Obama May be on the Golf Course in 2012

The United States certainly witnessed history in the 2008 elections, when for the first time ever, a black man was elected President.  This was a truly joyous moment for the country, as waves of hope and inspiration ran rampant amongst citizens around the country.  The nation was approached by a charismatic leader who promised change after a controversial stretch during the Bush administrations eight years in office.  The nation desperately needed a leader who would promote change and growth within a struggling nation.  President Bush left office after an eight year stretch that brought the United States through some of its most difficult times.  However, nearly three years later, there is a different tone of voice in this nations feelings towards their current President.  In addition, history is being made yet again.  Seats are changing, and the approval ratings are dropping.  These instances may hinder President Obama's chance at a second term in office.

For the first time since 1923, seats in the New York District have fallen out of Democratic hands and into the possessions of Republicans.  In addition, house seats in Nevada that were once in the possession of Democrats are now in the hands of Republicans.  The loss of these seats in the House of Representatives happened during a special election within one day.  To add insult to injury, the day after these losses, California's approval ratings were posted.  California, whose people historically have always voted Democratically regardless of how well the politicians have done, posts an approval rating for President Obama as less than 46% as of recently.  Let us look at the election map from 2008.

Two things to notice: California, Nevada, and New York account for 91 votes-over 1/3 of what is needed to become President by means of the electoral college.  Should the President lose these votes, especially in California and New York, it will prove extremely difficult for him to win a second shot at the Presidency.  President Obama may very well have come into office with the best of intentions for the country, however, his charisma and his goals may not be enough to keep his ship afloat.  While he will always be known as a historic President, we must remember that the term "historic" also comes with some negative connotation.  For example, President Obama has spent more money than any other President in the history of this country.  While he may feel justified, the people may disagree.  For this reason, I advise to keep our eyes on the elections, and the golf course if we wish to track President Obama.  For more information on these events see the following link:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/17/bad-news-for-obama-from-new-york-times/

National Popular Vote To Elect Our Next President?

Many people may argue that the process for electing the President of the United States may not always be the most efficient and or fair means for doing so.  Given historical events, can our nation's people be blamed for feeling such a way?  Let us travel back in time to the year 2000, where the infamous "loss of votes" in Florida took place.  Nearly six million votes were recounted in Florida in an effort to determine the winner of the popular vote.  Afterwards the winner would take the states than twenty-five electoral votes.  For a more in depth look at this controversial time see the following article from the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/09/us/2000-elections-florida-state-officials-don-t-expect-recount-change-outcome.html

The controversy in this election may play a paramount role in answering the following question: What would happen if the election for President in the United States was based solely on the popular vote?  For those who feel little concern for such an issue, it may be wise to reconsider.  A very strong political movement is underway currently which would if passed, completely transform the election process by which the President is placed in office.  Although this movement is recent, its origins date back to 1979 when Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan proposed a Constitutional amendment during a Senate debate that would result in the direct popular election of the President.  Over thirty years later, this proposal known as the National Popular Vote Plan or NPV, has gained large amounts of support.  Seven states including California have already signed on.  California is a particularly interesting player in this situation considering how the current electoral college process works.  For example, if this plan were to go into affect for the 2012 elections, if President Obama won more votes in California, however his Republican counterpart received more nationwide votes, than Obama would not necessarily win those 55 delegates.  

While the idea of such a phenomenon is intriguing to think about, this plan will not take into effect until the states signed on total 270 electoral votes.  However, it must be considered that with the recent addition of California, the number of electoral votes is just shy of halfway towards the plan being passed.  For more information see the following link:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/07/22/sracic.president.election/index.html?iref=allsearch