election 2012 explanation and summary

7/29/2019 Election 2012 Explanation and Summary

1/59

Scott Robert Lane

February 12th, 2013

The 2012 Presidential Election in the United States

The United Presidential Election of 2012 promised to be interesting from the very moment it

began to be considered. The conservative backlash against then-Senator Obama's election to the

Presidency in 2008 motivated and rallied the Republican Party and other faithful conservatives to begin

mobilizing, and this formed what is now known as the Tea Party Movement. Furthermore, in early

2010, President Obama, after a protracted legislative battle in Congress, signed the Patient Protection

and Affordable Care Act into law, further angering conservatives who viewed the law, which they

dubbed Obamacare, as an infringement upon individual liberty and an unwise allocation of

government revenues.

The 2010 Midterms reflected this anger, as Democrats suffered major losses. Then, in 2011, two

major legislative battles would become a prelude to the partisanship of the coming election. As the

election began to be set up in mid-2011, it became clear that the 2012 Election would be long and

protracted, unable to be definitively predicted until the very end.

Part I: The Aftermath of 2008

The 2012 Presidential Election really began as soon as the previous election, in 2008, ended.

Conservatives were already beginning to plan how they could possibly unseat the newly-elected

President Obama who, at the time, had a large amount of public support. Upon President Obama's

election, many wondered if a new era of bipartisanship in the face of fiscal crisis (the United States and

the wider world were both facing a destructive recession at the time) would be ushered in. This was

not to be, as the skirmish over the new President's stimulus proposal proved.

From the beginning, there was conflict over the bill. While few questioned that the economy


2/59

needed help, there was a significant problem with the proposal in the eyes of Republicans: it spent

money. A lot of money. $831,000,000,000.00 (831 billion dollars) over ten years (from 2009 to 2019),

to be exact, to be spent on such things as: tax relief ($288 billion), state and local fiscal relief ($144

billion), infrastructure and science ($111 billion), health care ($59 billion), education and training ($53

billion), energy ($43 billion), and protecting the vulnerable ($81 billion).

President Obama responded to conservative criticism of the spending by stating that such

spending would be necessary to jump-start recovery programs and heal the economy. Still, most

conservatives would not have it, and political polarization was inevitable, with liberal commentators

essentially calling Republicans sore losers and conservative commentators essentially, and sometimes

directly, calling the bill a form of Socialism.

Work on a stimulus package for the ailing economy was started by the Senate on January 6th,

2009, two weeks prior to President-Elect Obama's swearing-in ceremony. The House of

Representatives began work on the bill on January 26th. The House passed its version of the bill on

January 28th, with 244 votes for and 188 votes against. All but eleven Democratic Representatives

voted for the bill, and the bill received no Republican support. The Senate passed its version of the bill

on February 10th, with 61 votes for and 38 votes against. All Senate Democrats voted in favor, along

with three moderate Senate Republicans: Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter.

The vote tallies made it clear that what many thought would be the beginning of a bipartisan era

was actually the beginning of a hyper-partisan era, in which the Republicans and the Democrats in

Congress would continually battle against one another, each trying to achieve their own agenda. It was

this constant skirmishing and lack of compromise that eventually drove public approval ratings of

Congress to below 20%. It also handed President Obama an important weapon during his campaign for

re-election in 2012: he could run against a do-nothing Congress, much as one of his predecessors,

President Truman, had done in his tough bid for re-election in 1948.

Now, back to the stimulus package. Because the Senate had amended the House version of the


3/59

bill, there were now two separate bills: the House version and the Senate version. These two bills had

to go to conference to hash out the differences between them and create a bill acceptable to both

chambers. This was done on February 11th. The bill was passed by the House on February 13th, with

246 voting for and 176 voting against. All but seven Democrats voted for the bill, and all Republicans

voted against. The bill was passed by the Senate on February 13th, with 60 voting for and 38 voting

against. All Democrats voted for the bill, along with the same three moderate Republican Senators:

Collins, Snowe, and Specter. The bill was signed into law by President Obama on February 17th, thus

ending the first of many major legislative battles during his term.

Not long after the law was enacted, the Tea Party Movement held its first public protest, which

criticized the federal mortgage refinancing plan. This was the beginning of a vocal movement that

reached its height during the Health Care debate of late 2009 and early 2010. The Tea Party would go

on to influence many Republican Senate primaries in the 2010 and 2012 Senate Elections, supporting

very conservative Republicans over the establishment Republicans. The most high-profile and

memorable of these candidates were Christine O'Donnell (Delaware), Sharon Angle (Nevada), Rand

Paul (Kentucky), and Marco Rubio (Florida) in 2010 and Richard Mourdock (Indiana) in 2012. All of

these individuals won the Republican Senate primary in their state for their given year. Rubio and Paul

won the general Senate elections in their states, while O'Donnell, Angle, and Mourdock lost their races.

The movement would also help shape, for better or worse, the image of the Republican Party,

due to their influence in the Party's primaries. Due to some of its positions and controversies resulting

from some of its members' behavior, it may well have damaged the Republican Party's image in the

2012 Elections. For example, there were allegations of racism as well as homophobia on the part of

some Tea Party members, though this likely does not reflect the spirit of the movement at large. Polls

conducted by the University of Washington and CBS/New York Times have indicated a higher

prevalence within the Tea Party than in general public of the beliefs that President Obama was born in a

foreign nation and that the government should not guarantee racial equality. Many have also taken issue


4/59

with the Tea Party's anti-tax, anti-entitlement, and anti-abortion (sometimes even in the case of rape)

stances, viewing them as politically extreme.

Part II: The Battle over Health Care

The next large-scale legislative battle of the President Obama's first term, and perhaps the most

memorable and controversial, was over his and Congressional Democrats' health care reform proposals.

The Tea Party, by my personal estimation, reached its zenith during this conflict, becoming extremely

vocal in their opposition and, in a few instances, creating great controversy for themselves. The

exchanges between Democrats and Republicans in the congressional debates over the proposal were

often very heated and vocal as well, sometimes going almost to the point of forgetting the dignity of

Congress. In the end, the measure was passed, but it was passed imperfectly, relying on some backroom

deals and a complicated legislative maneuver to arrive at President Obama's desk. The battle had a

great influence on the 2010 Mid-term Elections and the 2012 Presidential Election, with Republicans

vowing to repeal the law, which they hated, if they were elected in great enough numbers.

A health care reform plan began to take shape in March, 2009, when President Obama met with

health care industry leaders and requested that Congress get to work on a bill. The bill that took form in

the proceeding months included among its key provisions:

Banning pre-existing conditions from influencing premiums costs

Expanding Medicaid

Allowing children to stay on their parents' health care plan until the age of 26

Mandating that employers provide health insurance to employees if the number of

employees exceeds 50

Mandating that employers pay for a certain percentage of employees' health care

premiums after the total business payroll exceeded a certain amount


5/59

Mandating that employers providing health care insurance must provide coverage for

contraception as part of the plan (unless the employer is a religious institution)

Mandating that individuals purchase health care insurance or pay a fine

Imposing a surtax on tanning, income above $1,000,000.00, and medical devices

Prohibiting insurers from implementing spending caps

Creating tax credits to help individuals and businesses pay for insurance

Setting maximum out-of-cost premium expenses for individuals (with the highest being

9.5% of income)

Setting up state-based health care exchanges

One proposal that did not make it into the final bill was the Public Option, a government-run

health insurance provider that would have competed with private insurance providers. This measure

was a part of the House bill but was stripped from the Senate bill in order to make sure that enough

Conservative Democrats supported the bill to avoid a filibuster (60 votes are required to end debate on

a bill in the Senate, rather than a simple majority of 51). That will be discussed in more detail later on.

Even in the early stages of the debate, it was clear that the Congressional Republicans would be

opposed to the proposed reforms. In July of 2009, Republican Senator Jim Demint said, during a

conference call, that If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him..

His comment may or may not have reflected the motivations of the wider Republican Party, but it made

it clear that Republicans would make every effort to prevent the reforms from becoming law and would

take every opportunity to criticize them in the public sphere.

