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

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

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

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

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

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 freemarket 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.

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

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 endgame 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-

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

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

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%.

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

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 newlyelected 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 highprofile 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

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

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 5th, 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 longerterm 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

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

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

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

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).

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 immigrationrelated 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

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

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

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.

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

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

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 unelectable 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.

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 5th. 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

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.

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.

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 midSeptember 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

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

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

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

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 7th (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

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

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

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 13th 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:

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 President Obama winning 294.1 electoral votes to Romney's 243.9, as well as winning 50.2% of the popular vote to Romney's 48.7% and having a 73.1% chance of victory. The President's position was thus continuing to improve, decreasing Romney's chances of winning the election. On the day after the final debate, October 23rd, the abortion in the case of rape issue was raised again during an Indiana Senate debate between Joe Donnelly (the Democrat) and Richard Mourdock (the Republican). During the debate, Mourdock said the following: "I know there are some who disagree and I respect their point of view but I believe that life begins at conception. The only exception I have to have an abortion is in that case of the life of the mother. I just struggled with it myself for a long time but I came to realize: Life is that gift from God that I think even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen. Some interpreted his comment as meaning that he believed that God intended the rape to happen, which, needless to say, outraged these people. Mourdock claimed that his comment had been misinterpreted and refused to issue an apology for it, instead blaming those who had allegedly interpreted the comment incorrectly. The comment damaged his campaign, and he lost the race on November 6th, receiving 44.3% of the vote to Donnelly's 50%. The issue may have also indirectly

damaged Romney's campaign, as the comment may have reflected badly on the entire Republican Party despite many establishment Republicans disagreeing with it. It is worth noting that Mourdock had won the Republican Senate Primary in Indiana by defeating an establishment Republican, former-Sentor Richard Lugar. During the Primary, Lugar was attacked by the Tea Party for his relatively moderate positions on immigration, gun control, and nuclear weapons. This was yet another example of an establishment-oriented and relatively moderate Republican being defeated in a congressional primary by a Tea Party-aligned candidate. Lugar was also the incumbent, having served in the United States Senate for thirty-six years and being elected seven times. His defeat in the Primary may have thus been decisive in giving that seat to the Democrat, Joe Donnelly. On October 25th, Romney attempted to use one of President Obama's advantages, the auto bailout that had been implemented early on in his presidency, against him. During a rally in Ohio, he accused Chrysler of planning to ship Jeep production to China. Chrysler's CEO, Sergio Marchionne, denounced the claim as completely false, but it was used by the Romney campaign again on October 27th in an Ohio television ad. The claim was likely used to try to discredit the auto bailout, which had lent money to the auto industry in order to prevent a shutdown of operations and massive job losses. The bailout had increased the President's chances in states that were particularly reliant on the auto industry for employment, such as Michigan and Ohio. The final major event of the campaign occurred when Hurricane Sandy made land in New Jersey on October 29th, causing massive devastation in he northeastern United States. At first glance, this does not seem like a political event, but it turned out to have an impact because of the ability it gave President Obama to act as a comforter to the nation. Furthermore, he received praise for his response to the hurricane, which included a tour of the damaged regions and visits to the FEMA and Red Cross headquarters, by the Republican Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie. This may have increased his appeal to moderates, who would have liked seeing him receive praise of a bipartisan

