Similar Articles

  • Impeachment Fever Has Hit House Democrats
    read more

  • Public Opinion Strategies Congratulates Karen Handel on Winning GA-06
    read more

  • The Democrats’ Pivot
    read more

    read more

    read more

Public Opinion Strategies helped us to clarify what we wanted to learn and then conducted research and analysis that shed light even beyond the questions we set out to ask. They were very receptive to our suggestions, responsive to our queries, and flexible when we needed them to be.

Public Opinion Strategies has consistently offered unparalleled advice and spot-on polling that has shaped how and where we spent money and deploy key resources. Additionally, they have always been an excellent steward of limited campaign resources, ensuring we spend wisely and not a dollar more than necessary in order to get the information we need.

Robert Blizzard and Public Opinion Strategies did a great job for us throughout our successful campaign for Congress. Robert gave us accurate data, spot on analysis, and professional advice, all of which were essential to our victory.

Public Opinion Strategies is one of our go-to pollsters when it comes to testing public support for bond ballot measures and other initiative proposals. They are available to provide ongoing consultation with regard to crafting of ballot questions, public outreach messaging, and related efforts.

ACLI has worked with Public Opinion Strategies for decades, through several tough industry battles—often ones in which public opinion does not naturally fall on the side of insurers. Yet Bill and his team consistently provide invaluable strategic advice by refining our messages and helping us frame our issues in a way that makes them understandable and persuasive.

The data from Public Opinion Strategies provided important insight and informed our public awareness campaign. We sincerely appreciate their professionalism and expertise in this arena.

Nicole McCleskey and the team at Public Opinion Strategies have been invaluable to me, both during my campaigns and as Governor of the State of New Mexico. It’s not just the accuracy of their numbers, but guiding the overall strategy that makes them so valuable.

Public Opinion Strategies has been a part of our team in Missouri for more than a decade. With their data and guidance, Republicans here were able to attain a majority in the House in 2002 for the first time in fifty years, and we have been able to grow that majority to the point that we now have a record, veto-proof majority.

In my tenure at two leading business associations, facing huge and complex consumer issues, I have benefitted enormously from the objective advisory skills of Bill and his team. They do their homework, they are rigorous, dispassionate and thoughtful. Turning questions into answers is a clever tag, but it’s also an apt description of the professional talents of the firm.

I consider Public Opinion Strategies to be a part of our team. That is the way we have always worked. They have helped us to understand our needs and fashioned research solutions to meet those needs. They have helped us to meet killer deadlines by being flexible, executing rapidly, and insuring quality. Teamwork is the best way to describe it.

Accuracy, speed, and deep knowledge of key issues and public sentiment are the hallmarks of quality opinion research, and on these measures Public Opinion Strategies consistently delivers. I have had the pleasure of working with Public Opinion Strategies for more than 15 years on dozens of issues, and they are undoubtedly the gold standard.

Public Opinion Strategies’ track record of success and wealth of experience in political campaigns and issue advocacy are why they are one of the most trusted and well respected public opinion firms in Washington, D.C. Their insights and perspectives have helped to inform a wide array of public affairs activities across multiple industries.

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com