Class Warfare: The White House Has Thought It Through
In the New York Times Magazine this morning, "Here Comes Class Warfare," a fascinating piece of analysis by the pollster and statistician Nate Silver.
Briefly put, Silver finds that if Obama were to campaign on class warfare, losing votes among those who make over $100,000 a year but gaining votes among those who make less than $50,000, he might lose a couple of states, notably Colorado, Virginia and New Jersey, but he would gain more than half a dozen, particularly in the Midwest.
Although "Santorum would probably be weaker than Romney in the popular vote," Silver notes,
Republicans wouldn’t care about that...if Santorum carried Ohio and Michigan — and perhaps even his home state, Pennsylvania — places where economic concerns tend to take precedence. Under these conditions, in fact, Republicans might be able to win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote.
I am not quite ready to suggest that Santorum would be a better nominee than Romney. But the electability gap between the two is closer than it might appear because of the way Santorum’s strengths could play in the Electoral College.
Whomever the GOP nominates, Silver concludes, "the Obama folks...[will] be acting from a place of relative strength--so long as the economic numbers remain decent."
If the economy tips backward toward recession because of the situation in Europe or tensions in the Middle East, Obama would go right back to being an underdog against either Romney or Santorum.
So, who wants to bet on there being nine months of no bad news?