Obama v. McCain (New Hampshire), Or The Approaching Sound Of Doom
Posted on May 1st, 2008
by Daniel Larison |
|
The new Rasmussen poll from New Hampshire can hardly be encouraging to Obama’s boosters. Two months ago, Obama had a comfortable lead of thirteen over McCain in this heavily Democratic-trending state, but now trails by ten and his unfavs have shot up to 48%. McCain wins every age group and all but one income group, and Obama draws just 68% of Democrats. Young voters, who once went for Obama in large numbers, now give McCain a 52-46 edge in that group.
54% say it is likely Obama shares some of Wright’s views, and 56% see his denunciation of the pastor simply as an act of political convenience. The damage has been well and truly done. Thus, in a state where 73% disapprove of Mr. Bush, McCain currently wins a majority of support.
Filed under: politics
16 Responses to “Obama v. McCain (New Hampshire), Or The Approaching Sound Of Doom”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
” 56% see his denunciation of the pastor simply as an act of political convenience.”
And 56% are absolutely correct. Obama didn’t disassociate himself frim Wright until it became potentially fatal for his campaign.
I think one still has to work under the assumption of a 10-point bump once the Democratic nominee is decided. This is definately a state Obama shouldn’t have to defend, and I think it is manifest now that real damage is being exacted on the Democratic candidates. The two States I’m watching are Missouri and Colorado. Pennsylvania he could lose, but he would need help in places like Virginia.
Mathew Yglesias has frequently pointed out that presidential elections are generally determined by objective events outside the candidates’ control–not campaign controversies.
If the economy is recessionary, energy prices are high, and the Iraq War continues to go badly, then the Democratic nominee will almost certainly win. Whereas, if the economy starts to improve, energy prices go down, and the War Iraq starts to go well, then the Republican nominee has a chance. In either scenario, the candidates have no control over these events and I cannot see how either campaign would affect those events.
Would you argue that a Republican has a good chance of winning the general election if the economy is recessionary, energy prices are high, and the War continues to go badly?
Obviously, anything could happen, and I am by no means as sanguine as Ygleasias about the Democratic nominee’s chances of winning. But considering how badly things are going I just cannot imagine how the Republicans could win, regardless of what polls are saying six months before the election.
PS How go those book recommendations? :)
From the WSJ/NBC national poll:
“Sen. McCain’s appeal could fade, the poll suggests. As Sen. McCain has reached out to suspicious conservatives to unite his party behind his candidacy, and become more partisan as its presumptive nominee, his popularity among voters already has eroded some. In two Journal/NBC polls in March, the share of voters with positive views was 20 points greater than for those with negative views. That margin was halved to 10 points in the current poll, with 40% positive and 30% negative.
Also, 43% say they have “major concerns” that Sen. McCain “will be too closely aligned with the Bush agenda.” His vulnerability to the Bush link is one that Democrats already are exploiting, with near-daily attacks from the national party suggesting a McCain administration would amount to a third Bush term.”
I look forward to the drama of McCain and Bush at the convention. Will Bush pick a fight with the candidate to allow him to be his own man? Will McCain? Or will they fall into each other’s arms, in hopes that the Reagan Revolution is still alive?
I’ve never been one of the people saying that Obama was a sure thing against McCain in the fall, and certainly some recent events (primarily the latest Wright eruption) could make his road to the presidency even tougher.
That said, my reaction to the latest polling is very different than Daniel’s. Of course two months of relentless attacks on Obama, combined with smooth sailing for McCain, has eroded Obama’s position in the polls. How could it have not? The question is whether that erosion is permanent. I’m inclined to think not, for several reasons. One is the asymmetry between a decided Republican nomination versus a still open Democratic nomination; if history is any guide, there are a ton of Hillary supporters who will rally around Obama. Not all of them, but, again, history says that most of them will. Secondly, given the battering that Obama has taken over past two months, the fact that Obama is still basically tied nationally with McCain has to be very worrying for McCain. It’s hard to see things getting better for McCain than they are now. Finally, there are signs that the supers are going to weigh in soon, and weigh in on Obama’s side.
