UGA Presidential Discussion Group – June 13, 2012

UGA Presidential Discussion Group – June 13, 2012

The discussion started on the memo to the Obama campaign from Greenfield, Carville and Seifert suggesting that he needs to refocus his efforts. Based on focus-group data including non-college-educated swing voters in Ohio and college-educated suburbanites of Philadelphia, they indicate that he needs to outline two possible visions of the future. This position expands on the statements of Bill Clinton made earlier. They state that the public acknowledges that Obama inherited the problems with the economy, but they believe that the economy is stuck. He needs to stop saying that things are not that bad or that they are improving, but he needs to explain how we are going to get out. The emphasis must be on the future. The same focus groups say that Romney is out of touch and only understands the wealthy. The situation is somewhat reminiscent of the Bush campaign in 2004. In that year the economy was going well. He focused not on the past but what we can do in the future to benefit from the booming economy. Obama should develop a message that shows that he empathizes with the problems of the middle class and that he wants to secure Social Security and Medicare.

We pointed out that there are limits to focus-group data. Focus groups are great at revealing the range of perspectives but are not good at drawing distinct conclusions. It was also pointed out that the authors are Democratic strategists who are currently on the sidelines in this campaign. On the other hand, Carville has skills to screen out irrelevant information to focus on the key information, what the political scientist Robert E. Lane “listening with the third ear.” Lee Atwater was able to get critical information by listening to clientele of biker bars, and David Broder got his information in other venues.

Discussions moved to Romney and taxes and some of the questions raised. Can Obama tie Romney to the negative aspects of the Ryan budget? How vulnerable is Romney in his immigration policy? The Supreme Court decisions on Obamacare and immigration will be announced in the next two weeks. Someone stated in the group a few weeks ago said that the ruling on ObamaCare will hurt Obama irrespective of the result and that the immigration ruling will hurt Romney. We indicated last week that the polls in June have little predictable value for November. We also noted that the national head-to-head polls and the Presidential approval ratings have been very stable indicating a very close election. The Obama campaign is data-rich and great at micro-targeting, used very effective by Karl Rove in 2004. Obama’s strategy will attempt to energize the base and mobilize it to get to the polls. Romney is noted for data mining in business, but it is not clear that he is effective in micro-targeting when it comes to politics. Fortunately he has Karl Rove to help him out here.  How important will the debates be? Romney has been successful at isolating himself from the Mainstream Media recently limiting his gaffes. Will that hurt him in the debates when Obama uses his superior oratorical skills OR will Romney benefit by exceeding low expectations?

The Obama gaffe and Romney response were discussed. The “just fine” private economy reinforces the anti-Obama voters while cutting back on “police, firemen and teachers” feeds the pro-Obama folks. Neither statement is likely to reach the level of having “voted for the war before I voted against it.” Thom Mazloom of the M Network which analyzes campaign ads has said that swing voters know Obama’s things-are-bad-but-are-getting-better position and view the attack ads as political opportunism. Two of us had seen a commentary recently without remembering the source that shows that the undecided voters are leaning to Romney while those not registered to vote lean to Obama. There appear to be at least three structural differences in this election from previous ones. First, there is a concerted campaign in Florida to clean up the voter rolls, perceived by Republicans as fraud prevention and by Democrats as voter suppression. From a strategic standpoint it would appear to help the Republicans when the number of registered voters decreases and aid Democrats as they expand. There has been some talk about the Justice Department suing Florida over the issue. That might be a politically risky strategy in a key swing state. Second, the campaign financing in light of Citizen’s United could be a major factor in the campaign. It is widely perceived that the ruling favors the Republicans, particularly with the unlimited PAC funds. It is not clear that the advantage will be enough to sway the election, but outside money spent on ads could free up funds in the Romney camp to devote to getting-out-the-vote effort in November. Third, innovations in the way we vote – early voting, mail-in ballots such as in Oregon, and being able to vote in locations in the same state other than the registered precinct – all can affect the way to approach the electorate. These innovations are not completely new to 2012, but they are much more of a part of the system now than they have been in the past. The explosion of social media in this year’s campaign will also be an important factor. 

Paul announced that he would miss the next two weeks. Rob Shewfelt will facilitate the discussion next week. We are looking for a volunteer for Wednesday, June 27.