Forecasting the 2012 Election

The InstaPundit noted that President Obama is not doing so well at the In Trade crowd sourcing website.  The InstaPundit links to this blog that talks to the data.  At the same time, none of the Republican candidates for the Party's nomination are doing all that well at In Trade.

In addition, the InstaPundit has this thought:

Plus, speculation that he’ll start a war to boost his popularity.  My guess is that, as with the stimulus spending and quantitative easing, we’re past the point of diminishing returns there.  Even I have to stop and think to remember all the countries where we’re currently at war, or at least at “kinetic military action.”

At the Immaculate we include four wars in our Prayers of the Faithful these days.

The third link (Zero Hedge, repeated here) includes an embedded paper that talks about war and presidential popularity.

ABSTRACT

Extensive research demonstrates that war casualties depress incumbent popularity.  The present study argues that analyses of the political costs of warfare should also account for the financial toll of wars since a) financial costsof wars are substantial, b) these costs are publicly observed and understoodand c) fiscal policy affects incumbents’ approval ratings. Empirical evidence based on US data for the 1948-2008 period supports this theoretical claim:  pecuniary costs of warfare either directly affect presidential popularity (e.g., in the Korean War) or their inclusion affects the predicted political cost of war casualties (e.g., in the Korean and Iraq/Afghanistan Wars).  Interestingly, the adverse effect of war-spending is strongest under favourable economic conditions (i.e. low unemployment)

Back to the numbers, they seem to go along with what Analyst Charlie Cook says, it is the Republicans to lose.  Mr Cook's view is that the Republicans need to appeal to moderates as well at the Tea Party.

Regards  —  Cliff