One potential 2012 scenario I have been considering for the past week is that his biggest threat to re-election in 2012 might come from a third-party, rather than from Republicans. This threat would be in the mold of a more populist and likeable Michael Bloomberg, or a more informed and less insane Ross Perot, rather than a minor party such as the Greens or Libertarians rising from obscurity. He would be male, white, extremely wealthy, have no real downticket support, center-right (possibly hard right-wing on economics), and fueled by corporate, big media, bi-partisan elitist, punditry disgust with Barack Obama. I term this the "billionaire king" scenario, and in the extended entry I describe how it could play out.
Here is how the "billionaire king" third-party challenge to Obama works:
Could have been a lot worse for Republicans: The Republican Party is extremely unpopular right now, and not in a position to reclaim the Presidency even if Obama himself becomes unpopular. McCain, as the most popular Republican in the nation for almost a decade, severely limited the damage to what otherwise would have been a double-digit thumping. Obama's race probably also kept his margin down by 2-3%. Democrats could have won this election by at least 11%, and possibly by 14%. Further, demographics continue to shift toward Democrats, as the non-white and / or non-Christian demographic shift that fueled Obama's ridiculous margins among under 30 voters and, to a somewhat lesser extent, among all under 45 voters, will increase their share of the electorate. Finally, the country won't forget the disasters of Republican governance in just four years, and just will not see them as a viable alternative in four years time even if Obama should stumble. Without McCain, with a less favorable demographic outlet, with the memory of the Bush years, and with utterly massive deficits in both chambers of Congress, Republican chances of returning to power by 2012 seem extremely limited to me.
Republicans will shift to the right: Further damaging Republican chances of reclaiming political control over the next four years (I think a six to fourteen year comeback is possible for Republicans, but not four), is that they will continue to shift to the right. All of the power structures pushing them to the right remain intact. Conservative media is intact, if downgraded in value. The Club for Growth isn't going anywhere in primaries. Still intact theocon groups are arguing. that the reason Republicans lost is because they didn't move to the right. Republican "moderates" in Congress have been harvested to the point of extinction in primaries and general elections alike. No people or institutions remain to push them to the left. It is all right-wing all the time here on out for Republicans, even more so than the current manifestation of the party.
Theocons could win bama complete control of the Republican Party: The coming fight in the Republican Party is going to center on Sarah Palin. McCain staffers are eager to blame the loss on Palin, and most of the punditry will probably go along with this. However, there are two flaws in this argument. First, it doesn't make any sense, because McCain picked Palin, and thus whatever damage she did to McCain's campaign is actually his own fault. Second, there are more theocons in the Republican Party than there are neocons or corporate cons. Huckabee's extremely underfunded campaign belied their numbers, as he only shot to national attention in December, which is too late to make a final charge. In the meantime, McCain kept eeking out narrow victories in numerous states primarily on the strength of media love, short-term internal Republican disgust with Bush, and an electability argument. In four years time, no Republicans will believe that a "moderate" like McCain is more electable, and smaller numbers of them will look back on Bush with the same disgust they currently hold. While polls currently show Romney as the favorite for the 2012 Republican nomination, that is only because those same polls show Huckabee and Palin splitting the theocon vote. If someone can consolidate the theocon vote in the 2012 Republican primaries, all of the factors listed here could very well propel that candidate to the nomination.
The corporate cons hate the theocons: The corporate and media elite despised both Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin. They didn't contribute to Huckabee's chronically underfunded campaign, and never took him seriously even after he won a huge victory in Iowa. In a very similar vein, hundreds of newspapers and pundits and elites like Colin Powell said that they turned on John McCain because he chose Sarah Palin. In perhaps the largest demographic shift of all-time, Obama even won the $200K+ vote for crying out loud, and I am sure that Sarah Palin had as much to do with that as the stock market crash. If she, Huckabee or some other "hillbilly" theocon, as they are now dismissively labeled, were to win the Republican nomination in 2012, none of the corporate or media elites would support them. And with the problems the Republican Party is facing, they would indeed be entirely unelectable.
The Village could turn on Obama: A lot of factors contributed to Obama's victory, but one of the undertold stories is how he was, in fact, supported by media and money elites. For the first time in decades, the Democratic nominee received vastly more favorable media coverage than the Republican nominee, which is particularly surprising given that McCain was the Republican nominee. Also, despite his vast small donor and grassroots army, Obama also received more big money support, both in terms of donations and in terms of votes, than did McCain. Bush and Republicans had so severely threatened what the elites in America value--for one thing, the stock market--that these elites actually turned to Democrats in this election.
However, unless he tows the center-right line they are demanding, the Village could turn on Obama just as easily as it moved in favor of him. This is the point where a third-party "billionaire king" challenge to Obama could manifest itself. If the Democratic trifecta does in fact govern in a progressive manner, expect a severe elitist backlash that will make Village hatred of the Clintons seem like a quaint, familial hazing. This could open the door for a mildly populist billionaire king, who could be championed by media and money elites, be supported by a wave of conservative Democrats who were never really culturally comfortable with Obama, round-up the disaffected "moderate" corporate Republicans who would feel homeless, and combine it all with a dash of populist American exceptionalism that could pull in Libertarians and Perotistas.
Would this coalition be enough to function as a real threat? It combines Bloomberg supporters, LieberDems, Rockerfeller Republicans, and Peroistas with Village backing and enough money to outspend even Obama. A three-way campaign involved a Republican theocon nominee, the billionaire king, and Obama could send the electoral map into chaos. While I wouldn't bet on the billionaire king in such a scenario, I also wouldn't count him out.
