I haven’t been happy with the Obama campaign lately. The McCain campaign is doing all the defining and driving most of the news coverage. Yes, McCain’s ads have been asinine, but they’ve got the media talking, and that’s where many voters get their information.
Regular readers of my blog will know that I am no doe-eyed Obama supporter. I went back and forth between Clinton and Obama over the course of the primary race. First I was undecided; then I chose Obama, voted for him in my primary in February, and posted an Obama icon on my blog. Then, as the race went on and Clinton began to define the debate, I started to think she might be a more impressive general election candidate, even if I loathed some of what she was doing. (Gas tax holiday? Please.)
Lately I still think she might have been a better nominee.
On June 3, the day Obama effectively clinched the nomination, Electoral-vote.com published its last set of competing matchups: Clinton vs. McCain and Obama vs. McCain. Clinton was doing much better against McCain than Obama was. That was two months ago, and things have moved in Obama’s direction since then. But I can’t help wonder whether Clinton would have a stronger lead right now.
Several months ago, the Republicans were relishing the idea of running against Clinton; they had a whole attack plan ready. And if she were the nominee they’d be using it right now.
But Clinton would be out-Roving McCain. She’d be running commercials that everyone would be talking about, defining the debate, defining McCain, going on the offensive against him, while casting herself as an issues-oriented champion of the working class. That’s what she started doing against Obama once she got her act together in March. The only reason Obama won is because he had a superior organization and racked up state after state in February. There’s nothing illegitimate to that; he knew the rules and took advantage of them. But he got blindsided once the Ohio/Texas campaign got under way and never really recovered. If not for February, Clinton would be the nominee. She ultimately lost, but she won the rhetorical debate.
The polls right now should not be as close as they are. Granted, according to the state-by-state polls, Obama still has a healthy lead. But the election is exactly three months from today, and so much can happen in that time. I want to smack Obama upside the head for not being more aggressive these last couple of weeks. Of course, if he winds up winning, everyone will say he chose his strategy wisely. But if he loses, Democrats will once again be banging their heads against the wall.
He’s still the favorite right now. But is anyone talking about his commercials? Is he doing anything but play defense? I’m sick of Democratic nominees who overestimate the intelligence of the American people. We need a nominee who kicks people’s asses. Clinton would have been that nominee.
Would her cynicism piss me off? Yes. Would I call her craven? Yes.
But would she have a better chance of winning?
Yes.
Ms. Clinton would have lost. I have been to rural America where people detest her (including my family) often for stupid reasons (she’s a broad, she let Bill cheat on her, etc).
I believe the polls we are seeing are flawed- they all rely on land phone lines. Most young people only have cell phones, they are overwhelmingly in support of Obama. A similar situation took place a long time ago (was it Roosevelt or Truman?) when pollsters called phone numbers, but couldn’t contact people without phones, and they predicted the other guy would win.
If the Democrats had nominated a homophobic, racist, Republican war monger like Hillary Clinton, I would have voted Green. The Clintons, like their ideological clones the Bushes, are cancers on American politics and governance.
I’m not so sure. Both candidates came with huge liabilities. Hillary had her sky-high negative ratings and her lecherous husband. (Plus, she’s dishonest, phony and transparent.) And there are knuckleheads out there who just won’t vote for a woman, I guess. There are also knuckleheads (and knuckleheadettes) who won’t vote for a mixed race candidate. Obama’s main liability seems to be what the media now calls the “low information voter” — on both ends of the political spectrum. The Rush Limbaughs are mocking his energy plan, and the far-out lefty loonies suddenly find themselves astonished that Barack Obama is not the rabid socialist attack dog of their dreams. I, too, have been disappointed by some of Obama’s decisions and statements (the FISA is inexplicable…), but when I consider the alternative I feel better. McCain is just a dolt. I thought I liked him…I thought he was the moderate conservative of principle, but he has amply demonstrated that he doesn’t have the first idea what he’s talking about. He’s somewhat more eloquent and coherent than the current president, but no better informed.
Polls consistently show Obama in the lead; I think the Obama campaign is also laying low for a little bit until the convention. I feel pretty good about his chances in November. Once the 1:1 debates start, he’s going to eat McCain for breakfast.
If Clinton had been the nominee, the negative ads and scurrilous campaigning would be revolting. She would probably have won, but it would have been a nail-biter.
I think Homer is right about the polling. But I also think Obama has been campaigning rather terribly over the last few weeks. He needs to give up being the high-road Messiah and start bashing first. He doesn’t have to lie and cheat and pander like McCain does (and Hillary would have). He just needs to run clips of McCain talking.
It sounds like you’re saying that Obama’s not enough like McCain and that Hilary would have been a lot more like him. If that would have helped her get elected, we would have ended up with someone not very different from McCain from an ethical point of view. I’d rather have Obama come in with a closer vote and given him the chance to prove the rest of the voters wrong with what he does for the country.
I’m kind of just looking forward to the televised debates and seeing McCain make a fool of himself. He isn’t the same person that was running against Bush 8 years ago and he hasn’t been in front of a camera enough for people to see that.