Obviously there are risks ahead for Obama. If he doesn’t knock Hillary out before the convention (she doesn’t necessarily need to concede, as long as Obama has enough delegate support and the media narrative becomes “Obama has it sewn up.”) he will have a problem. If the recent perception that he no longer has the fire in the belly is true, then he is wil have a very tough time of it. And if Wright doesn’t shut up (signs are he will), then that issue could dog him till November. Finally, A lot of McCain’s very real vulnerabilities could be minimized by the fact that the press is (mostly) very much in the tank for McCain.
But, absent another big controversy, the following narrative seems likely:
(1) Nomination wrapped up by early June.
(2) Above predicted 10 point bump for Obama.
(3) McCain’s weaknesses exposed once Obama can focus on him prevent McCain from gettign those 10 points back.
It’s not guarenteed, but if I had to handicap it, I’d say 60/40 (that is, 60% chance of victory; of course he isn’t going to win 60% of the popular vote) Obama if the namination is secured by mid June, but 65/35 McCain if it goes all the way to the convention.
Mind you, if he wins, it will be with a somewhat different coalition than prior Dem winners. The majority of the Reagan Dems will vote for McCain. Countering that, though, will be (1) more moderate suburban Republicans & Independents will support Obama than have voted Dem in recent elections; (2) high turnout among the Dem base; (3) low turnout among the Rep base.
Now, one can argue that, given the structural advantage that the Dems enjoy this cycle, he should be doing better. But I think that available evidence suggests that, while Obama most likely will do worse than one would expect given that advantage, he will do enough to win. The current Dem edge in the generic presidential poll is, what, 10%? Obama can squander 8% and still win.
Another variable: will Clinton work for Obama’s election, even if she isn’t on the ticket (and she won’t be). If not, adjust the above predictions downward. But, as much as I loath the woman, and while her motives for doing so will be less than pure, I see her rallying around Obama when the dust settles.
Other variables, though, could help Obama. Thus far, you have the odd fact that many people who want us out of Iraq actually favor McCain. If things there go substantially south, that could change. The economy is also a variable that could work for Obama.
Finally, one ironic parallel: Clinton 1992, where he managed to survive several scandals and pseudo scandals during the primaries and general election that would have sunk other candidates. Obama seems to have some of the seam resiliency. It’s just remarkable that, after Wright x2, the manufactured Ayers controversy, “Bitter,” a rather poor debate performance (made worse by media hackery) and relentless attacks by Hillary, he has lost only a few points versus McCain in national polling.
Just to quantify a bit: looking at the RCP averages in the McCain/Obama head to head, Obama went from a 4 point lead to tied over the last two months. Really, given how relentlessly bad things have been going for him over that period, that is a surprisingly low drop.
Certainly, everything is aligned to the advantage of the Democratic candidate. The violence in Iraq is getting worse again, and probably will continue to do so during the summer, and the mood about the economy is absolutely miserable even if any recession that happens may not be as large of a contraction as some of the doomsayers are expecting. I agree that McCain’s chances go down significantly if we have a recession, but I would keep reminding everyone that it is the challenger, not the virtual incumbent, who loses ground down the stretch. This ought to be a replay of 1952 in which the Democratic nominee plays the role of Eisenhower, as I said repeatedly last year, but the Democrats are conspiring to blow it, and if the last two months are any indication I think they are entirely capable of continuing to blow it.
It is conceivable that once the nomination fight has ended his numbers will improve, but I think any “bump” of this kind will be much smaller than 10. At best for him we are looking at another 49-48% or 48-47% election. A 23-point flip in the last two months in a state where the Democrats should walk away with the electoral votes seems more significant than the inevitable wear-and-tear of the primay fight. If he loses in N.C. next week, which that Insider Advantage poll suggests he might, he may have to struggle just to get the nomination.
What is fascinating to me that it is precisely amonst those white, working class voters who are arguably a) suffering the most economically b) struggling with paying the high gas/food prices c) statistically more likely to have served in the military (and thus been to Iraq/Afghanistan, or know someone who has) where Obama is faring the worst, so I’m not sure that the “if Iraq gets really bad again and gas hits $5 per gallon by Labor Day, McCain is sunk” arguments have a lot of merit. If there is a correlation between “the worse it gets” and “the better for Obama” it seems like we would have seen some evidence of it by now. Those voters are certainly hurting more on a lot of fronts then they were 4 months ago, but their antipathy towards Obama is, if anything, deepening and broadening.