Similar to their position during the debate over the stimulus in early 2009, the Republicans

believed that the health care reforms would needlessly increase the public debt. Furthermore, they were

opposed to the new regulations and taxes that would be put in place by the reforms. In short, the


6/59

conflict over health care was a conflict over the role of government: should the government be able to

spend large sums, create new programs and regulations, expand existing programs, and impose new

taxes to solve the problem of many people not having access to affordable health care, or should free-

market solutions be the ideal in confronting that issue?

The Tea Party reaction to the proposal was strong, and they staged public protests in reaction to

it. They also joined in with the Republican Party in calling the proposed legislation a government

takeover of health care. Specifically, they were likely opposed to the price-tag that the reforms would

come with (despite the fact that the reforms would actually decrease the deficit due to savings and new

taxes), the expansion of what some of them viewed as un-earned entitlements, and the new

regulations and mandates that would be enacted under the proposal.

It was during the protests that the Tea Party generated a great deal of controversy for itself.

Allegations of racism and homophobia occurred when some protestors allegedly shouted the n-word

at black Representatives and the f-word (rhyming with bag it) at Representative Barney Frank

(who is gay). Whether these events actually occurred has never been irrefutably proven or dis-proven.

Additionally, some Tea Party protestors mocked a pro-reform counter-protestor who had Parkinson's

disease, throwing dollar bills at him and saying If you're looking for a handout, you're on the wrong

end of town.. These incidents captured media attention and likely helped negatively shape public

perception of the Tea Party, though they likely do not reflect the attitude and spirit of the movement at

large.

Now, we will look at the detailed legislative path that the proposals followed. From the first

time bill proposals were discussed to the day that President Obama signed the final bill into law, the

debate took a year and eighteen days. The House and the Senate differed in their original versions of

the bill, most significantly on the issues of abortion funding and the Public Option. Thus, the final bill

needed to be a compromise and would eventually need to be passed in the Senate via a complicated

legislative maneuver so that a filibuster could be avoided.


7/59

Actual legislative work did not begin on health care reform until October 29th, 2009, when the

House introduced the Affordable Health Care for America Act. The bill passed the House on November

7th, 220 to 215, with all but 39 House Democrats voting for, and all but one House Republican (Joseph

Cao) voting against. The bill included an amendment proposed by Bart Stupak and Joseph Pitts, the

Stupak-Pitts Amendment, that barred use of federal funds for abortion services with exceptions for

rape, incest, and danger to the life of the mother. This amendment played a significant role during the

end-game of the health care reform legislative battles, as the Senate did not include it in its version of

the bill.

The Senate decided not to take up the House bill and instead used another bill that had been

previously passed by the House, dealing with tax breaks for service members, as the vehicle for its own

bill. The Senate had to do this because all revenue-related bills must originate in the House. The Senate

version was called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

When the time came for the Senate to begin piecing together its bill, there were two major

obstacles to clear: Senators Ben Nelson (Democrat) and Joe Lieberman (Independent who caucused

with Democrats). These two Senators had demands for inclusions to, and exclusions from, the Senate

bill. If these demands were not met, they would not vote to end debate on the bill, thus preventing it

from ever coming to a vote. Remember: 60 votes are needed in the Senate to end debate on a bill, and

the Democrats in the Senate, if the Independents who caucused with them are included, numbered

exactly 60. Therefore, if even one Democrat or Independent sided against the bill, it would never even

be voted on.

Nelson wanted to a measure to prohibit the use of public funds for abortion services to be

included in the Senate bill, much like the Stupak-Pitts Amendment in the House version. Until such a

measure, or something close to it, was added, he would refuse to vote to end debate on the bill, thus

effectively filibustering it. His vote was secured when the Senate bill received two additions: one

allowing the states to choose not to allow insurance exchanges to provide abortion service coverage


8/59

and another that would provide federal reimbursement for the cost Nebraska (Nelson's home state)

would have to pay for the mandated Medicaid expansion under the bill (about $100 million). The

second addition came to be called the Cornhusker Kickback and it was repealed later, during the end-

game of the health care skirmish.

Lieberman wanted to eliminate the Public Option from the Senate bill and not expand Medicare.

Until theses demands were met, he would also filibuster the bill. Because of this, the Public Option was

left out of the Senate bill and Medicare was (to my knowledge) not significantly expanded. His support

being won by these exclusions, Lieberman voted for cloture as well.

The Senate voted to end debate on the bill on December 23rd, 60 to 39. All Democrats and

Independents caucusing with Democrats voted to end debate and all Republicans voted against. The bill

passed the Senate with the exact same vote tallies and party-alignment the next day (December 24th,

Christmas Eve of 2009).

It seemed that now, everything was going swimmingly for the bill: a form of it had passed both

chambers and a compromise would be reached that both chambers could support. But this was not to be

the case because on January 19th, 2010, a special Senate election to replace the deceased former-Senator

Ted Kennedy was won by Scott Brown, a Republican. The Senate seat, which was being held by Paul

Kirk (Democrat) during the special election, would now go to a man who would almost certainly

oppose the bill, thus not giving the Democrats enough votes to end debate on the compromise bill when

it came back to the Senate. There would not be a compromise bill, and the House would have to pass

the Senate's version of the bill or else be responsible for the failure of the reform effort. By passing the

Senate version, the House would avoid sending the bill back to the Senate (where it would certainly be

filibustered). Therefore, it would be the Senate bill that eventually ended up on President Obama's desk

for signature into law.

The major obstacle in the House was Bart Stupak and his followers. Since the Senate had not

amended its bill to fully ban public funds for abortions services (which the House did via the Stupak-


9/59

Pitts Amendment), Stupak and his followers (who numbered anywhere from 15 to 20) were unwilling

to support its version of the bill.

Stupak and his followers were eventually persuaded to support the bill when President Obama

signed an executive order re-affirming the Hyde Amendment (which, essentially, did the exact same

thing as the Stupak-Pitts Amendment). The House passed the Senate's version of the bill on March 21st,

219 to 212, with all but 34 Democrats voting for and all Republicans voting against. Joseph Cao did not

give his support this time, likely because of the abortion issue. President Obama signed the bill on

March 23rd, making the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act the law of the land.

There was one last thing to do, though: there would be a compromise bill after all, and it would

come in the form of an entirely separate bill that would modify the just-enacted health care law. This

bill was called the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Among its modifications to

the new law were:

Increasing the tax credits that could be used to purchase insurance

Eliminating the Cornhusker Kickback that was used to get Senator Nelson's vote for the

Senate bill and other special Senator-specific deals

Lowering the penalty for not purchasing insurance slightly

Offering larger subsidies to low income groups

Implementing a $2,000.00 fine per employee for employers not offering coverage to their

workforces if the workforce exceeds 50 (the first 30 employees do not count towards the fine)

Increasing the Medicare brand-name and generic drug discounts

On March 25th, both chambers passed the Reconciliation bill. The House passed it 220 to 207. A

few hours later, the Senate passed it 56 to 43. All Senate Republicans and three Senate Democrats

(Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, and Mark Pryor) voted against. The Reconciliation bill did not need 60


10/59

votes to end debate on it in the Senate because it was used for the purpose of making revenue-related

changes to an existing law (this is the complicated legal maneuver I talked about earlier). President

Obama signed the modifications into law on March 30th, thus ending the five-month legislative battle

over health care reform.

But though the legislative battle had ended, the ideological conflict had not. This conflict would

eventually find its way to the Supreme Court, which issued a ruling just as the Republican Presidential

Primaries of 2012 had ended. The ruling, which will be revealed later on, was a rallying cry for

conservatives and put focus on the controversial health care law just in time for the general election

season.

Part III: The 2010 Midterm Elections

The Congressional Elections of 2010 (also called the 2010 Midterm Elections) resulted in major

losses by the Democratic Party in the House and Senate. The Party lost its majority in the House and

barely hung on to its majority in the Senate. During these elections, four Republican primaries were

won by a Tea Party-endorsed conservative rather than a moderate Republican. Two of these Tea Party

candidate went on to win the general election in their state, and the other two went on to lose.