nature from a member of the Party that generally opposed him. On Election Day, November 6th, both campaigns had reasons to feel optimism. Romney's campaign believed that it would benefit from the anger over the health care reform bill and the fact that the economy was still in relatively bad shape. The unemployment rate, after all, was 7.9% on Election Day, and no incumbent President since Franklin Roosevelt had won re-election with the rate being above 7.2%. Furthermore, the advantage for President Obama in many polls was deemed by many Republicans to be inaccurate, as they believed that such polls were oversampling Democrats. President Obama's campaign also had reasons to believe it would win. First, The Republican Primary debates had likely alienated Hispanics, and Akin's and Mourdock's comments about rape and abortion likely alienated women. Thus, the President most likely had demographics on his side. Second, the economy, though still not fully recovered, was in better shape than when the President had taken office. During his first month in office, the amount of jobs lost was 818,000. But during October of 2012, no jobs were lost. Instead, the number created was 171,000. Thus, although the actual unemployment rate was virtually unchanged from the day the President took office (when the rate stood at 7.8%, slightly lower than the rate on Election Day), the jobs trend was decisively more favorable than four years prior. Third, the perception of Romney by many was that of a rich elitist who was inconsistent on the issues, a perception that was furthered by his 47% comment, change of opinion on health care and abortion, and opposition to increased taxes on the wealthy (in fact, his plan was suspected by some to decrease the amount that the wealthy would pay in taxes). Fourth, the auto bailout was likely helping President Obama in the key battleground state of Ohio. Finally, the polls were, for the most part, on the President's side. Silver's final projection on the morning of Election Day, derived from weighted polling averages, showed President Obama receiving 313 electoral votes to Romney's 225, as well as obtaining 50.8% of the popular vote to Romney's 48.3% and having a 90.9% chance of victory. Furthermore, his state-by-state projections showed the President carrying all eight battleground states (each candidate had a roughly 50% chance in Florida,

but the President's chance, at 50.3%, was slightly higher). If this turned out to actually happen, the President would carry 332 electoral votes to Romney's 206. What follows is a time line of which states were projected to be won by which candidate by CNN during the evening of Election Day, November 6th (the times listed are for the Central Time Zone): 6:00 P.M.: President Obama carries Vermont (3) and Romney carries Kentucky (8). President Obama: 3, Romney: 8 6:20 : Romney carries Indiana (11). President Obama: 3, Romney: 19 6:30 : Romney carries West Virginia (5). President Obama: 3, Romney: 24 6:40 : Romney carries South Carolina (9). President Obama: 3, Romney: 33 7:00 : President Obama carries Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), the District of Columbia (3), Illinois (20), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (11), three of Maine's four electoral votes (one remains un-projected), and Rhode Island (4). Romney carries Oklahoma (7). President Obama: 64, Romney: 40 7:10 : Romney carries Georgia (16). President Obama: 64, Romney: 56 7:30 : Romney carries Arkansas (6) and Tennessee (11). President Obama: 64, Romney: 73 7:40 : Romney carries Alabama (9). President Obama: 64, Romney: 82 8:00 : Romney carries Kansas (6), Louisiana (8), three of Nebraska's five electoral votes (two remain un-projected), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Texas (38), Wyoming (3), and Mississippi (6). President Obama carries Michigan (16), New York (29), and New Jersey (14). President Obama: 123, Romney: 152 8:40 : President Obama carries Pennsylvania (20). President Obama: 143, Romney: 152 9:00 : Romney carries Utah (6). President Obama: 143, Romney: 158

9:05 : President Obama carries New Hampshire (4), a battleground state. President Obama: 147, Romney: 158

9:50 : President Obama carries Minnesota (10) and Romney carries Arizona (11). President Obama: 157, Romney: 169

10:00 : President Obama carries Washington (12), California (55), and Hawaii (4). Romney carries Idaho (4) and Montana (3). President Obama: 228, Romney: 176

10:02 : President Obama carries Wisconsin (10), a battleground state, and Romney carries North Carolina (15). President Obama: 238, Romney: 191

10:10 : President Obama carries Iowa (6), a battleground state, and New Mexico (5). President Obama: 249, Romney: 191

10:15 : President Obama carries Oregon (7). President Obama: 256, Romney: 191 10:17 : Romney carries Missouri (10). President Obama: 256, Romney: 201 10:18 : President Obama carries Ohio (18), a battleground state. This makes his electoral vote total exceed the 270 needed to win, thus he secures a second term as President. President Obama: 274, Romney: 201

10:45 : President Obama carries Maine's one remaining electoral vote. President Obama: 275, Romney: 201

