ShareThis Page
Independents drive strategy |

Independents drive strategy

| Sunday, October 9, 2011 12:00 a.m


The North Main Street building here marking William McKinley’s birthplace reconstructs the famous front porch of a president who won what historians consider one of our most turbulent elections.

Presidents become presidents by winning the country or by winning their parties. In 1896, with America at the peak of a series of “wave” elections, McKinley won the country.

“It is no secret that President Obama is coming back to the base of the party,” said Adam Bonin, chairman of Netroots Nation, the granddaddy of today’s progressive movement.

“Seeming like the reasonable man in the middle didn’t work because the results haven’t been tangible,” Bonin said of Obama’s run to the middle in the first eight months of 2011. Now, he said, the president has some work to do to earn back progressives’ love.

Obama is feeling a lot of heat from his party’s base, according to Bert Rockman, Purdue University political science professor. “You first have to consolidate your party base before you move on to the uncommitted,” he added.

Obama’s re-election strategy — going to his base rather than winning the country — is born of necessity: He is not faring well with independents.

That also was President George W. Bush’s game plan in 2004, Rockman said — except that this time, “Republican legislatures and governors have tilted the playing field in such a way that full mobilization of the base will be harder (for Obama) to do than it was for Bush.”

Keep in mind that Bush came extremely close to splitting the independent vote.

Today America is “essentially split … between independents, Republicans and Democrats,” said presidential-election historian Lara Brown. If Republicans vote for their nominee and Democrats vote for theirs, she theorized, the winner will need either a good-sized majority of independents — say, a 60-40 split — or a crazily lopsided turnout of his own partisans to offset the other guy’s independent vote.

“In ‘wave’ years,” she said, “independents go strongly towards one party or another. So, really, offsetting them is almost impossible.”

The elections of 2006, 2008 and 2010 were “wave” years in which independents strongly sided with the party out of power. Independents split in 2000 and 2004, according to Brown, “and while Bush won in the Electoral College in 2000, he realized that if that happened again in 2004, he might lose since he had lost the popular vote.”

His team turned out huge numbers of Republicans in 2004 so that, if independents split again, he would still win.

Obama’s team realizes its best-case scenario is that independents will split in 2012; he can’t carry a majority of them because his “moderate” course has not worked.

Team Obama decided in August, after the federal debt deal, that he got no credit for compromising, so they repositioned him.

Obama needs roughly 80 percent of the Democrat base to win, according to one Washington-based party strategist who has had a hand in successful national elections. “He is currently in the mid 60s,” he contended.

If the president drastically improves his base numbers, he can go after independents by explaining why he is the safe alternative for the country. Selling such a message relies heavily on his strong likability in opinion polls.

Netroots Nation’s Bonin believes that, in pursuing his base, Obama must support marriage equity: “We are a year now since he said he was evolving on gay marriage. I wish he would evolve already.”

Democrats in the middle are less thrilled about the president moving left, however.

“My opinion is that that is not going to help him in Middle America,” said U.S. Rep. Jason Altmire, a Democrat whose Southwestern Pennsylvania district is a postcard portrait of Main Street America.

Obama can succeed if the Republican field moves so far to the right that independents have nowhere to go. Yet such a strategy is tough; Bush never lost his base the way Obama has as of today, and Obama has a lot more ground to make up than Bush did in 2004.

“Plus, he is facing a nasty economy,” said the D.C. strategist. “The question really is, how much does the current team realize they are in trouble?”

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.