On November 2nd, 2010, Republicans gained six seats in the Senate, decreasing the Democratic

members to 51 (53 if Independents who caucused with the Democratic Party are counted) and

increasing their own members to 47. In the House Elections, Republicans gained sixty-three seats,

increasing their members to 242 and decreasing the Democratic members to 193.

The dramatic losses by the Democrats in 2010 can likely best be explained by the health care

battle that preceded the elections. Popular opinion on the bill was mixed from the start. Key provisions

of the bill, mentioned alone, tended to get the support of the majority of the public, but the requirement

that everyone purchase health insurance was an exception to this. This provision, which came to be

called the individual mandate, was likely the main reason that the majority of the public disapproved


11/59

of the bill and chose to elect officials whom they believed would work to repeal it.

The loss of the Democratic House majority would increase partisanship in Congress. The Senate

and the House, do to their different Party make-up, would clash on important issues in the times to

come. The payroll tax cut, doc fix, and unemployment insurance extensions of late 2011 and early

2012 would be an excellent example of this.

Another narrative emerging from the 2010 Midterms was the rise of the Tea Party's influence on

the Republican Party. Four Tea-Party endorsed candidates defeated establishment Republicans during

the Senate Primaries: Marco Rubio in Florida, Rand Paul in Kentucky, Christine O'Donnell in

Delaware, and Sharon Angle in Nevada. With two of these candidates winning the general election and

the other two losing, these candidates had a mixed record.

Marco Rubio defeated a fellow Republican who was widely believed to be the front-runner,

Governor of Florida Charlie Crist, during the Republican Senate primary in Florida. This upset was

likely due to Crist's support of the stimulus bill signed by President Obama in February, 2009. Rubio

was opposed to the bill, and was thus probably viewed as a purer Republican. Crist continued to run

for the seat, but switched his party banner to independent. The Democratic candidate was Kendrick

Meek. Rubio won 49% of the vote in the general election, while Crist won 30% and Meek won 20%.

Rand Paul won the Republican Senate primary in Kentucky by accusing his opponent, Trey

Grayson (Secretary of State of Kentucky), of being a career politician and not being a true

conservative. The Democratic candidate was Jack Conway. Paul won the election, 56% to 44%.

Christine O'Donnell won the Republican Senate primary in Delaware, defeating former

Governor of Delaware Mike Castle, most likely due to the Tea Party's drive to oust the establishment

Republican from the race. The Democratic candidate was Chris Coons. O'Donnell damaged herself

during the general election with the I'm not a Witch ad, and the fact that Delaware is generally a

Democratic state did not help her. Karl Rove, a very prominent Republican, was also skeptical of her

candidacy early on. She lost the race to Coons, who received 57% of the vote to her 40%.


12/59

Sharon Angle won the Republican Senate primary in Nevada. The Democratic candidate was

Harry Reid. Angle's candidacy was troubled from the beginning of the general election, when some

prominent Republicans supported Reid instead of her. She was damaged by her avoidance of answering

questions from the press and possibly by some of her political positions which included support for

eliminating the Department of Education, opposition to the United Nations and support for the United

States withdrawing from that organization, total disbelief in global warming, opposing abortion even in

the cases of rape and incest (calling the pregnancies resulting from these cases God's plan), support

for ending Social Security by transitioning it out of the system, and support for privatizing Medicare.

She also suffered two public relations gaffes: one in which one of her campaign ads was viewed

by some as having racist overtones and another in which comments she made about the Second

Amendment (the right to bear arms) appeared to some people to imply support for a military revolution

against Congress. All of this damage taken together ultimately doomed Angle's candidacy, and she lost

to Reid, receiving 45% of the vote to his 50%.

While the larger narrative on November 2nd, 2010, was that Democrats had suffered major

election defeats, the smaller narrative concerned the Tea Party's influence on the Republican Party and

the consequences of this influence. Rubio and Paul, who both defeated establishment Republicans

during their states' Senate primaries after being endorsed by the Tea Party, went on to win the seats they

campaigned for. But O'Donnell and Angle, who won their primaries under the same circumstances,

went on to lose their elections. Whether this was because of their affiliation with the Tea Party, their

personal positions, or their campaign gaffes is open for debate, but there is no doubt that their losses

forced the Republican Party to put emphasis back on electability during primaries. This emphasis on

electability manifested during the 2012 Republican Party Presidential Primaries, when electability was

cited as being the top concern of people voting in these contests.

Part IV: Legislative Battles in 2011


13/59

In the aftermath of the 2010 Midterms, the lame duck Congress (lame duck refers to the fact

that the next Congress had been elected) passed three major pieces of legislation before the newly-

elected Representatives and Senators were sworn in: An extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for all

taxpayers, a repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell military policy, and a nuclear arms treaty. After the

new Congress was sworn in, two major battles would take place: one over the Debt Ceiling and another

over an extension of a payroll tax cut, the doc fix (explained later), and unemployment benefits. The

eventual compromise on the Debt Ceiling would put in place something known as the Sequester,

which will be discussed in more detail later. At the same time that these two battles were occurring, the

Republican Party Presidential Primaries were beginning to take shape, and by the time the extensions

issue was resolved in February of 2012, some primaries and caucuses had already taken place.

The first major thing done by the lame duck Congress was an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts

for two years for all taxpayers. These was a slight problem with this: Democrats wanted to extend the

cuts only for those making less than $250,000.00 per year, while Republicans wanted the cuts extended

for all incomes. The Democratic proposal passed the House, but did not garner enough votes in the

Senate to avoid a filibuster. The compromise that was reached extended the cuts for all incomes, as well

as extending unemployment benefits and cutting the Social Security tax rate for employees from 6.2%

to 4.2%. The Senate passed the compromise on December 15th, 2010, 81 to 19. The House passed the

measure on December 16th, 277 to 148. President Obama signed the bill into law on December 17th.

The second major legislation enacted during the lame duck period was a repeal of the Don't

Ask, Don't Tell policy in the military, which banned soldiers from being openly gay. The most high-

profile Congressperson opposed to the repeal effort was John McCain (the Republican nominee for

President in 2008). The repeal passed the House on December 15th, 250 to 175. It passe the Senate on

December 18th, 65 to 31. President Obama signed the repeal on December 22nd.

The third and final major action of the lame duck Congress was to give consent to the

ratification of a nuclear arms treaty called New START, which would limit the number of nuclear


14/59

warheads in Russia and the United States each to between 1,500 and 1,675 units. On May 13th, the

treaty was submitted to the Senate for consent by President Obama. Some opposition to the treaty

occurred, in part because of the timing of the proposed vote. On December 22nd, the Senate voted to

give its consent for ratification of the treaty, 71 to 26 (67 votes are needed for consent to a treaty).

President Obama completed the ratification process by signing certain documents on February 2nd,

2011.

After the new Congress had been sworn in, there were two high-profile legislative battles. A

battle over raising the United States Debt Ceiling occurred in August of 2011, and a battle over the

extension of the payroll tax cut (first created by the Bush Tax Cuts extension discussed earlier),

unemployment benefits, and the doc fix. These battles highlighted the new reality in Washington:

Congress was split, with one chamber being controlled by Democrats (the Senate) and the other being

controlled by Republicans (the House). They also lowered public approval of Congress, giving

President Obama a powerful weapon during his 2012 campaign for re-election.

The first of the two major legislative battles of the new Congress, concerning the Debt Ceiling,

requires some background information. The United States Debt Ceiling is a limit on how much money

the Treasury can borrow in order to carry spending enacted by Congress. On April 4th, 2011, the

Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, informed Congress that the Debt Ceiling would be hit on August 2nd.

There was disagreement on whether, and by how much, to raise the Debt Ceiling, as well as what

conditions should be attached to it. Republicans wanted spending cuts in exchange for raising the

Ceiling, while Democrats wanted either an unconditional increase or an increase combined with tax

increases in lieu of, or in addition to, spending cuts.