10:46 : President Obama carries Nevada (6). President Obama: 281, Romney: 201 11:20 : President Obama carries Colorado (9). President Obama: 290, Romney: 201

Romney was reluctant to concede the race at first, as there some doubt within the campaign and among some others (such as Karl Rove, a Republican political consultant) about the projection in Ohio. However, when Colorado was projected for President Obama and Florida began to look more and more unlikely to be won by Romney, he decided to give his concession speech and did so at midnight

(Central Time). Romney apparently did not even write a concession speech until that point, as his campaign was convinced he would win the election. This was mostly due to internal polling, which showed Romney winning Colorado, New Hampshire, Florida, and Virginia, as well as having a good shot at Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Ohio. President Obama gave his victory speech at 12:40 A.M. (Central Time), November 7th, concluding the major Election Day announcements. In the pre-dawn hours of November 7th, Romney carried Alaska (3) and the two remaining electoral votes in Nebraska. Additionally, President Obama carried Virginia (13) at this time. This made the electoral vote tally 303 for President Obama and 206 for Romney. Florida (29) would remain unprojected until Saturday, November 10th, when it was carried by President Obama. The final electoral vote tally was 332 for President Obama and 206 for Romney. Having exceeded the 270 electoral votes needed to win the election, President Obama had won a second term as President of the United States. There were a total of seventeen state results where the candidate who won had a victory margin of less than 10%. They are as follows: Florida (President Obama by 0.88%) North Carolina (Romney by 2.04%) Ohio (President Obama by 2.98%) Virginia (President Obama by 3.87%) Colorado (President Obama by 5.37%) Pennsylvania (President Obama by 5.39%) New Hampshire (President Obama by 5.58%) Iowa (President Obama by 5.81%) Nevada (President Obama by 6.68%) Wisconsin (President Obama by 6.94%) Nebraska's Second Congressional District (Romney by 7.16%) (Nebraska awards three

electoral votes by congressional district and two are given to the statewide winner) Minnesota (President Obama by 7.69%) Georgia (Romney by 7.82%) Maine's Second Congressional District (President Obama by 8.56%) (Maine awards two electoral votes by congressional district and two are given to the statewide winner) Arizona (Romney by 9.06%) Missouri (Romney by 9.38%) Michigan (President Obama by 9.50%)

From this, it is clear that the tipping point state was Colorado. Had President Obama lost all the states which he won by a smaller margin than he won by in Colorado, he would still have had 272 electoral votes, two more than was needed to win the election. There was a bit of an early issue with the national popular vote. When President Obama was projected to have won the election, he was still behind Romney in terms of this number. However, as more votes came in from the West Coast (California, Washington, and Oregon), he pulled ahead of Romney and stayed there. When all the votes had finally been counted, President Obama had received 65,907,213 votes (51.06%) to Romney's 60,931,767 (47.21%), a victory margin of 4,975,446 votes, or 3.85%. Complete election results in terms of the national popular vote are listed below, including the major third party candidates: President Barack Obama (Democratic Party): 65,907,213 (51.06%) Mitt Romney (Republican Party): 60,931,767 (47.21%) Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party): 1,275,804 (0.99%) Jill Stein (Green Party): 469,501 (0.36%)

Virgil Goode (Constitution Party): 122,001 (0.09%) Roseanne Barr (Peace and Freedom Party): 67,278 (0.05%) Rocky Anderson (Justice Party): 43,011 (0.03%) Tom Hoefling (America's Party): 40,586 (0.03%) Others: 217,669 (0.17%) Total: 129,064,662

