« Russian Author Alexander Solzhenitsyn Dies
For Obama Campaign, Female Leaders Are An Afterthought? »



Rasmussen Poll: More Voters Think Obama Played Race Card Than McCain In Recent Political Mini-Firestorms

August 3rd, 2008
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief

Print Print

A new poll says that when voters are asked about who has played the race card in the recently, highly-publicized flaps involving charges by the camps of Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and Republican Sen. John McCain, more voters think the Democratic presumptive party nominee pulled the card out of the deck.

Rasmussen Reports has the poll:

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of the nation’s voters say they’ve seen news coverage of the McCain campaign commercial that includes images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and suggests that Barack Obama is a celebrity just like them. Of those, just 22% say the ad was racist while 63% say it was not.

However, Obama’s comment that his Republican opponent will try to scare people because Obama does not look like all the other presidents on dollar bills was seen as racist by 53%. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree.

The big political lesson here is that Obama is going to have to be far more careful what he says and how he says it than McCain. Voters are giving McCain a lot more leeway. MORE:

Both campaigns expressed a desire to move beyond the recent flap. On Saturday Obama backed off the racism charge and accused McCain’s campaign of cynicism instead. He also rejected McCain’s charge that the Democrat himself had brought race into the campaign with his dollar bill comment.

Rasmussen also found some racial and partisan polarization on these questions:

Not surprisingly, the McCain ad generates significantly different perceptions along racial and ethnic lines. Most African-American voters—58%–saw the McCain ad as racist. Just 18% of white voters and 14% of all other voters shared that view. To watch the ad, click HERE.

As for Obama’s comment, 53% of white voters saw it as racist, as did 44% of African-Americans and 61% of all other voters.

There were also significant partisan divides. Democrats were evenly divided as to whether the McCain commercial was racist, and they were also evenly divided on the Obama comment. Republicans, by an 87% to 4% margin, rejected the notion that the McCain campaign ad was racist. But, by a 67% to 26% margin, GOP voters believe that Obama’s comment was racist.

Unaffiliated voters, by a five-to-one margin, said the McCain ad was not racist. By a much narrower 50% to 38% margin, un-affiliateds viewed Obama’s comment as racist.

One fact: since these controversies burst on the scene, McCain has pulled even with Obama in the Gallup Daily Tracking poll amid other indications that Obama’s candidacy is not gaining the kind of traction that many Democrats would wish at this early point in the campaign.

But one factor to consider is this: August isn’t the political ball game…yet. Political independent writer John Avlon, writing on The Politico in a post titled “Beware of the Ides of August” says this:

For all the times that this campaign has felt like a coronation for Obama, it’s worth remembering that his lead — while steady — has never approached Dukakis’ mid-summer 17 percent lead. McCain has been faring far better than the damaged Republican brand, polling well ahead of his party and its incumbent president. If Obama is a bridge-builder, McCain is a survivor.

In recent weeks, Republicans have reached back into their mid-summer bag of tricks, attempting to paint Obama with weirdly sarcastic variations on the “entitled-liberal-effete-elite” label. This style versus substance contrast may win converts, but McCain is playing a dangerous game: He gained credibility with independent voters by holding himself above partisan gutterball politics. Any low blows could be seen as a sign of desperation, which would only feed the “angry old man” and “Bush 3″ labels that Democrats are trying to pin on him. The Obama campaign is disciplined and they’ve got money to burn.

This campaign is only going to heat up. So both campaigns should beware the Ides of August — it’s primetime for character assassination.

But the old saying is “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

And if McCain comes out politically on top in a week of warring charges about the race card, why shouldn’t his campaign decide it’s best not to fix a strategy that polls show is not broke? If push comes to shove and each side says the other side is playing the race card, Obama’s the one who falls further down the stairs.

For more blog reaction go HERE.



This entry was posted on Sunday, August 3rd, 2008 at 3:39 pm and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, John McCain, Negative Campaigning, Campaign Ads, Demonization, Barack Obama, Republicans, 2008 Elections, Polls, Race, Democrats, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 22 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Honestly I think the US is starting to suffer from Obama Fatigue. I heard a political pundit saying back in about march that this fervor pitch support cannot go on till November 4th. That the people will burn up and burn out.

    I suspect there may be some truth to that. I suspect the closing poll numbers are starting to illustrate that. Obama still leads in Electoral votes but even that has changed in McCains favor.

    We will see. Can the faithful keep up this fever pitch support for the Good Senator till November 4th? We will find out soon.
    • ^
    • v
    The voters are giving the leeway that the press gives. When McCain get about 50/50 positive and negative and Obama gets 75% negative press that is what is influencing the voters.
    And why they give McCain leeway.
    They are not being told the truth.
    part of it is the press still thinks McCain is the old flame of 2000 and cannot accept he is not. He is now part of the Bushies and neocons with Roves henchmen running his campaign.
    They blamed Obama for the race thing when in truth it was the usual republican dog whistle going on under the radar.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/03/gergen...
    David Gergen explained this to the ignorant pundits this morning and what is really going on.
    The people will only react to the information they are given and if that information is one that gives McCain the breaks and covers up for him and they keep picking apart everything about Obama and spin it into a negative, the public will react in kind.
    • ^
    • v
    Neocon said: "Can the faithful keep up this fever pitch support for the Good Senator till November 4th?"