The compromise eventually came on July 31st, when President Obama and House Speaker John

Boehner announced an agreement. The key provision of this agreement was what is now known as the

Sequester: a series of across-the-board spending cuts, starting in 2013 and lasting through 2021,

totaling $1.2 trillion. The House passed the agreement on August 1st, 269 to 161 (174 Republicans and


15/59

95 Democrats for, 66 Republicans and 95 Democrats against). The Senate passed the agreement August

2nd, 74 to 26 (46 Democrats and 28 Republicans for, 7 Democrats and 19 Republicans against).

President Obama signed the bill into law on the same day as the Senate passed it (August 2nd).

On August 5

th

, three days after the compromise was enacted, Standard and Poor's downgraded

the United States' credit rating from AAA to AA+, citing reluctance by Congress to raise new revenues

(in other words, raise taxes) and the possibility that the Sequester would not actually occur. The

downgrade made the stock market enter a very volatile week, as investors began to become pessimistic

about Americas future economic conditions. It also gave President Obama's critics an important and

powerful talking point during his bid for re-election.

The second battle was over an extension of the payroll tax cut, unemployment benefits, and the

doc fix (which ensured the doctors taking Medicare patients were reimbursed adequately). These

measures were set to expire at the end of 2011, so they required legislation to be extended for another

year. Republicans wanted something in exchange for these extensions: a requirement that the

administration decide whether to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline project within 60 days.

A temporary extension of the three measures, moving their expiration date to the end of

February of 2012 rather than the end of December of 2011, along with the pipeline project requirement

passed the House and Senate on December 23rd, 2011. After the Senate approved the extensions, there

was concern that the House may not pass the bill, as some in that chamber were calling for a longer-

term solution. However, due to public pressure and the fact that passage in the Senate had been vastly

bi-partisan (only 10 Senators voted against the bill), the House passed the bill the same day. President

Obama signed the bill into law later that same day.

On February 17th, 2012, year-long extensions for all three measures were approved by the

House and Senate after reconciling minor differences. The House passed the bill 293 to 132 and the

Senate passed it 60 to 36. President Obama signed the extensions into law on February 22nd.

Among the implications of the bills passed from December of 2010 to February of 2012 was a


16/59

new deadline at which three things would happen. The Bush Tax Cuts would expire at the end of 2012

and this, combined with the Sequester, created a looming Fiscal Cliff of tax increases and spending

cuts that would go into effect on January 1st, 2013, pending further action by Congress. Furthermore,

the payroll tax cut would expire on the same day. Congress would eventually address the Fiscal Cliff,

but not until after the 2012 Election. Another implication, dealing with the payroll tax cut extension,

was that the Keystone XL Pipeline was denied authorization, which gave Republicans the opportunity

to accuse President Obama of killing a job-creating project. The most likely reason that it was denied

authorization was the short time span in which the administration had to choose whether or not to

authorize it (60 days).

Part V: The Republican Primaries

It has been necessary to discuss the major legislative battles that occurred between 2009 and

2012 because they all had an impact on the upcoming election. Some, such as the health care reform

bill, had a large impact, while others, like the New START treaty, had only a small impact.

Furthermore, it was necessary to discuss the 2010 Midterms because they represented a turning point

away from the Democratic surge of 2008 and demonstrated that 2012 would be far more unpredictable

than 2008.

The early stages of the Republican Primary season would prove to be very volatile, with at least

five different candidates all having their moment in the sun before the first official contest (the Iowa

Caucus) could even be held. Bachmann, Perry, Cain, and Gingrich would all surge and then fall back.

Romney was, from the beginning, the most likely candidate to win the nomination, and each of the

more conservative candidates vied for the position of the non-Romney candidate.

Romney's only major problem was that he had held some liberal beliefs in the past, as Governor

of Massachusetts, many of which he would recant as a candidate for President. This often made him

look like a flip flopper, particularly on the issue of health care, as he had signed a health care reform


17/59

bill in Massachusetts that included an individual mandate and was now against a mandate at the federal

level, as well as the issue of abortion, as he had switched from being pro-choice to being pro-life in

2005.

During the early stages of the Primaries, particularly at the debates, the Republican candidates

sometimes damaged themselves, alienating, most likely unintentionally, certain voter groups. The

Primary season forced the candidates to the Right, as each one of them tried to appear more

conservative than his or her opponents. This was necessary because Primary campaigns rely on

appealing to the given party's base. In the long run, however, it had the potential to be damaging during

the general election, when appealing to moderates and independents was vital.

President Obama did not have to worry about this problem because, as the incumbent President,

he was almost certain to win his party's nomination. Indeed, aside from his official announcement that

he was running for re-election on April 4th, 2011, nothing worthy of recollection happened concerning

President Obama's campaign for the Democratic nomination for President. Aside from the killing of the

infamous terrorist Osama bin Laden by United States Special Forces on May 2nd, which resulted in a

poll bounce for President Obama, and an announcement concerning gay marriage rights, no major

political event directly concerning him occurred until after the Republican Primary contests had ended.

When it came time for the official contests to begin occurring, it was somewhat unclear who

would win the nomination, though Romney was the most likely candidate. The Iowa Caucus, the New

Hampshire Primary, and the South Carolina Primary demonstrated the volatility of the Primaries when

each one of these vital contests was won by a different candidate. There wasn't a presumptive nominee

until late April of 2012, and by that time, almost all of the contests had ended. Meanwhile, as the

Republicans were campaigning against each other, President Obama's campaign was free to attack

Romney without retaliation.

As the Primary season was dying down (but before the Republican National Convention),

several other occurrences took place that would influence the Election. President Obama would endorse


18/59

gay marriage rights, Governor Walker of Wisconsin would battle to survive a recall election, the

President would announce a new immigration policy, the Supreme Court would issue a ruling on

whether the health care reform act was constitutional, President Obama would damage himself with a

controversial comment, the Republican nominee would select his Vice Presidential candidate, and the

Senate race in Missouri would be re-defined when the Republican candidate made a controversial

comment on abortion. After all of this, the conventions would be held, the nominees from both parties

would be formally nominated, and the general election season would begin.

Twelve candidates joined the race for the Republican nomination, creating a wide field what

would, naturally, narrow as the race progressed. A list of candidates and the date that they officially

joined the race is below (all dates are in 2011):

Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, April 21st

Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, May 11th

Ron Paul, United States Representative from Texas, May 13th

Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, May 21st

Tim Pawlenty, former Governor of Minnesota, May 23rd

Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, June 2nd

Rick Santorum, former United States Senator from Pennsylvania, June 6th

Michele Bachmann, United States Representative from Minnesota, June 13th

Jon Huntsman, former Governor of Utah and former United States Ambassador to China, June

21st

Thaddeus McCotter, United States Representative from Michigan, July 1st

Buddy Roemer, former Governor of Louisiana, July 21st

Rick Perry, Governor of Texas, August 13th


19/59

It is worth noting that the date of Perry's candidacy, August 13th, was the same day as the Ames

Straw Poll. This poll was the first major event of the Republican Presidential Primary season, and the

result was a Bachmann victory. This resulted in a surge of support for her campaign, but this quickly

subsided after Perry entered the race. Perry, being a new candidate, excited the party's base, and this

propelled him to front-runner status. Pawlenty dropped out of the race on August 14th in light of his

poor showing in the Ames Straw Poll.

The next major event, following the Ames Straw Poll, was the debate in Simi Valley, California

on September 7th. This debate became noteworthy when Perry claimed that Social Security was a Ponzi

scheme. This may have appealed to the right wing of the Republican Party, but it likely damaged Perry

among moderates. This was perhaps Perry's first major mistake.

Next up was the debate in Tampa, Florida on September 12th. At this debate, Perry was booed

for signing an executive order requiring girls in Texas to have an HPV vaccine. Another noteworthy

incident occurred when Wolf Blitzer,the moderator, asked Ron Paul whether a man who could afford

health insurance but chose not to purchase it and later went into a coma should be allowed to simply

die. The question was likely not dealing with euthanasia, but rather with the individual mandate

provision of the health care reform bill. In response to the question, a few members of the audience

shouted Yeah!, a response that, needless to say, would not appeal to moderates. The booing of Perry's

HPV vaccine mandate signaled further decline for him.