Part VII: The Aftermath of 2012 First, I will outline why President Obama won the 2012 Election. There are twelve major reasons for this: demographics, public perception of Romney, the effectiveness of President Obama's campaign, economic improvements, the political impact of Hurricane Sandy, the auto bailout, Romney's running mate's (Paul Ryan) budget proposals, low approval of Congress, union motivation, the incumbency factor, the failure of the ORCA project, and President Obama's electoral vote advantage. After these have been discussed, events coming after the election but before the inauguration will be examined. These include the reactions of five conservatives (Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck) to President Obama's re-election, the Sandy Hook school shooting and its political consequences, the formal meeting of the electors and counting of the electoral votes, and a partial addressing of the Fiscal Cliff. Finally, the inauguration will be discussed. The first major reason for President Obama's re-election was demographics. Akin and Mourdock, with their controversial comments about abortion in the case of rape, had likely made many women angered towards the entire Republican Party. Furthermore, Hispanics may have been alienated by the early Republican Primary debates and drawn to the President by his new deportation policy that was announced in June of 2012. Additionally, young voters favored President Obama by a large

margin. Finally, LGBT voters were likely enthusiastic about President Obama's endorsement of gay marriage. Listed below is a demographic breakdown of the 2012 electorate: Women (54% of electorate): President Obama: 55%, Romney: 44% Men (46%): President Obama: 46%, Romney: 53% Whites (72%): President Obama: 39%, Romney:59% Blacks (13%): President Obama: 93%, Romney: 6% Hispanics (10%): President Obama: 71%, Romney: 27% Other Races (Asian, Native American, etc.) (5%): President Obama: 73%, Romney: 26% Age 18 29 (19%): President Obama: 60%, Romney: 37% Age 30 44 (27%): President Obama: 52%, Romney: 45% Age 45 64 (38%): President Obama: 47%, Romney: 51% Age 65 and Older (16%): President Obama: 44%, Romney: 56% Heterosexual (straight people) (95%): President Obama: 49%, Romney: 49% LGBT (5%): President Obama: 76%, Romney: 22%

Second, public perception of Romney may have helped President Obama win. A wealthy man who refused to release more than two tax returns and opposed higher taxes on the wealthy likely did not resonate with the middle class and working poor. These people may have reached the conclusion that President Obama was the candidate who cared more about people like them. Additionally, Romney appeared to many to be a flip flopper, switching his positions on abortion and health care. Third, President Obama's campaign was effective at turning out voters and encouraging early voting. The result of a close election usually depends on which candidate can do a better job at these. President Obama managed to turn out enough of his base to put the odds in his favor, as evidenced by

the fact that more than 28% of the electorate in 2012 was made up of non-whites, a group among which he would win 81.6% of the vote. Fourth, economic improvements probably helped the President win a second term. As I mentioned earlier, the job situation went from losing hundreds of thousands of jobs per month at the beginning of President Obama's term to gaining a decent amount of jobs by Election Day. Furthermore, despite the fact that the unemployment rate had increased by 0.1% during President Obama's term, it had come down from its high point of 10% in October of 2009 to 7.9% on Election Day. Finally, many continued to blame President Obama's predecessor, former-President George W. Bush, for the tough economic conditions. According to a Washington Post/ABC News Poll, 54% held this belief. Thus, while the voters were likely not satisfied with economic conditions on November 6th, a majority of them viewed the President's predecessor as being more responsible for them than the President was, and these people were likely willing to give him more time to turn the economy around. Fifth, Hurricane Sandy gave President Obama an advantage when it encouraged Chris Christie, the Republican Governor of New Jersey, to praise his response to the disaster. The fact that President Obama received praise from a prominent Republican, especially in an election season, likely made him look more bipartisan, acting as head of the entire nation, not just the Democratic Party. Sixth, the auto bailout, implemented early in the President's first term, was very advantageous for President Obama in Ohio and Michigan, two states that rely on the auto industry for employment. Romney, perhaps realizing this, had tried to discredit the bailout with his claim that Jeep production was being shipped to China. This claim may have backfired, however, when it was proven to be false. Seventh, Romney's running mate, Paul Ryan, had drafted budget proposals as a United States Representative that contained some controversial provisions. Among these was a potential weakening of the Medicare system by introducing vouchers that may not have been able to keep up with the cost of health care, a tax cut for the wealthy by lowering the top marginal tax rate, a partial privatization of Social Security, and cutting of education funding. These provisions, if they were known to the voting