    Of course they can, Neocon. Note the innumerable pundits and media figures who ridiculed McCain's brilliant "Celeb" ad . . . and/or warned that pursuing this risked destroying his candidacy/brand.
    There was even one predicting that the outrage of the Hilton family would lead to McCain firing the same aides whose tactics cut Obama's lead...made the "Celeb" ad go viral...and brought him even in the polls with Obama!

    A total disconnect with reality. . . explainable only by their general outrage that Obama was being brought down to earth by hit after hit . . . leading to the fantasy that McCain would fire those evil men who were hurting their Obama.

    Thus, I think McCain still faces an uphill fight. As Howell noted in the WaPo, Obama dominates visual media coverage.

    McCain has to go positive at some point. He has to project why he is a better pick than Obama. Remember Bush Sr. not only demolished Dukakis, but offered himself as a kinder gentler Republican.

    Obama has been careful to remain generally positive himself . . . leaving much of his mud-slinging to surrogates to take down McCain. If McCain can tempt Obama into responding in kind, Obama loses as he depends more on his "shininess" than does "cranky old man McCain".

    But if Obama remains disciplined . . . and leaves the nasty take-downs of McCain to his allies in the MSM and the blogosphere (Recall Reagan's breezy - "There you go again" - dismissal of Carter's attacks!). . . McCain will lose.

    Just my opinion.
    • ^
    • v
    Re: Joe's post. . . .

    I think the lesson here is that Obama cannot go negative personally without significant cost.

    Obama's campaign model should be Ronald Reagan. Reagan offered himself as a breath of fresh air, just as Obama offers change.

    Note to Race-warriers: Brit and Paris are NOT examples of a threatened white womanhood meme. Had "Celeb" designers sought a racist message, they could have easily paired Obama with an A-list beauty like Scarlett Johannsen (who has publically declared her "crush" on Obama, with whom she has been in regular contact). They expressly did not, and instead associated him who two celebs with LOW public esteem, and no values.

    When Obama plays the race card in this way...like an Al Sharpton would . . . it plays negatively to his breezy, positive image. Obama should have let it flow beneath him . . . as Reagan did with Carter's attacks . . . and let his aides hit back. Instead, he let it get under his skin . . . as he did with HRC.

    I know progressives want Obama to be in attack dog mode.

    But I argue the significance of Joe's post poll numbers is that . . . if Obama follows Reagan's model - and leaves the nastiness to surrogates, and suggests that he is above it (the only exception being an attack on Michelle or his kids, re: the Dukakis-rape debate meme) - he will be living on Pennsylvania Ave. next year.
    • ^
    • v
    I think that Obama can't win on this issue and really thought he shouldn't have brought it up. I think there is a lot of social racism still (across all demographics/political views/regions) that makes it so a black person has to prove themselves more and has to be superior.

    This sucks but I don't think it's going to go away anytime soon. I also have to say that I think in most instances racism doesn't affect the outcomes a whole lot if there is that extra effort. If Obama wanted to be honest he could just say he realizes this and will strive to make it a non-issue because he thinks his ideas are so much better. There is so much subconscious racism that it's bound to pop up even if it's not explicit, and most people feel very defensive about it so they are likely to deny everything if there is not explicit racial messages (which they will eagerly denounce). This phenomenon definitely isn't a republican/democrat, rich/poor thing or any other divide.

    Marlow has a more cynical take that is probably closer to what Obama is trying to do over the long term. It's not like Obama is a saint, there are tons of instances where he has used deft political maneuvering. I just happen to think that in most instances Obama doesn't tell outright lies.
    • ^
    • v
    Contra Mr. Gandelman's post, voters are not giving McCain any more leeway than Obama. Obama has explicitly played the race card on several occasions, and McCain has not done so once, and voters have eyes and ears and can perceive the truth.

    Is there a non-racial interpretation of this Obama statement, from a Florida fundraiser in June?

    "It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy. We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. ‘He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?’"

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/21...

    As Lindsey Graham said on Fox News Sunday this morning, referencing the above passage: "Who the hell is 'they'"? Well, in the preceding sentences, Obama referenced "the Republicans," and "the campaign" so it's clear that Obama meant to include the McCain campaign in his false indictment.

    And now, in his latest "dollar bill" remark, Obama explicitly referenced McCain by name before proclaiming that nefarious forces would say that Obama doesn't look like other presidents on our currency, which was so obvious a racial appeal that even Obama's own campaign manager Axelrod had to admit to it.

    So I ask Gandelman or anyone else who cares to answer: How many times is Obama allowed to call McCain a racist, before McCain is permitted to call him out on it?
    • ^
    • v
    Sounds to me Kryon77 that Obama was just correctly predicting the future... he new the Republicans were going to run a smear campaign. They've done it since the 2000 election what made you think they weren't?
    • ^
    • v
    That Rasmussen poll is very dubious. 44% of African Americans believe that Obama's statement was "racist?" Umm, I highly doubt that. In fact, the McCain campaign calls it "playing the race card," or "race-baiting," which is very different from being "racist." A racist statement actually denigrates someone because of their race. Playing the race care is falsely accusing somebody else of being racist.

    Tha 44% of African Americans said "yes" to this question means that they interpreted it MUCH differently than the Rasmussen is reporting it. My guess is that many of them meant, "Obama was responding to real racism" in his dollar bill reference; remember more than half of blacks believe the Paris Hilton ad was racist.

    So this datapoint is pretty much useless Rasmussen should be called to task for asking such a sloppy question.
    • ^
    • v