The next debate was in Orlando, Florida on September 22nd. During this debate, a gay service

member's question of whether Don't Ask, Don't Tell would be re-instated under any of the candidates'

potential presidencies was booed. Furthermore, Perry was criticized for the Texas DREAM Act, which

allows discounted tuition for the children of illegal immigrants. Perry countered that his opponents did

not have a heart on this issue, and this comment damaged him among conservatives. Perry's overall

performance at this debate was poor, and was widely panned. McCotter dropped out of the race the

same day as the debate (September 22nd).


20/59

This debate was noteworthy for the aforementioned booing of the gay soldier's question and

criticism of the Texas DREAM Act. These occurrences may have alienated LGBT and Hispanic voters,

helping put them into President Obama's column during the general election.

Perry lost his front-runner position both because of the debates and because of his underlying

circumstances and beliefs. His connection to Texas reminded many of President George W. Bush,

whose unpopularity was a key factor in the 2008 election. Furthermore, his criticism of Medicare,

belief that the Federal Income Tax should be repealed, and total disbelief in global warming made him

unpopular among moderate Republicans and may have made him look un-electable at a time when the

Republican Party's ultimate priority was to nominate a candidate who could defeat President Obama.

He also managed to disappoint conservatives with his relatively moderate stances on immigration-

related issues. Finally, his debate performance in Orlando was very poor, and this damaged his

candidacy.

When Perry fell from the front-runner position, a new candidate surged to take it: Herman Cain.

Cain's 9-9-9 Plan, which would replace all federal taxation with a flat 9% federal tax on personal

income, business transactions, and sales, appealed to the anti-tax element of the Party. He may have

also benefited from fighting between Romney and Perry during a memorable debate in Las Vegas.

This Las Vegas debate was held on October 18th. During the debate, Perry accused Romney of

using a lawn service that employed illegal immigrants in response to the perception that Romney was

strong on immigration. As Romney tried to rebut Perry's claim, Perry interrupted , and there was

heated crosstalk. Eventually, it was discovered that Romney had fired the lawn service after learning

that they employed illegal immigrants. Romney and Perry likely damaged themselves slightly through

this heated exchange, due to the perceived rudeness of their crosstalk, and may have also, once again,

alienated Hispanic voters.

Cain's moment in the sun began to end when sexual harassment allegations against him arose in

early November. Although he denied all accusations, the toll they took on his campaign was


21/59

undeniable. He began slipping in polls and soon ended up in somewhat distant third place rather than

first or a close second. The man who took his place as the non-Romney candidate was Newt

Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House who had led the successful campaign in 1994 to put

Republicans back in control of that chamber. He had performed well in the debates, and this was likely

the key in making him look electable to primary voters.

The next memorable moment came during the debate in Rochester, Michigan on November 9th.

Perry claimed that, as President, he would eliminate three federal departments, but, after listing

Commerce and Education, he was unable to name the third one (which turned out to be Energy). This

came to be known as the oops moment of his campaign, and it further damaged him.

On December 3rd, Cain dropped out of the race, likely because of the allegations mentioned

earlier. He would briefly revive his campaign during the South Carolina Primary as a joke, using his

name, which was still on the ballot, as a proxy for Stephen Colbert. After this event, he endorsed

Gingrich.

The debate in Des Moines Iowa on December 10th was memorable as the site of Romney's

$10,000.00 bet. The incident occurred when Perry accused Romney of deleting a line about the

Massachusetts health care reform bill that he (Romney) had signed during his time as Governor from

his book. The alleged line stated that the individual mandate in Massachusetts was a model for the

nation. In light of the 2010 federal health care reform bill, which put an individual mandate in place,

this line would have made Romney look far too liberal to the conservative base. Romney proceeded to

bet Perry $10,000.00 that the line was never present. This bet, even if it was in jest, likely made

Romney appear to be out of touch with middle class and poor Americans.

In late December, during the final weeks before the Iowa Caucus, Romney-sympathetic super

PACs released many ads attacking Gingrich. This made Gingrich's hopes of winning that contest shrink

significantly. When the conservatives in Iowa saw that Gingrich was no longer a viable candidate there,

they likely turned to Santorum, who began to surge in that state. The contest in Iowa would come to be


22/59

decided by less than 50 votes because of this surge.

The last noteworthy event before the Iowa Caucus occurred when Gary Johnson dropped out of

the Republican Primary race on December 28th. Seeing little hope in wining the Republican

nomination, he decided to seek the Libertarian Party's nomination instead. He would go on to win this

nomination and receive the third highest share of votes of Election Day (November 6th, 2012).

The Iowa Caucus was held on January 3rd, 2012, and the results were projected incorrectly at

first. At first assessment, it appeared that Romney had won very narrowly, but upon further inspection,

it was declared that Santorum had won the contest by 34 votes. His extensive campaigning in the state

had paid off, and he had made the first step to being Romney's chief opponent during the Primary

season. Bachmann dropped out of the race the day after the caucus, narrowing the field to seven

candidates: Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Huntsman, Paul, and Roemer.

Another issue pertaining to the general election emerged in early January, when Romney

released only his 2010 tax return along with an estimate of what 2011's would look like. He claimed

that he did not want to release anything more because he would like to keep his tithing amounts private.

Nevertheless, this became an issue, as some believed he was hiding something more significant.

Romney would go on to pay a little less than $2 million in taxes on $13.7 million in income, for an

effective rate of 14.1%. This rate, especially on such a high income, may have damaged him and may

also have strengthened President Obama's liberal position on taxes on the wealthy.

The next contest, the New Hampshire Primary on January 10th, was easily won by Romney, who

defeated the candidate in second place, Ron Paul, by more than 15%. Huntsman, who had been relying

on a solid second-place or higher showing in New Hampshire, got third place, losing to Paul by 6%. He

dropped out of the race six days later, on January 16th, because of this. Perry left the race on January

19th, three days after Huntsman. Now, the race had only five candidates: Romney, Santorum, Gingrich,

Paul, and Roemer.

The South Carolina Primary on January 21st was won by Gingrich, and after this win his


23/59

campaign surged once again. He defeated Romney by 12% and won all but one of the state's

congressional districts. This surge would be short lived, however, because the next contest essentially

halted Gingrich's momentum.

The Florida Primary was a Romney victory by 14% with Gingrich in second place. Gingrich

had been hoping to use a win in Florida to deliver the knockout punch to Romney's campaign.

Failing that, a win would have at least helped make him the definitive non-Romney candidate. But

his loss to Romney stopped his momentum, as did the Romney victory in Nevada on February 4th

(Romney won that contest by 29%).

The race took another turn on February 7th when Santorum won all three states (Colorado,

Missouri, and Minnesota) having contests that day. He won Colorado by 5%, Missouri by 30%, and

Minnesota by 18%. From that point on, Santorum would be widely viewed as the non-Romney

candidate and Gingrich would win only one more state, bringing his final total to two states won. Still,

it would be another month before Santorum truly cemented his status as Romney's main opponent by

winning states that were vital to Gingrich.

Having just lost three contests, Romney attempted to regain momentum by campaigning to win

the CPAC straw poll, a departure from his previous no straw polls stance. He won the poll with 38%

of the vote to Santorum's 31%. Furthermore, he campaigned to win the Maine Caucuses, which were

held from February 4th to February 11th. He ended up winning the state by 4%, with Paul in second

place. He also won the Arizona and Michigan Primaries on February 28th (Arizona by 20% and

Michigan by 3%, with Santorum in second place both times), as well as the Wyoming Caucuses from

February 11th to February 29th (by 7%, with Santorum in second place) and the Washington Caucus on

March 3rd (by 13%, with Paul in second place and Santorum in third by 1%).

In the meantime, on February 22nd, Roemer left the Republican Primary race to seek the Reform

Party's nomination. He would fail to win the support of that party. His withdrawal from the race left

only four candidates (Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul) in the running.