public, had the potential to damage Romney's candidacy among moderates. Eighth, President Obama likely benefited from public disapproval of Congress. In effect, any remaining economic hardship could be feasibly blamed on a Congress that, after the 2010 Midterm Elections, was very divided. This would reduce the President's share of the blame, improving his public image. Ninth, union members may have been motivated to vote after Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin won the election that was intended to give Wisconsin voters a chance to recall him. Walker's union-limiting bill had angered unions, giving them something to fight against by voting. Since union members tend to vote for the Democratic Party, this motivation helped President Obama. Tenth, the incumbency factor helped President Obama win re-election. Historically, it is difficult to defeat a sitting President running for re-election unless the public has a compelling reason to unseat him or her. It can be argued that the public did have a compelling reason (the economy) to do this in 2012, but since the general economic trend was more positive in 2012 than it had been when President Obama took office, the argument that he had made things worse, and thus deserved to be unseated, was perceived by a majority of the voters to be invalid. Eleventh, the ORCA project, which the Romney campaign had intended to use to increase the turnout on Election Day, experienced many technical difficulties on November 6th. The program crashed many times and at one point was intentionally shut down when a surge of activity from campaign volunteers was incorrectly believed to be a denial of service attack. Thus, it failed to achieve its goal of turning out more of the Republican base on Election Day. Had this failure not occurred, President Obama's victory margin may have shrunk, though he probably still would have won the election due to the ten factors discussed above. Finally, the electoral map itself favored President Obama. On Election Day, he had 237 safe electoral votes to Romney's 206. Thus, of the 95 electoral votes possessed by the battleground states, President Obama needed only 33 to arrive at the magic number of 270, while Romney would need 64,

nearly twice the amount the President would need. Because of this, President Obama had more paths to victory than Romney did. Next, the reactions of five high-profile conservatives to the re-election of President Obama will be displayed. What follows is a list of each person followed by their reaction: Bill O'Reilly (said before the winner was declared): It's a changing country. The demographics are changing. It's not a traditional America anymore. And there are 50 percent of the voting public who want stuff. They want things. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it. And he ran on it. Whereby 20 years ago President Obama would have been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney, the white establishment is now the minority. And the voters, many of them, feel that this economic system is stacked against them, and they want stuff. You're going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama. Overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama's way. People feel that they are entitled to things, and which candidate between the two is going to give them things? Sean Hannity: "Americans, you get the government you deserve. And it pains me to say this, but America right now deserves Barack Obama. You deserve what you voted for Four years ago, the public could be excused for voting for Obama because, frankly, he was a blank canvasNow he is a known entity. And just barely over 50 percent looked at this pathetic record and decided they wanted more of the same." Ann Coulter: If Mitt Romney cannot win in this economy, then the tipping point has been reached. We have more takers than makers and it's over. There is no hope. Rush Limbaugh: ... Small things beat big things yesterday. Conservatism, in my humble opinion, did not lose last night. It's just very difficult to beat Santa Claus. It is

practically impossible to beat Santa Claus. People are not going to vote against Santa Claus, especially if the alternative is being your own Santa Claus. I went to bed last night thinking we're outnumbered. I went to bed last night thinking all this discussion we'd had about this election being the election that will tell us whether or not we've lost the country. I went to bed last night thinking we've lost the country. I don't know how else you look at this. Glenn Beck: ... I don't know how we survive. I don't know how we survive the regulation that is coming to my industry. I don't know how we're going to survive the pressure and the tactics, because they have more flexibility now, and they remember their enemies. I don't know how we're going to survive because I won't compromise. I won't make a deal with the devil. Inflation is coming. The fiscal cliff is coming. The dollar fell last night. Your taxes are going up. Your healthcare costs are going up. Your religion is going to come under attack. Gas, coal, and energy is going to become more expensive. May I recommend that, if you have the chance to buy farmland, you buy farmland. If you live in the East, may I recommend get the hell out of the East. Find a place where you are surrounded by like-minded people, and the best way to find those people is you should probably look at the maps of how counties voted And get your kids away from those schools that are indoctrinating them that socialism is okay. May I highly suggest you get grandfathered in with the second amendment today. And don't forget the ammunition.