That’s a good point. The question then becomes whether Obama holds on to suburban and independent voters, or if their support begins to melt away (as seemed to happen with suburban voters, at least, in the final weeks of the Pennsylvania primary campaign). I think that the basic statement, “the worse it gets, the better for the Demoratic nominee” is correct. It is not necessarily equally true for both candidates, and the one who *appears* to be able to take more advantage of that dynamic is the one they will end up nominating. That is why the timing of all this has been so deadly, because it creates the worst possible appearance for Obama at just about the worst possible time. Obama might rebound over the summer, but if people insist on making the choice in June Obama may end up looking much weaker at that point than he actually would be come the fall. I should clarify: the approaching doom to which I refer is not necessarily that Obama will lose in such places as New Hampshire once nominated, but that enough superdelegates are persuaded by this and other information that he is less competitive to give the nomination to her.
Adam never actually argues for McCain, he just explains why the people are going to vote for him out of ignorance.
Your analysis regarding the supers misses one significant point. The only person who can sew up the nomination in June is Obama. Many supers have stated that they want this to end in June, and the only way for that to happen is for them to anoint Obama. I think it’s fairly clear that, even if they perceive Hillary as the slightly better general election candidate (a debatable assumption to say the least), they most likely will conclude that Obama with 5 1/2 months to campaign will be more likely to win than Hillary with 3 months to campaign after a damaging convention fight.
Even apart from that, for better or worse (I think better, but that’s irrelevant to the point I’m making), I think it’s pretty clear right now that the supers are making the judgment that Clinton’s weaknesses are more significant than Obama’s, especially given that supporting Clinton will be much more likely to be perceived as going against the will of the voters. Also, I think they take the long view, and (again, correctly IMO, but that doesn’t matter) take the view that picking Clinton will do more long term damage to the party. Certainly there have been plenty of not for attribution comments from supers suggesting that most of the unannounced supers are currently favoring Obama.
Could that change? Sure. Hillary’s scenario for victory at this point: win Indiana big, get an upset win in NC, then hit somewhat more favorable ground, picking up expected big wins in Kentucky, WV, and PR, keeping the supers on the fence, take it to the convention, win it there. And/or have Obama’s support truly crater. I don’t view those things as likely possibilities, but they are possible ones.
If, OTOH, Obama wins as expected in NC and beats Hillary in Indiana, I think you see a flood of supers declaring for Obama, and a decided Democratic race by June 15.
Well in fairness Dave, I don’t think Adam is much of a fan of McCain, and I know Daniel isn’t.
I don’t think anyone can reasonably argue for McCain. There’s no argument that can be made in support of him. And, yes, I suspect people will vote for him out of ignorance. It wouldn’t be the first time that’s happened.
Obama has to eke out a win in North Carolina. If he loses there, he’s toast, unless Hillary is caught in flagrante with Bin Ladin or something.
davegnyc,
A mix of ignorance, fear, and misplaced optimism about his (McCain’s) politically transformative potential and war-hero credentials, and no, this is not some double bankshot/three card monte type of arguement in favor of McCain. I live in Ohio, and a large number of those blue-collar workers who voted for Hillary in the primary (or more correctly, voted against Obama) are ***not*** going to swing around in Obama’s column come November. Now, they may rationalize their vote for McCain in a “only Nixon can go to China/only McCain can stop the war” kind of way, or they may stay home out of disgust, but they won’t be voting.
If you can come up with the electoral math whereby Obama loses PA, OH, FL to McCain and wins the White House, more power to you, but I just don’t see it. Obama has touched a raw nerve with these voters, and not in a good way: the dislike of the man personally is pretty visceral.
Just one more data point on this: The AFL-CIO has been doing mailings (my wife is a teacher and received one) to its constituent members all but begging its own members not to vote for McCain. They wouldn’t have spent that kind of money on a direct mail campaign if they didn’t see Obama as a weak candidate specifically amongst blue-collar voters.
[...] Obama v. McCain (New Hampshire), Or The Approaching Sound Of Doom 15 Adam01, Grumpy Old Man, Daniel Larison [...] [...]