24/59

March 6th was Super Tuesday for the 2012 Republican Primaries, as it had the highest amount

of contests in a single day: ten. Romney took six states: Alaska by 4% (with Santorum in second place),

Idaho by 44% (with Santorum and Paul tied for second place), Massachusetts by 60% (second place:

Santorum), Ohio by 1% (second place: Santorum), Vermont by 15% (second place: Gingrich), and

Virginia by 20% (second place: Paul, as no other candidates but he and Romney were on the ballot).

Santorum took three states: North Dakota by 12% (second place: Paul), Oklahoma by 6% (second

place: Romney), and Tennessee by 9% (second place: Romney). Gingrich took one state: Georgia by

21% (second place: Romney). Gingrich's win in Georgia was generally expected, as that was his home

state. He would not win any more states during the duration of the primary season.

On March 10th, Santorum won the Kansas Caucus by 30% (second place: Romney), and

Romney won the most delegates from the each of the three territories holding caucuses that day: Guam,

the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands. This was the first day that

territories held contests, and their results are recorded in terms of how many delegates each candidate

secured from them rather than how many votes each candidate received.

On March 13th, two prominent southern states held primaries: Mississippi and Alabama.

Santorum won both of these, Mississippi by 2% and Alabama by 6%. Romney and Gingrich essentially

tied for second place in both contests (Gingrich was slightly ahead of Romney both times, but not by

more than 1%). Hawaii also held a primary that day, along with a caucus in American Samoa. Romney

won both of these contests, Hawaii by 20% (second place: Santorum) and the American Samoa with six

delegates (no other candidate received any).

On March 18th, Puerto Rico held a primary, which Romney won by 75% (second place:

Santorum). This is the only territory to have its results recorded in terms of the number of votes

candidates received in this paper.

On March 20th, Romney won the Illinois Primary by 12% (second place: Santorum). On March

24th, Santorum won the Louisiana Primary by 22% (second place: Romney). By this time, it was clear


25/59

that Gingrich's former Southern Strategy wouldn't work, as Santorum had taken three Deep South

states to Gingrich's two. Three days after the Louisiana Primary, on March 27th, Gingrich re-structured

his campaign by scaling it down, a sign that he might be preparing for a possible end to his campaign.

Romney began receiving high-profile endorsements from establishment Republicans towards

the end of March, signaling that he was viewed by many as the clear front-runner and inevitable

nominee. Santorum may have finally emerged as the main alternative to Romney, but while he and

Gingrich had been battling for that spot, Romney had profited from the split in the more conservative

Republican vote. He was now on track to becoming the presumptive nominee.

On April 3rd, Romney won the District of Columbia Primary by 58% (second place: Paul),

where Santorum was not on the ballot. He also won the Maryland Primary by 20% (second place:

Santorum) and the Wisconsin Primary by 5% (second place: Santorum). Santorum had been relying on

a win in Wisconsin to remain viable as candidate. After this primary, Romney and Santorum both took

a break from campaigning to allow their staff to be with their families on Easter. Santorum used this

break to have a strategy meeting. On April 10th, he ended his campaign, leaving only Romney,

Gingrich, and Paul in the running. In light of this development, Gingrich hoped he could revive his

campaign by winning the Delaware Primary.

On April 24th, Romney won all five of the contest being held, all of which were primaries. He

won Connecticut by 54% (second place: Paul), Delaware by 29% (second place: Gingrich), New York

by 48% (second place: Paul), Pennsylvania by 39% (second place: Santorum, even though he had

ended his campaign), and Rhode Island by 39% (second place: Paul).

Gingrich had been relying on Delaware to revive his candidacy, but Romney had defeated him

soundly in that state, rendering his campaign no longer viable. In fact, with the results from

Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island, it became mathematically

impossible for any candidate other than Romney to get the number of delegates necessary to win the

nomination on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention (unless all of the non-Romney


26/59

delegates were freed by all but one non-Romney candidate and they then united behind this

candidate, which was a very unlikely scenario). The day after these contests, April 25th, the Republican

National Committee declared Romney the presumptive nominee and began to put its resources behind

him.

On May 2nd, Gingrich ended his campaign, leaving only Romney and Paul to compete for the

nomination. He planned to endorse Romney at a later event. On May 7th, after a visit from Romney,

Santorum endorsed the Romney campaign as well, citing Romney's conservatism and pro-family

political stances as well as the need for President Obama to be defeated in November.

On May 8th, Romney won the Indiana Primary by 49% (second place: Paul), the North Carolina

Primary by 55% (second place: Paul), and the West Virginia Primary by 58% (second place: Santorum).

At this point, it was a two-man race between the candidate who had already been declared the

presumptive nominee and an opponent who was disliked by much of the Party because of his

libertarian foreign policy stances and certain extreme beliefs that would very likely make him un-

electable in the general election, such as his total opposition to the federal income tax, support for

states' right to secede, and opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Furthermore, Paul would not be

able to rely on freed delegates to come to him from Gingrich or Santorum's column, because they had

both endorsed Romney. Thus, the primaries were essentially over: it was clear to everyone by this point

that Romney would be the nominee, and this was reflected by his victory margins in the remaining

contests.

On May 9th, an issue dealing with the general election took shape when President Obama

endorsed the legalization of gay marriage. Prior to this, he had thought that civil unions were adequate.

This announcement likely ensured that the LGBT vote would be solidly for President Obama in

November. This, along with growing support for legalized gay marriage, probably gave the President

the political motivation to make the announcement, though he also cited conversations with gay friends

and his wife and two daughters as a factor.


27/59

On May 14th, Paul announced that he would no longer be campaigning in states that had not yet

held their contests, as he did not have the money to do so. Instead, he would seek delegates from

conventions of states that had already held primaries. He ended up getting a plurality of delegates from

four states (Minnesota, Iowa, Louisiana, and Maine) despite not winning a plurality of the popular vote

in any of them. During the Republican National Convention, he would receive the votes of a plurality

of delegates from Nevada, Minnesota, and Iowa, likely due to restructuring after Santorum and

Gingrich formally freed their delegates.

On May 15th, Romney won the Nebraska Primary by 57% (second place: Santorum) and the

Oregon Primary by 58% (second place: Paul). On May 22nd, he won the Arkansas Primary by 55%

(second place: Paul) and the Kentucky Primary by 54% (second place: Paul). On May 29th, he claimed

to have received more than the number of delegates needed to win the nomination when he won the

Texas Primary by 57% (second place: Paul), though other sources estimate that he did not reach this

number until after the contests on June 5 th.

On May 31st, after failing to win any third party support, Buddy Roemer ended his campaign for

President. He was not able to be nominated on the Reform Party ticket, and he failed to win the

Moderate Whig Party's nomination as well. This meant that he would have a lack of viable ballot

access, so his campaign at that point would have been totally unfeasible had he decided to maintain it.

On June 5th, Romney won the California Primary by 69% (second place: Paul), the Montana

Caucus by 54% (second place: Paul), the New Jersey Primary by 71% (second place: Paul), the New

Mexico Primary by 62% (second place: Santorum), and the South Dakota Primary by 53% (second

place: Paul). It was after these contests that he unquestionably acquired enough delegates to be

nominated on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention. The final contest and the

Convention itself were now just formalities (and, in the case of the Convention, a general election

campaign event).

On the same day as these contests, Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin (a Republican) won an


28/59

election that was scheduled in order to give the voters a chance to recall him from office. He defeated

his opponent, Mayor Tom Barrett of Milwaukee, 53% to 46%. The Democrats thought that they had a

real chance of winning the recall election, but their internal polling turned out to be inaccurate. The

reason that the recall election was being held was a contentious debate in 2011 over a bill proposed by

Walker that limited the collective bargaining rights of public sector employees, with the exception of

police and firemen.

This election had two major consequences for the general election. First, President Obama's

campaign would not be able to take Wisconsin, which he won by 14% in 2008, for granted during the

general election. Wisconsin would become a battleground state in 2012, shrinking President Obama's

electoral map somewhat. Second, unions might take the results, which were unfavorable for them, as a

call to action and work for the benefit of President Obama's campaign. By turning out union members

to vote, they would be able to aid the campaign, as union voters tend to vote for the Democratic Party.