Each of these reactions highlights an aspect of what may be the internal dialogue of the Republican Party concerning the 2012 Election, why the result of it was unfavorable for its members, and whether there is a chance for the Party to recover. O'Reilly recognized that the demographics were shifting towards the non-white races and that these races, along with women, would likely side with the

Democratic Party (which is precisely what happened). What he meant by the white establishment is now the minority is unclear, as whites still made up 72% of the electorate in 2012, which is a majority. Furthermore, it appears initially as though he is connecting reliance on entitlements to racial minorities, though he may have been talking about them separately, as separate issues for the Republican Party going forward. Hannity appeared to blame the voting public for what had happened, as did Coulter. Both were appalled that President Obama could win re-election given his record and the state of the economy, though, as mentioned earlier, the economy had recovered somewhat between the start of the President's term and November of 2012. Coulter appeared to blame entitlements for the loss as well, claiming that the takers (those who rely on government aid) now outnumber the makers (presumably, business owners). She also appeared pessimistic, saying ...It's over. There is no hope.. Limbaugh appeared to believe, like the other three, that entitlements had won the election for President Obama, saying It is practically impossible to beat Santa Claus.. He also appeared, like Coulter, to be pessimistic, saying I went to bed last night thinking we've lost the country.. Beck was also pessimistic, outlining what he believed would be the negative consequences of a second term for President Obama and telling his listeners to buy farmland, seek like-minded company, pull their children from indoctrinating schools, and buy guns. Whether Beck's comments will have any resonance with mainstream conservatives is unclear, as he tends to be an outlier. After the Election, it appeared that the major political discourse would concern the Fiscal Cliff, which was set to go into effect on January 1st, 2013. However, a new issue was brought to light when, on December 14th, 2012, the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting took place in Newtown, Connecticut. In this shooting, twenty children and six members of the school staff were shot dead by Adam Lanza. Before the attack, Lanza had also shot and killed his mother, Nancy. The shooting ended when Lanza committed suicide. A Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle was used to kill the victims in the school.

In response to the shooting, President Obama announced that more comprehensive gun control measures would become a priority during his second term. His proposals included universal background checks, a ban on assault weapons, and limiting the capacity of magazines to ten rounds. This generated criticism from many, including the National Rifle Association (NRA), gun enthusiasts, and other conservatives. Whether gun control measures will be adopted by Congress remains unclear. On December 17th, the Presidential Electors, who had been elected by their states on November 6th, cast their votes for President. The result of this ballot would be announced before a joint session of Congress on January 4th, 2013. As mentioned earlier, there were 538 Electors, and whichever candidate received the vote of the majority of them (270) would become the President. Since states with electoral votes totaling 332 had elected the Electors for Barack Obama, President Obama was expected to receive the vote of 332 of the Electors and be formally re-elected. Romney, on the other hand, was expected to receive the votes of 206 of the Electors (since states totaling 206 electoral votes had elected the Electors for Mitt Romney). In late December, discussions were occurring between the President, Congressional Democrats, and Congressional Republicans concerning a deal to avoid the fiscal cliff. Remember, the Fiscal Cliff contained two parts: the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts and enactment of across-the-board spending cuts (known as the Sequester). Most Democrats wanted to allow the Bush Tax Cuts to expire only for those making more than $250,000.00 per year, while most Republicans wanted them to be made permanent for all taxpayers, regardless of income. A compromise was reached on December 31st, after negotiations between Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican) and Vice President Biden, that would put in place the following measures: Individuals making $400,000.00 or more, and married couples making $450,000.00 or more, per year (after deductions) would see their marginal tax rate go to 39.6%, a change from the former rate of 35% Long-term capital gains and dividend marginal tax rates for these same individuals and

