Look up the subject
realigning elections, please.
Also: take a look at presidential elections since 1856. You should notice that all those who won a second term — even non-consecutive Grover Cleveland — had an electoral-vote count gain with re-elections, compared to first-term victory.
Just one exception to this: 1916 Woodrow Wilson; but consider 1912 Republican rift between the incumbent, William Howard Taft, and his predecessor, Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy reduced Taft down to two states, Utah and Vermont, and he took six that had voted for Taft in 2008: California, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Washington. The rest — plus first-time participants Arizona and New Mexico — ended up in Wilson’s column. The Rs regrouped for 1916, and that’s why they reduced the electoral-vote count of Wilson, who even lost his home state of New Jersey to challenger Charles Evans Hughes. This was during a realigning period favoring the Rs, from 1896–1928, with Wilson was the only D president.
Yes, of course when Bill Clinton won re-election to a second term in 1996 he became the first Democrat to win that second term since 1936 Franklin Roosevelt. But when Dwight Eisenhower won re-election to a second term in 1956, he became the first Republican to win that second term since 1900 William McKinley. Keep in mind the in-betweens who either died in office, or were replacements who won one full-term election but did not seek a second full term. Mitigating factors. Clinton was the only two-term D president during the realigning period for the Rs of 1968–2004. Ike was the only R president, with two terms (of course), during a realigning period for the Ds, 1932–1964.
You look at today’s two parties, and their latests with presidential elections — and go ahead and hone in popular-vote margin and Electoral College. It’s not the Republicans but the Democrats who have advantage.
The 1970s and 1980s Rs won more than 400 electoral votes in all their victories. In the 2000s, they never reached 300. 1972 Richard Nixon won against unviable George McGovern by a national margin of 23.15%. 1980 Ronald Reagan unseated Jimmy Carter by 9.75% and won re-election, in 1984, by 18.22%. 1988 George W. Bush did what third-consecutive-election party holds normally do — see a significant reduction of support that doesn’t go deep enough for the flip of the White House; he lost about 60% of Reagan’s margin, had an increase only in Tennessee, and beat Dukakis nationally by 7.73% while still reaching 400 in the Electoral College. For the 2000s, his son didn’t beat Al Gore in the popular vote. Bush, Jr. shifted 1996 Bob Dole’s loss of –8.52% by 8.00%, and he came up short at –0.52%. In 2004, and as a wartime president, his shift was only +2.98%, and a national margin victory of 2.46% — historically the lowest for a re-elected incumbent, winning a second term (like with the majority who came before) with gains.
Let us keep in mind that Bush Sr. had more electoral votes combined winning [426] and losing [168] than Bush Jr. had with his two [271 and 286] — that’s 594 to 557.
With the 1990s’ and 2000s’ winning Democrats, and that neither Bill Clinton or Barack Obama were under 5.50% nationally, and both had 2-to-1 victories in the Electoral College: unseating Bush, Sr. in 1992, Clinton shifted +11.29% of Michael Dukakis’s loss of –7.73% to win the popular vote by a margin of 5.56%. His re-election margin shift was +2.96% so that he beat Bob Dole by 8.52%. (This was mentioned already.) In 2008, Barack Obama shifted 9.72% of John Kerry’s 2004 loss of –2.46% to prevail over John McCain by 7.26%.
I look at this way:
There are four scenarios worth consideration for Election 2012…A) Republican Party wins back the White House. A 7.27% to 9.72% shift of the popular vote, for a national margin between 0.01% and 2.46%. All states that were 2008 Democratic pickups flip back to the Rs. New Hampshire is the bonus state. Electoral-vote count is, once again, under 300. (This would be the case for Rs to win back the Senate. It would come along for the ride.) Since Rs and Ds first battled in 1856, just three party-pickups lost bid for re-election: 1888 Grover Cleveland was unseated by Benjamin Harrison; 1892 saw a rematch and Harrison was, in turn, unseated by Cleveland; 1980 Jimmy Carter was unseated by Ronald Reagan. Both Ds were unseated during realigning periods for the Rs: 1860–1892 and 1968–2004.
B) Democratic bare hold, where Barack Obama becomes first re-elected incumbent with electoral-vote decline since 1916 Woodrow Wilson — despite 2008 being the first election in a realigning period for the Ds. (Due to voting pattern, this scenario is the one I tend to dismiss. If he’s suffering such decline, the electorate tends to let these going-south-numbers make enough of the difference to sweep out the incumbent and/or flip party control.)
C) Democratic retained (variation on status quo), where Obama does some color-trading with select states (no greater than five would be involved). This would come from a modest gain in his popular-vote margin (say, 3 to 5 percent). Theoretically, the R challenger gets the pickup in Indiana (and, perhaps, the 2nd congressional district in Nebraska). D incumbent — who doesn’t lose No. 10 most-populous North Carolina (party’s convention hosting state; Ds have lost in one, while winning the election, since 1960!) — counters with pickups between these three (all in which Obama won the female vote): Missouri (R+0.13%), Montana (R+2.38%), and Georgia (R+5.20%). If any of those three need a substitute, that would come in the form of Arizona (R+8.48%), which is seemingly more of a reach but has been — since its first in 1912 — in the column for all two-term presidents at least once. Ariz. voted with the winner its first five decades (1910s till the 1950s), and gave the flip/carriage to Bill Clinton’s re-election in 1996. (45%/45% was the male/female support for Obama in 2008. Females drew back, after giving John Kerry 47%, to give more support for home son John McCain.) Electoral vote — with consideration to reallocation — would go from 365, in 2008, to somewhere in the 370s but not beyond the 380s.
D) Democratic landslide. If this scenario were to play out in 2012, it would make Barack Obama just the fifth two-termer — given R-vs.-D. — to retain every state won in first election and build from there. (The other four were 1864 Abraham Lincoln, 1936 Franklin Roosevelt, 1972 Richard Nixon, and 1984 Ronald Reagan. What would enable this is a bomb of an opposition party’s nominee. That explained all four others, against George McClellan, Alf Landon, George McGovern, and Walter Mondale.) Basically, he’d pick up nearly all or every state in John McCain’s column by 10 points or less: Mo., Mont., Ga., Ariz., plus South Dakota (R+8.45%), North Dakota (R+8.65%), South Carolina (R+8.95%), and the 1st congressional district in Nebraska. Possibly, outside the single digit, select others under 20%, like Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia, Louisiana, Nebraska (statewide or whole), and Kansas; well… it would stem from essentially doubling his national 2008 margin of 7.26%. Electoral vote would shoot past the 400 mark.