On June 15th, President Obama announced that his administration would stop deporting illegal

immigrants who entered the nation when they were children if they met certain conditions. Many

conservatives considered the new policy equivalent to amnesty, and they accused the President of

overstepping executive boundaries by not waiting for Congress to act on the issue. The announcement,

however, was likely a net positive for the President's campaign, as it probably increased support for

him among Hispanics.

On June 26th, Romney won the final contest of the primary season, the Utah Primary, by 88%

(second place: Paul). Now, the only thing left was the Convention, in which Romney would receive far

more than half of the delegates. Despite having virtually no chance of winning the nomination, Paul

refused to free his delegates, making him the only real opposition to Romney at the time of the

Convention. He had received intense support from the Republican Party's libertarian wing, and he

planned to use this leverage, along with the leverage he had by keeping his delegates, to influence the

Party's platform.


29/59

Two days after the end of the primary contests, on June 28th, an old issue was revisited when the

Supreme Court, which had been hearing arguments for and against the constitutionality of the

individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable

Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, as well as whether the acts

could be constitutional if one or both of these provisions were declared unconstitutional, came out with

a verdict. The individual mandate was constitutional as an exercise of Congress's power to tax, and the

Medicaid expansion, though mostly constitutional, would have to be administered in a non-coercive

way, which meant that states must not have their existing Medicaid funding taken away if they refuse to

expand Medicaid.

Four of the nine justices (Sotomayor, Breyer, Kagan, and Ginsburg) were expected to support

upholding the laws and the individual mandate provision, while another four (Roberts, Alito, Thomas,

and Scalia) were expected to oppose one or both. Kennedy, the ninth justice, was expected to be the

swing vote. As it turned out, Kennedy voted with those who opposed the mandate and Roberts, who

had been expected to oppose to it, voted with those who supported it. The decision to uphold the

mandate and the two laws was thus made with five in favor and four against. The Medicaid issue was

more unpredictable, and the solution was a kind of compromise: Congress could expand Medicaid, but

it could not threaten to take away states' Medicaid funding as punishment for non-compliance.

Conservatives were outraged by the ruling, not least because during the debate over the reform

bill, many of its proponents had insisted that the mandate was not a tax, while the Supreme Court had

just upheld the law on the basis that the mandate was a tax. They were also now made aware that the

only way the law would be repealed was if a Republican President was elected. The only silver lining

for them was that the Court's decision made the states able to opt out of expanding Medicaid. The

Romney campaign received large amounts in fund raising after the decision was announced, as the

Republican voters now realized that Romney had to be elected if the health care reform law were to be

repealed.


30/59

On July 13th, President Obama damaged himself by making a public gaffe during a speech in

Roanoke, Virginia. The speech, which focused in part on the reliance of businesses on private action

and public investment in infrastructure, contained these lines:

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great

teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we

have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a businessyou

didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.

The line You didn't build that. was used by Republicans to accuse the President of not

recognizing the hard work that business owners must do. In context, it seems that the line is not in

reference to the business itself, but rather the roads and bridges that make transporting goods easier, as

well as the system of security that is implemented in America to protect property (police, firemen, etc.).

Nevertheless, the wording was damaging, and it played into a pre-existing narrative of the

conservatives, that President Obama was in favor of big government. Gaffes are most damaging

when they play into pre-existing narratives such as this, as Romney would come to realize in mid-

September when he made his own public gaffe.

On August 11th, Romney made the announcement that he had chosen Paul Ryan, a United States

Representative from Wisconsin, to run with him as the Republican Party's vice-presidential nominee.

With Ryan as his running mate, Romney would have a better chance in the battleground state of

Wisconsin, but the choice came with some risk as well. Ryan's budget proposals in the House of

Representatives had been perceived by many as an attempt to weaken Medicare, though the changes he

proposed would not take effect for anyone over the age of 55, as well as being too conservative, as it

proposed to cut taxes for the rich, privatize a portion of Social Security, and significantly reduce public

education funding by freezing the Pell Grant award at the current level. These proposals had the

possibility to cause concern among moderates, a key demographic in the general election.

On August 19th, the Senate race in Missouri between Claire McCaskill (the Democrat) and Todd


31/59

Akin (the Republican) was re-defined by comments that Akin made concerning abortion. When he was

questioned during a debate about whether he thought women should be able to have an abortion if their

pregnancy was a result of rape, he stated that he believed legitimate rape didn't usually cause

pregnancies because the woman's body had ways to try to shut that whole thing down, but if it did

cause a pregnancy, the rapist should be punished, not the child (thus, he does not believe that abortion

is acceptable in the case of rape). His comment about legitimate rape and the woman's body being

able to somehow prevent a pregnancy in that case was, of course, medically inaccurate.

He would later claim to have misspoken, but the damage was already done. His comment made

national news, and as a result, many women heard it and were understandably outraged. This event may

have helped his opponent win the Senate election in Missouri (55% to 39%), and likely helped

President Obama among female voters, as Akin's comments likely influenced, fairly or unfairly, the

perception of the entire Republican Party. Perhaps realizing this, many Republicans urged Akin to drop

out of the Senate race, but he refused to do so.

On August 27th, the Republican National Convention officially began, but the nomination was

postponed until the next day due to the threat of Hurricane Isaac hitting Tampa, Florida, where the

Convention was being held. In the week before the Convention, Gingrich and Santorum freed their

delegates and and asked them to vote for Romney. As stated before, Paul kept his, and was thus the

second-place candidate when the roll call came, despite not having the won the popular vote in a single

state. The results of the roll call are listed below:

Romney: 2,061 delegates

Paul: 190 delegates

Santorum: 9 delegates

Bachmann: 1 delegate

Huntsman: 1 delegate


32/59

Roemer: 1 delegate

Abstaining: 13 delegates

Unannounced: 8 delegates

Uncommitted: 1 delegate

Undecided: 1 delegate

Paul was nominated for Vice President by acclamation (voice vote). The most memorable event

of the Convention was the empty chair speech by Clint Eastwood on August 30th, the final day of the

Convention. In this speech, Eastwood spoke to an empty chair that hypothetically had President Obama

sitting in it. The speech was panned by the media and some Republicans as awkward and embarrassing

to the Party. After the Convention, Romney received a modest bounce in the polls.

The Democratic National Convention began on September 4th and ended on September 6th.

President Obama was unanimously nominated for President on September 5th, and Joe Biden was

nominated for Vice President. On the same day President Obama was nominated, there was controversy

within the Convention over language in the Party's platform stating that Jerusalem was Israel's capital

and mentioning God and God-given rights. This may have damaged perception of the Party slightly.

Former-President Bill Clinton's speech on September 5th, and President Obama's on September

6th, outlined the case for a second term for the President. President Obama's post-Convention poll

bounce was more substantial than Romney's, and he was in a better position to win the election on

September 7th than Romney was. The weighted average of polls, as compiled Nate Silver, the

statistician behind fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com, showed the President having a 3.8% lead over

Romney (51.3% to 47.5%), as well as a projected electoral vote count of 314.2 to Romney's 223.8 and

a 78.1% chance of winning heading into the general election campaign season. Silver's estimates will

be noted throughout the remainder of the essay, as they were the most comprehensive and they factored


33/59

in the bias of conservative and liberal-aligned polls when determining the average.

Part VI: The General Election

The first thing to discuss concerning the general election season is which candidate each state

was likely to give its electoral votes to. The states being considered safe for President Obama were

California (55), Oregon (7), Washington (12), New Mexico (5), Minnesota (10), Illinois (20), Michigan

(16), Pennsylvania (20), New York (29), Vermont (3), Maine (4), Massachusetts (11), Rhode Island (4),

Connecticut (7), New Jersey (14), Delaware (3), Maryland (10), Hawaii (4), and the District of

Columbia (3), for a total of 237 electoral votes (the number in parentheses after each state is the

number of electoral votes that state had in 2012) .

