A new Pew Poll illustrates how the pundit’s conventional wisdom has been now turned on its head: the poll shows the Presidential race essentially tied because Republican Senator John McCain is regaining his party’s base while Democratic Senator Barack Obama is not unifying his party sufficiently.
One continuing strand in many polls and stories now is how some supporters of Senator Hillary Clinton are balking at supporting the Democratic ticket. You can see it in the Pew results. And another bit of bad news for Obama: McCain is making greater strides than the Illinois Senator in convincing Americans that he has leadership qualities.
With less than two weeks to go before the start of the presidential nominating conventions, Barack Obama’s lead over John McCain has disappeared. Pew’s latest survey finds 46% of registered voters saying they favor or lean to the putative Democratic candidate, while 43% back his likely Republican rival. In late June, Obama held a comfortable 48%-to-40% margin over McCain, which narrowed in mid-July to 47% to 42%.
Two factors appear to be at play in shifting voter sentiment. First, McCain is garnering more support from his base – including Republicans and white evangelical Protestants – than he was in June, and he also has steadily gained backing from white working class voters over this period. Secondly and more generally, the Arizona senator has made gains on his leadership image. An even greater percentage of voters than in June now see McCain as the candidate who would use the best judgment in a crisis, and an increasing percentage see him as the candidate who can get things done.
……Conversely, Obama has made little progress in increasing his support among core Democrats since June – currently 83% favor him compared with 87% of Republicans who back McCain. The likely Democratic nominee is still getting relatively modest support from Hillary Clinton’s former supporters: 72% of them support Obama, compared with the 88% support level that McCain receives from backers of his formal GOP rivals. Obama’s strong points with voters are in being seen as the candidate with new ideas and as someone who connects well with ordinary people.
The bottom line is neither party can win if it doesn’t (a) unify itself for the battle to come after Labor Day and on Election Day and (b) get a good chunk of independent voters. McCain continues to show strength among independents — and the Democrats are not unifying sufficiently or quickly enough.
The AP gives this good summary of the poll:
The Democrat Obama led McCain, the Republican, by 8 percentage points in June in the Pew Research Center poll, though by July his lead was 5 points, about the same as now. Since June, McCain has solidified his support among whites, men, Republicans, white evangelicals and whites who haven’t completed college. Obama has made few gains, but has retained his overwhelming advantage among blacks and leads by 13 points with women and 24 points among those under age 30. Seven in 10 who backed Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic nomination now support Obama — little progress for Obama since June. Growing numbers pick McCain over Obama as the candidate who is personally qualified, could handle a crisis and is willing to take a stand. Obama retains his edge as the one with new ideas and connects with people.
Now, a bunch of factors have popped up that contribute to some conspiracy political theories.
Some of the factors: Bill and Hillary Clinton will both speak at the convention, Hillary Clinton has made it known that she doesn’t think it’s a bad idea if her name is placed in nomination to honor her supporters, some Clinton supporters are going to do a rally in Denver in her honor, and some other Clintonists have been emailing delegates urging them to either not to vote for Obama or to keep their options open and dump him in favor of Hillary.
The bluntest example of this theory come in a column by New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd:
You can almost hear her mind whirring: She’s amazed at how easy it was to snatch Denver away from the Obama saps. Like taking candy from a baby, except Beanpole Guy doesn’t eat candy. In just a couple of weeks, Bill and Hill were able to drag No Drama Obama into a swamp of Clinton drama.
Now they’ve made Barry’s convention all about them — their dissatisfaction and revisionism and barely disguised desire to see him fail. Whatever insincere words of support the Clintons muster, their primal scream gets louder: He can’t win! He can’t close the deal! We told you so!
Hillary’s orchestrating a play within the play in Denver. Just as Hamlet used the device to show that his stepfather murdered his father, Hillary will try to show the Democrats they chose the wrong savior.
But that makes no sense politically, as we’ve noted here before and as Buck Naked Politics’ Deb Cupples, who supports Hillary Clinton, writes:
Let’s further assume, for the sake of argument, that Sen. Clinton has no political savvy whatsoever, has no self control, doesn’t care about anyone but herself, and does not understand how closely the Democratic party is divided (because she still doesn’t know how to read polls and cannot grasp simple percentages).
Even if that were Hillary Clinton, what on earth could she gain by thwarting Obama’s nomination? Seriously.