couples would increase from 15% to 20% Deductions and credits for individuals making $250,000.00 or more, and married couples making $300,000.00 or more, per year would be phased out The marginal estate tax rate for value over $5,000,000.00 was set to 40%, whereas previously, the rate had been 35% for value over $5,120,000.00 The Alternative Minimum Tax was permanently indexed for inflation The Payroll Tax Cut would be allowed to expire, thus raising the Social Security Tax rate on employees from 4.2% to 6.2% The Sequester was delayed for two months (it would go into effect on March 1st instead of January 1st of 2013) Unemployment Benefits were extended for a year The doc fix was extended for a year A farm bill was extended for nine months

The bill passed the Senate on January 1st, 89 to 8 (49 Democrats, Democratic-caucusing Independents, and 40 Republicans for, three Democrats and five Republicans against). The House considered adding an amendment to the Senate bill that would cut spending by $300 billion, but decided against it. The House passed the un-amended Senate bill the same day, 257 to 167 (172 Democrats and 85 Republicans for, 151 Republicans and 16 Democrats against). President Obama signed the bill the next day, January 2nd. In total, the bill raised federal revenues by a projected $600 billion over the next ten years. Had the Bush Tax Cuts expired for all taxpayers, a projected $3 trillion would have been raised in that same period. Since the Fiscal Cliff had already happened when the bill was passed, it is assumed that retroactivity was involved in the bill's provisions and in projections of budget impact.

The compromise was criticized by some as being a tax hike, while others praised it as a tax cut (since it made the Bush Tax Cuts permanent for the vast majority of taxpayers). Additionally, some complained that it lacked provisions to cut spending. Perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of the compromise was permanence: the income tax rates were now permanent and would not expire at any set date, and the Alternative Minimum Tax was permanently indexed for inflation. On January 3rd, the newly-elected Congress was sworn in. After this event, the Senate contained 53 Democrats, two Democratic-caucusing Independents, and 45 Republicans. The House contained 234 Republicans and 201 Democrats. Once again, the House and Senate would be led by different political Parties. On the next day, January 4th, the votes of the Electors were formally counted before a joint session of Congress. As expected, President Obama and Vice President Biden received 332 votes and Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan received 206 votes. President Obama had now been officially elected to a second term. On January 20th, President Obama and Vice President Biden were sworn in for their second term in a private ceremony. The public ceremony was held the next day, on the 21st, as the 20th was a Sunday. The President's inaugural address was notable for themes dealing with climate change, LGBT rights, alternative energy, the tone of Congressional debate, gun control, and immigration. On a historical note, the speech was the first time that an endorsement of gay marriage rights was made during an inaugural address. Congressional Republicans mostly responded to the speech by stating their hopefulness that cooperation between President Obama and the Republican Party would increase during his second term. With the speech and swearing-in ceremony, President Obama had officially begun his second term, ended the 2009 2013 political season, and begun the 2013 2017 chapter in politics. This chapter will be defined by a variety of key questions. What will happen regarding the Sequester? Will employment growth accelerate of stagnate? What will be done concerning climate change, taxes, spending, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, the Patient Protection and Affordable

Care Act, immigration, gun control, energy, and gay marriage? Will any major foreign policy developments occur? Which Party will benefit from the 2014 Midterm Elections? Who will run for President in 2016? Furthermore, who will be elected to the Presidency and Vice Presidency in 2016 (President Obama, after all, cannot serve a third term), and what will Congress look like after the House and Senate Elections in that same year? At this point, there is no definitive answer for any of these questions. But when the earlier ones begin to be answered, they are almost certain to have an impact on the answers to the later ones, which concern the culmination of the next four-year political cycle: The 2016 Presidential Election.

