A Referendum on Obama

One of my correspondents wrote

OK… it's time for Romney to start really defining who and what he is, and how different he would be in the White House. People still don't know much about him…

I don't agree.  The standard dictum on re-election races is that they are first and foremost referenda on the sitting president, not a choice between the two candidates.  Only when people decide the President doesn't deserve another term do they begin to consider the opponent, and then only to decide if he is acceptable.


Carter led Reagan until the last debate, but never broke 50%.  And as you can see here -- where the good guys are blue and the left is a communist red -- he got 41% of the vote and lost in an electoral vote landslide.

That's why the Obama folks keep describing this election using the word "choice."  It's the opposite of a referendum.  If it's a choice election, Obama has a far better chance than if it's a referendum on his performance.

From Romney's point of view, the election must be solely about Obama.  Romney needs to keep slamming Obama's performance.  Rightly or wrongly, that's his campaign's strategy, and almost all campaign strategists -- on both sides -- agree with it.