President Obama's Re-election Chances
Dartmouth welcomed the Gallup Poll's editor-in-chief, Frank Newport, to campus yesterday for the closing lecture in our "Leading Voices in Politics and Policy" series. His assessment of President Obama's re-election chances was negative:
Ten presidents have run for re-election since we’ve had modern polling, since Harry Truman. Seven of them have been successful, and three have been defeated. … in August before his election year his current 38 percent job approval rating is lower than any other president who was successfully re-elected. So history would say he’s in big trouble.
There has been a rash of commentary in recent weeks about what the Obama Administration could have done better. (Pick up one thread here and follow it back.) At a very general level, I think President Obama's biggest problem is that he wants to be the president who transcends politics. The president who wants to transcend politics will be a patsy for a Congress that doesn't.
At the level of policy, I don't see why Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and ARRA are not policies that he can run on. And remember that I am a conservative saying this. The first provides badly needed insurance reform and greater health care access to millions. It does so at too high a projected cost (primarily the design of the subsidies up to 400% of the poverty level), in my opinion, but it is a step forward. The second improves the framework for preventing financial crises and resolving them once they arrive. A lot will depend on whether the new regulatory structure actually raises capital requirements, clamps down on the most abusive practices, and puts a profligate financial institution out of its misery at its first opportunity. And the stimulus package was either too small if it was to be "timely, targeted, and temporary" or simply spent on the wrong things (consumption, not public investment). But the president can make the case that it provided assistance when assistance was needed. The economy may not improve rapidly enough for any of this to matter, but I reject any suggestion that he cannot make a credible case for re-election based on his policies.
At the level of tactics, President Obama's actions have been puzzling in some cases. He should never, as a matter of principle, allowed the Bush era tax cuts on the highest income groups to be renewed. He ran away from a fight, lost credibility with his base, and gained little in return. The critical part of engaging in that fight would have been to use the tools available to him through the political process to block the agenda of Congressional Republicans. I find it hard to believe that his fiscal policy changes he has enacted would have turned out materially worse for him if the Democrats did not have the majority in the Senate and the Constitution did not afford him a veto.
Sometimes, the way to transcend politics is to be extremely good at it.

conventional wisdom
Two things-
These type of poll number retrospectives are worthless in general but especially worthless this time. With Obama deeply unpopular and a Republican field made up of lunatics we are all but guaranteed a third party candidate. If that is the case any one of the three could potentially win.
Second, this idea that Obama is just a patsy that wants to transcend politics is lazy conventional wisdom thinking. He is not a terrible negotiator who can't get his way. He is DLC democrat that agrees with Republicans more than he disagrees. He thinks his role is to cater to the economic elite so he can raise $1 billion for his reelection.
Conventional Wisdom
Good insight on Obama basically being a kind of Blue Dog/Centrist angling for the fundraising sweet spot. I think where I depart is on the idea of a 3rd party candidate having any real chance of winning in the general election.
Obviously, weird things happen; I just don't see anybody out there who has the oomph to pull enough voters from both sides of the divide to have a legitimate shot at the title.
Third Party
I am not sure who could run a seriousthird party capping either but there has never been a bigger opening. A serious outsider running against Washington corruption would do very well. Even if they didn't win they would radically alter the dynamics of the race and probably tip the election upwards the Republican. This possibility makes Obama's calculation that he can ignore his base and still get elected seem very short-sighted.
You must be kidding
You must be kidding when you say this :
> And remember that I am a conservative saying this.
There are no conservatives writing on this blog, if the words have any meaning.
"President Obama's actions
"President Obama's actions have been puzzling "
Only if you assume that the result he wanted was significantly different from what he got. There's plenty of evidence that this assumption is not warranted.
It's like the guy wants to lose
Barack Obama: the first GOP president I ever voted for. Tax cuts for the wealthy, the Gitmo terrorist recruiting poster still in business, neoconservative policies, expansion of the trillion dollar GWOT farce, and now talk of Medicare/SS "reform."
This clown has done nothing but bring us the third term of George W. Were it not for their racist Southern Strategy base, the Republicans would love this guy.
What's the deal with Obama
For the life of me I can't figure out the strategy Obama is employing.
He appears to believe (without much evidence) that there is an army of voters yearning for his moderate, don't get too excited, let's compromise on everything form of governing. There are in fact avery large number of non-voting registered voters. The problem with Obama's strategy is they are not going to vote for him or anyone else. They simply don't care about politics or voting.
The major problem with this strategy is that you alienate or dampen the enthusiasm of your most likely voters.
My assessment of Obama is that he is not a very good politician. He knows how to take a punch but he will not or can not deliver a punch. George Bush was very lazy and didn't have a surplus of common sense. He was however, a very good politician.
I estimate Obama's likely-hood of winning reelection at less than 50% and maybe even less than 25%. The job of the US President requires a certain amount of political "street theater" or political fighting. Obama simply can't or won't bring himself up to the level required.
Not an Obama enthusiast either
I'm a lifelong democrat, and knowing a fair amount about healthcare, how he wasted his first year in office "magisterially" appearing at the end - whereas Hillary worked her but off, and how bad PPACA is, I'm pretty aggravated and have seen nothing since to significantly improve my view. So, I'm switching to Independent. I think Romney has run a smart, low key campaign to date, staying above the Tea Party fray. At the same time, apparently he's trying to run on his business leadership - how can we cut costs in America and ship jobs overseas among other things - rather than his Massachusetts governorship. And Bruce, in an off-handed way [panache come to mind here], said "Rick Perry's an idiot." So I suspect it will really be a case of voter box blues, e.g., who do you really want to not be President.