First of all, Hillary couldn’t actually win in the general election, because more than half of the Democratic party now supports Obama (if those polls that Hillary can’t read are to be believed). Given that many of Obama’s supporters are beyond emotionally committed to their candidate, Hillary’s hijacking of the convention would piss them off in a volcanic way.
In short, Hillary would not be able to get enough votes to win the White House.
We’ve noted that before…but she says it far better…
Then there’s the notion that Hillary might secretly want to help Obama lose, so she can run against McCain in 2012. It would have to be 2012, according to “conventional wisdom,” because she’d be 68 in 2016 — far too old to run for office. John McCain is a man, and he’s already getting crap for being 71: nobody would take a 68-year-old woman seriously.
Fast forward to 2012. If Hillary had managed to get enough delegates to knock Obama out of the race in 2008, Do you really think Obama’s millions of committed supporters would forgive Hillary and happily give their votes to her in November?
And we’ve noted that as well..but again she says it far better.
What she notes that we have not noted here is how party bigwigs would look upon Clinton:
Then there’s the Democratic Party leaders: the same people who tried to push Hillary to drop out of the primaries even after she won Ohio and Texas. Do you really think they’d forgive Hillary for ruining Obama’s chances in 2008 and back her in 2012?
She further demolishes the argument of Dowd (who despite an occasional misfire is still one of the most enjoyable columnists to read) by pointing out that if Clinton grabbed the nomination away from Obama it would also hurt her in the Senate, hurt her place in history and perhaps even damage her daughter Chelsea’s future if Chelsea goes into politics. Chelsea was a huge hit during the campaign and seems to have a future, if she wants it. And if the Clinton name brand survives the Presidential campaign.
In short, Hillary is intelligent and analytical and savvy enough to know that she would gain nothing and lose everything if she tried to thwart Obama’s nomination.
Read the entire piece.
The New Republic’s The Plank is scratching its head as well:
Maybe Hillary really is thinking this. But if she is, she’s delusional. There could be a Clinton speaking every night of the convention–instead of just Hillary on Tuesday and Bill on Wednesday, why not book Chelsea for Monday and Roger for Thursday–and the convention would still be Obama’s show.
Why? Because, unlike like when the Clintons threatened to overshadow Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004, this year’s Democratic presidential nominee is one with undisputed star power. The presidential primaries, after all, should have been ample proof that Obama has the wattage to outshine Bill and Hillary both.
…And besides, after the last night of the convention, when Obama addresses a crowd of 80,000 people on the 45th anniversary of MLK’s “I Have A Dream” speech, do you really think anybody is going to be talking about the Clintons?
The Booman Tribune also doesn’t buy into this scenario:
What do you think the chances are, really, that Bill Clinton will say something petulant during his speech that upstages the Vice-Presidential pick’s speech? The Clintons were overrated as strategists but they aren’t so stupid as to think they’ll gain points by sowing division and rawly displaying their bitterness. They may not be able to avoid an unhealthy focus on themselves but their legacy is in enough danger as it is.
Being seen as responsible for an Obama loss is not in their interests. Any sabotage they might do will be by way of benign neglect. For example, Hillary may allow her name to enter into the nomination. She may not openly discourage some of her supporters from parading around with anti-Obama signs. Or maybe not. Maybe she will be a loyal soldier. The only thing that is certain is that Maureen Dowd is counting on some drama. And anyone that actually thinks this election matters and wants Obama to win is not rooting for drama at the convention.
But the situation as it exists posts political dangers for Obama — and for the Clintons:
1. Obama has to be more adept at unifying his party and getting the Clintons out there campaigning in a way that is convincing. His inability to do so to date shows he has surprisingly limited skills as a politician. This isn’t 1964 when there was a huge gap in ideology between the GOP supporters of nominee Barry Goldwater and the Rockefeller-Scranton-Romney wing of the Republican Party.
2. The Clintons are deluding themselves if they think that simply not overtly undermining while not truly working to try and get Obama elected will mean they can pick up the pieces in 2012. Talk to Obama supporters and it’s clear that unless the Clintons clearly show they’re behind the ticket and work to get Obama elected, Hillary Clinton will have a tough time getting the nomination since she will have a wing of her own party working actively against her.
3. Unless the Democratic Party heals the residue of the Obama-Clinton split it’s clear that, if poll trending continues, there’s a good chance the Democrats will lose. McCain continues to be the candidate on the slow upswing — bolstered by party members who months ago denounced him and vowed to either not vote or even vote for Hillary or Barack are now rallying to their side because they realize their agendas are closer to his. Some Democrats clearly don’t think that factor matters when it comes to Obama.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.