Works Cited 1. Unless otherwise noted, all specific dates, legislation titles, information on the provisions of legislation, congressional vote tallies on bills, electoral vote totals, popular vote totals and victory margins, the number of seats each Party held in Congress, and quotes originated from Wikipedia 2. Employment information, unless otherwise noted, comes from a pre-compiled database originating from various online sources 3. The quote claiming that stopping the health care reform effort would be Obama's Waterloo was taken from ABC News 4. The Tea Party protestor's quote to the counter-protestor with Parkinson's disease was taken from The Huffington Post 5. The date that President Obama endorsed gay marriage rights was taken from The New York Times 6. The date and provision of the new deportation policy announced by President Obama on June 15th, 2012 were taken from CNN. 7. Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight forecasts were taken from the New York Times 8. Romney's quote concerning the subsidy to PBS was taken from The Hollywood Reporter 9. President Obama's quote concerning the nature of the military was taken from Fox News Insider 10. The number of jobs lost in January, 2009 was taken from Wikipedia 11. The unemployment rate when President Obama took office was taken from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 12. The Election Day time line was taken from a log that I recorded on Election Day 13. The time of Romney's concession speech was taken from Wikipedia

14. The time of President Obama's victory speech was taken from The NY Daily News 15. Demographic information was taken from Addicting Info 16. Information concerning the LGBT vote was taken from the New York Times 17. The unemployment rate in October, 2009 was taken from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 18. The poll concerning blame of former-President George W. Bush for economic conditions was taken from The Washington Post 19. Bill O'Reilly's quote was taken from The Wrap 20. Sean Hannity's quote was taken from The Week 21. Rush Limbaugh's quote was taken from a transcript of his radio show contained on the show's website 22. Ann Coulter's quote was taken from Global Grind 23. Glenn Beck's quote was taken from The Dallas Observer 24. Information regarding the Sandy Hook Shooting and its political consequences was taken from Wikipedia

About the Author I am a sophomore Computer Science major at the University of Southern Indiana. Aside from that field, my interests include personal finance, investment strategy, and, of course, politics. I supported then-Senator Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential Election, but I was too young (14 years old) to vote for him. That changed in 2012, when I cast my vote for him, as well as Joe Donnelly in the Senate and Dave Crooks (Democrat) in the House (I live in Evansville, which is currently contained in Indiana's Eighth Congressional District). On economic issues, I am a liberal. I disliked the Bush Tax Cuts for those making more than $250,000.00 per year, believing the low rates to be unnecessary for these individuals. Furthermore, I supported the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, though I was disappointed by its lack of a Public Option. I understand the politics of why it had to be removed in order for the bill to pass, however. Finally, I firmly believe that an economic safety net is needed to support the poor, the disabled, and the elderly, and I do not believe in the theory that the private sector would do a better job of generating this safety net than the government currently does. In my opinion, whenever a public program is turned over to the private sector, it is inherently more likely to become insolvent or insufficient, as well as disorganized and less available to the people who need its services. On social issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc.), I am a moderate, and I care about these issues far less than those that concern economics. I am pro-life, opposing abortion except in the cases of rape and danger to the life of the mother. On gay marriage, I have no real opinion. I don't care a great deal whether or not it is legalized in more states. I do, however, oppose a federal constitutional amendment banning it, as I believe it is a state-by-state issue. I would also prefer not to see a federal law requiring states to legalize it for the same reason. However, if the federal government decided to legalize gay marriage for the purposes of federal tax returns and financial benefits, this would be acceptable to me, as it does not force states to do the same in regards to their state tax returns and financial benefits. Currently, the federal government does not recognize same sex marriage in regards to federal tax

returns or financial benefits. I wrote this essay to explain the results of the 2012 Presidential Election and to summarize the 2009 2013 political season. I never expected it to be this long (55 pages using OpenOffice), but there was so much more to write about than I had originally anticipated. I hope I have presented the information neutrally, not allowing any of my personal liberal bias to be included in the essay's main body. If any readers notice a piece of information in the body of the essay that appears to be biased, or if they feel that I have left something important out of the essay, I urge them to contact me about it via private message on Facebook or by Reply on Twitter (currently, only my Facebook friends and Twitter followers are aware of this writing).

- Scott Robert Lane, March 16th, 2013