Who will win in the 2012 American presidential elections?
by Emrah Usta*

As the parties and groups list their candidates, it becomes apparent that the elections will be closely followed because of their importance for the future of Turkish-American relations. The relations, already soured by the March 1, 2003, decision that disallowed US troops from opening a northern front in the Iraq war from Turkish territory during the Bush administration, further deteriorated with a row over United Nations sanctions targeting Iran.

Bilateral relations did not improve during the Obama era either due to Turkey’s failure to live up to the US’s expectations in cases such as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan criticizing Israeli President Shimon Peres and walking out on a debate with him in Davos, Switzerland, this in addition to the Mavi Marmara incident. It could be argued that the troubled relations of both states with Israel and Iran and the failure of the United States to appreciate the increasing dynamism of Turkish foreign policy are the key reasons for Washington’s inability to develop a common stance with Turkey. Despite these negative developments, the probable political stance of the Obama administration if the incumbent president secures a victory in the elections for a second term in office may lead to some constructive efforts that will serve Turkey’s interests in both Europe and the Middle East. The White House, which displayed a different style of diplomacy during recent revolutions in Arab countries, used effectively the democratic gaps in the region and wisely considered Turkey’s historical influence and wealth of knowledge in this area. The growing relations along these lines emphasize the importance of Turkey for the US administration as the main sponsor of a possible solution for the Palestinian issue, which can be resolved by establishing an independent Palestinian state, and the only actor in the region with the ability to broker improved relations with Iran. It should also be noted that Turkey enjoys extensive support by the US in its EU membership bid. The improved image of the US in Europe in the post-Bush era may be a great advantage for Turkey’s membership process.

‘Yes, we can’

American presidents tend to develop a presidential doctrine. A doctrine serves as a guide for the next president; the doctrines also secure stability and consistency in future policies. The primary discourse of the doctrine developed by Obama was “Yes, we can.” However, the hope and expectation for change did not materialize during the first quarter of Obama’s term. Tax reform, an economic crisis, rising unemployment and a growing debt problem appeared to be major problems for Obama, who was unable to convince the Republicans of the measures to be taken. As an alternative move, Obama tried to appeal to the people, calling them to put pressure on congressmen. But this strategy did not work. The failure of the Obama administration is further evidenced by recent surveys by Gallup which find that support for Obama is in decline.

The same data revealed that only 39 percent of the respondents find Obama’s performance successful, whereas 54 percent do not endorse his policies. Analysts believe Obama should try to improve his image, which was undermined in the aftermath of the debt crisis during his tour of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois. There are still no signs indicating the direction of the rapidly changing political climate before the elections. However, it should be noted that the political games and tricks that will take place during this period will determine the winner among the Republicans who will run against Obama in the upcoming presidential elections. It could be argued that the killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden by Navy SEALs on May 1 would contribute to Obama’s re-election chances. Likewise, Gallup data reveal that this incident increased the confidence in Obama by 10 percent overnight; however, experts note that this rise in popularity will not carry Obama all the way through the elections. Former US presidents have enjoyed sudden spikes in support; however, none have been long-lasting. Popular support for George H.W. Bush increased to 90 percent in the aftermath of the first Gulf War. However, despite this incredible support, he lost the next election in 1992 to Bill Clinton.

Will religion decide the

winner of the 2012

presidential elections?

The Republican candidates and President Obama are staging a bitter competition for the race next year. Things such as the growing reactions associated with the incident of burning a Quran on Sept. 11 -- a controversy that sparked when the pastor of the Christian Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, Terry Jones, declared he would burn 200 Qurans on the 2010 anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks -- and an increasing threat of Islamophobia in the US show that religion will play a role in the coming presidential elections.

Recent data published by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) confirm this line of reasoning. It is particularly obvious that the Republican candidates will have difficulties with regard to religious issues. For instance, as a Mormon, Republican candidate Mitt Romney will face serious criticism and reactions during the campaign by Evangelists. It is also clear that Michele Bachman will have a troubled campaign because her church is known for its anti-Catholic sentiment and views. More importantly, 18 percent of Americans still see President Obama as a Muslim. Only 40 percent of Americans know that Obama is a Christian. Recent polls show that Americans are becoming increasingly religious. Results of the 2010 American Values Survey show that 57 percent of Americans see religion as an important part of their lives; PRRI profiling on the desired religiosity of the next president based on the 2011 data suggests that 71 percent of Republicans and 51 percent of Democrats believe that the president should be very religious.

Key to Obama’s secret

success: Tea Party

Obama has failed to fulfill the expectations of the American people during his term in office. The question thus becomes: How can Obama redeem his once soaring popularity? The answer to this question lies in the internal battle between the Tea Party followers and more moderate Republicans within the Republican Party.

The Tea Party movement, which has not fully realized its strength, has been mobilized and organized over the Internet and appeals to the young members of the Republican Party. The movement, which proved the strength of its influence in the 2010 midterm elections, succeeded in leaving the traditional Republicans behind and attracted a great deal of support within the party. This ongoing battle is now one of the biggest assurances of another Obama election victory.

There are two major groups within the Tea Party. One of these groups, the financial conservatives, is extremely disturbed by the Obama administration’s social policies. Those who adhere to this position argue that tax rates should be lowered and that public spending should be minimized. The social conservative group within the Tea Party movement, however, holds strong and rigid views on some controversial issues such as homosexuality, abortion and the right to bear guns, which attract a great deal of support from middle-class Americans. These social groups develop strong political positions and stances in an attempt to exert pressure and fulfill their goals. In conclusion, Obama seems to have the advantage in the upcoming elections despite the serious financial and social troubles he has been struggling with. The White House, which has adopted more lenient policies as a response to George W. Bush’s hawkish stance, will, however, need more time to bring about the change it promised.

*Emrah Usta is chairman of the Anatolia Daily’s Academic Research Department. He is also a foreign analyst at the Atlantic-Community.Org in Berlin and a fellow at the Praxis Thinking Institute. The author can be followed on Twitter: http://twitter.com/StrategcAnalyst