The states being considered safe for Romney were Alaska (3), Arizona (11), Utah (6), Idaho (4),

Montana (3), Wyoming (3), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Nebraska (5), Kansas (6), Oklahoma

(7), Texas (38), Missouri (10), Arkansas (6), Louisiana (8), Indiana (11), Kentucky (8), West Virginia

(5), Tennessee (11), North Carolina (15), South Carolina (9), Georgia (16), Alabama (9), and

Mississippi (6), for a total of 206 electoral votes.

The battleground states, which were not safe for either candidate, were Nevada (6), Colorado

(9), Iowa (6), Wisconsin (10), Ohio (18), New Hampshire (4), Virginia (13), and Florida (29), a total of

95 electoral votes. Some Romney supporters thought that Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania were

also battleground states, but those states would turn out to fool's good for them, as none of them had

gone to a Republican presidential candidate since 1988. Additionally, some supporters of President

Obama believed that North Carolina and Arizona were battleground states, but most serious analysts

disagreed with that sentiment, believing that those states were firmly in Romney's column.

There were a total of 538 electoral votes available, and the candidate who won 270 or more

would win the election. If no candidate received a majority, the House of Representatives would divide

into 50 delegations (one for each state) and each delegation would cast one vote for President. The


34/59

candidate who won a majority in this vote would win the election. Furthermore, the Senate would cast

votes for Vice President, with the candidate winning a majority of the vote there winning the election.

Neither of those two selection processes were needed, however, as it was clear on the morning of

November 7

th

(the day after the election) who had won.

As I mentioned earlier, President Obama entered the general election season, which began on

September 7th, in a better position to win than Romney. He had received a higher polling bounce after

the Democratic National Convention than Romney had received from its Republican counterpart.

Furthermore, he had an electoral college advantage, as he was virtually guaranteed to receive 237

electoral votes, while Romney's safe electoral votes totaled only 206.

This advantage would be threatened by an attack on a United States consulate in Benghazi,

Libya, on September 11th. Four Americans died in the attack, most notably Christopher Stephens, the

United States Ambassador to Libya. The next day, President Obama condemned the attack, saying No

acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of

the values that we stand for.. The attack, though originally speculated to be a spontaneous protest over

an anti-Islam film, was later discovered to be a premeditated assault by Islamic militants, and the fact

that it occurred on the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks of 2001 was most likely not a

coincidence.

The conservative reaction to the attack and to President Obama's response was predictable: he

was roundly criticized. Some conservatives claimed that he had avoided calling the attack an act of

terrorism (which, as the quote mentioned earlier proves, was not true). Some also questioned what the

President knew, when he knew it, and whether he was deliberately withholding information from the

public. The attack and the resulting criticism of the President also gave some conservative protestors

and critics of his administration a new mantra: Four died, Obama lied.

Despite the attack, there was no significant change in President Obama's poll numbers as

averaged by Silver. On September 14th, he was expected by this analyst to carry 308.3 electoral votes to


35/59

Romney's 229.7, as well as 51.2% of the popular vote to Romney's 47.7% (a 3.5% lead). Silver also

concluded that he had a 76.2% of winning the election. September 14th is used because it is assumed

that the public will have had a sufficient chance to digest the attacks after three days.

Not even a week after the attack, Romney would also experience an event that threatened his

campaign. As I stated earlier, gaffes are most damaging when they play into pre-existing narratives, and

Romney's incident did just that. On September 17th, a video was released by Mother Jones that, in part,

depicted Romney saying the following at a private fundraiser held on May 17th:

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the President no matter what. All right,

there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are

victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are

entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That's an entitlement. The government

should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean the President

starts off with 48, 49...he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax.

Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect. So

he'll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. ... My job is not to worry about those people. I'll

never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

This would come to be known as the 47% incident, and it was very damaging to Romney's

campaign, as it was likely responsible for decreasing his electoral vote share to 218.7 and his chance of

winning the election to 13.9% by October 3rd, as projected by Silver (his projected popular vote share

was virtually unchanged, at 47.4%, meaning that the President's gains were mostly in battleground

states). The initial reaction in the polls was not severe, but the incident gave President Obama renewed

momentum, which eroded Romney's polling long-term. Romney would later apologize for the remark,

saying I was completely wrong..

On October 3rd, the day of the first presidential debate, Romney would perform well, and thus

regain momentum, neutralizing President Obama's gains from the 47% incident. President Obama's


36/59

performance during that debate was criticized, as he looked somewhat detached, did not address

Romney directly often enough, and was often caught looking down while his opponent was speaking.

Post-debate polls showed that a wide plurality of people thought that Romney had won the debate, and

this was likely responsible for renewing his momentum. Although immediate projection changes were

not severe, Romney's renewed momentum decreased President Obama's projected electoral vote share

to 285.4 to Romney's 252.6, his popular vote share to 49.9% to Romney's 49%, and his chance of

victory to 62.9% by October 13th, according to Silver's projection model. The President was still ahead,

but his advantage was narrow and he was in imminent danger of being overtaken.

The debate was also notable for introducing a sideshow issue to the general election: Big

Bird. During the debate, Romney said the following the moderator, Jim Lehrer:

Im sorry Jim, Im gonna stop the subsidy to PBS. I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like

you, too. But Im not gonna keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for

it.

This comment was widely mocked by liberals, as it seemed that Romney was speaking about an

inconsequential amount of spending (the subsidy to PBS). It was also used to begin a satirical save

Big Bird movement, with meme-like captioned images of Big Bird being used to mock the comment

or call for the character to be rescued from the plan to de-fund his network. In the end, the comment

made no real impact, instead being a side issue that gave Romney critics something to laugh about.

On October 11th, the vice presidential debate took place. Vice President Biden and Paul Ryan

both performed adequately, and the post-debate polls showed a rough tie between them as to who had

won (Biden had a narrow plurality in most of these polls). The debate likely helped to slow Romney's

renewed momentum, as three days after this event, on October 14th, President Obama's numbers as

projected by Silver began going back up, slowly but steadily.

The second presidential debate was on October 16th. At this event, President Obama performed

far better than he did at the first debate. He was more assertive this time, and Romney appeared edgy


37/59

and irritable. Post-debate polls showed that a plurality thought President Obama had won. During the

debate, there was a disagreement between President Obama and Romney about whether the President

had called the Libyan attack on September 11th an act of terror or not. The moderator, Candy Crowley,

commented on this disagreement, saying He did call it an act of terror.. She was criticized by some

for interfering in the debate.

Three days after the debate, on October 19th, Silver's projection showed that the President had

regained some lost ground. His projected electoral vote share was 287.8 to Romney's 250.2, his

projected popular vote share was 50% to Romney's 48.9%, and his chance of victory was 67.9%. This

was not a significant improvement from the President's October 13 th low point, but it was an

improvement nonetheless.

This debate introduced another sideshow issue when Romney made this comment about

suggestions for female candidates for cabinet positions that he received when he was campaigning for

Governor of Massachsetts:

"I had the chance to pull together a cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men I went to

a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders

full of women."

This comment was also mocked by liberals, mostly for its awkwardness. The binders contained,

of course, the names of women, not the women themselves. Thus, the comment was grammatically

incorrect, awkward, and gaffe-like. Again,the comment did no serious damage, acting only as a meme

for Romney critics to enjoy.

The third and final presidential debate was held on October 22nd. This debate did not change the

direction of the race significantly, as neither of the candidates' performances were widely criticized or

praised. Post-debate polls showed that a plurality thought President Obama had won. This debate

produced a minor issue when Romney criticized President Obama by saying that the Navy had fewer

ships than it did in 1916 and the President responded by saying the following:


38/59

You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well,

Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our militarys changed. We

have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go

underwater, nuclear submarines. And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where were counting

ships. Its what are our capabilities.

This also turned into a minor meme, using the phrase Horses and Bayonets to mock Romney's

positions on foreign policy and the military. Like the other two memes that came from the debates, no

serious damage was done to either campaign by this comment or its internet-based commentary.

On October 25th, three days after the debate, Silver's projection model showed Preside

election 2012 explanation and summary

Documents