McCain Benefits From Protracted Democratic Race

Despite assurances by Sens. Clinton and Obama that everything will come out rosy in November, Democrats are becoming more and more concerned that the protracted infighting is only benefiting Sen. McCain.

The New York Times points out that even the McCain camp is pretty pleased that a steep hill is flattening itself out for them:

Democratic operatives have prepared a sustained attack against what they call myths underlying Mr. McCain's reputation for straight talk. "It's going to take a while to tear that down," said Jim Jordan, a consultant who will lead a Democratic Party advertising campaign to aid its nominee. Lamenting the Clinton-Obama fight, Mr. Jordan added, "That's why it would be nice to get this over with as soon as possible."

For now, Mr. Obama faces continued fallout from the controversy over his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. And Mrs. Clinton continues to fend off Mr. Obama's attacks on her integrity. If that has not made Mr. McCain the fall favorite, it has left him in a far better position than a month ago.

"Everything about the playing field still tilts against us," said Neil Newhouse, a Republican pollster. "But the slope is not as steep. As a Republican, things have started to look a little brighter."

The New Republic explores how McCain is able to reconcile with his conservative base in private, while swing voters are exposed every night to the latest dirty laundry from the Democratic senators:

The problem is that each day Clinton and Obama spend consumed with the other is a day that moves John McCain closer to the White House. McCain's biggest asset is his political brand, which evokes a straight-talking, party-bucking reformer. Among his biggest liabilities is the suspicion he inspires among conservatives thanks to these same attributes. McCain apparently plans to spend the next few months making nice with his base. But anything he accomplishes on this front clearly diminishes his swing-voter appeal and, therefore, his chances in November.

Ideally, the Democrats would be exploiting this tension like mad. They would highlight the anti-Catholic, anti-gay ravings of John Hagee, the evangelical minister whose endorsement McCain recently accepted. They would ridicule his chumminess with supply-side Neanderthals like Jack Kemp and his flip-flop on the Bush tax cuts. They'd dwell on McCain's less-noticed association with crony-capitalists during his tenure as Commerce Committee chairman.

Instead, something close to the opposite is happening. McCain's courtship of the lunatic right and his ties to K Street have largely been hidden from view, while the Democrats' dirty laundry has been aired for swing voters. The upshot for Democrats has not been good. In late February, a Gallup poll showed Obama leading McCain among independents by 15 points. By March 6, a Newsweek poll put McCain up ten points among this group--and that was before Jeremiah Wright weighed in. Hillary went from down five to down 15 among independents during the same time.

Chris Bowers laments that the Democratic campaign has turned into a unprovable discussion of which candidate is more electable:

Barring something shocking, like the Michigan delegation being seated as is, the delegate math is clearly laid out before us, and Obama will slowly slog toward clinching the nomination sometime between May 20th and June 21st. For now, unfortunately, we are stuck in a holding pattern of an endless electability argument. I don't think that this sort of campaign will carry with it the benefit of the first two months of the year, where an intense, high-profile Democratic nomination campaign was largely helpful to the party. That is demonstrable by McCain taking the lead in general election matchups over the past two weeks. Without any voting to maintain interest between Mississippi and Pennsylvania, the void has been filled with electability and race (with the latter really being about electability). That is not the kind of discussion that Democrats need to win, because when Democrats talk about electability, no one believes what Democrats say.

Comments

[ntmessage]

If you believe that this process hurts the Democrats in the fall, you can place 100% of the blame squarely on the DNC, not the candidates or the media. The candidates are expected to fight it out and we can now prove that the media plays favorites. On the other hand to create rules were no one can actually win before the convention, disenfranchise voters or believe that a caucus and proportional delegate system could ever select a candidate that can win in the general, well that is the DNC leadership alone acting to mess with the process to the point that it is so perverted and likely corrupt, how could they do anything than hope that the candidates bail them out. The silence from the DNC leadership throughout this process is deafening, lacks leadership and of course rightfully takes 100% of the blame and no one else.

[dadw5boys]

MEDIA CREATES PROBLEMS AND BLAMES THE CANDICATES!

[RobertaInCT]

[donaldw6]

I'm prepared to let this thing go on until May 6th, through the NC and IN primaries, if everyone behaves. I can wait to see if there's some miraculous last-minute rush to Hillary's side. But I say if the mud starts flying Obama's way one more time, it's over. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who'll say this.

[sparkandy]

Is the Democratic Party just now figuring this out? Everyone has known it for the longest time, most of all regular Democrats like the posters here. That being said, there's nothing that can be done at this point. The candidates are too close for one to drop out. Of course, since Obama is marginally ahead, his supporters want Clinton to, but Clinton supporters feel they have the right to hang in there until the end. It's bad now, but once it's resolved, and the Dems can concentrate on McCain this will all be water under the bridge. All the candidates are seriously flawed, and maybe this little fuss lets people who aren't Democrats get a good look at them so we can decide which one is the least flawed so that by November we'll know if we want McCain and another four years of same old or the Dem candidate and four years of God only knows what.

[PacificGatePost]

The mud you sling is going to stick..... dems, ease up////

[billrott]

Dems do not need to ease up, they need to end it. Hillary had her chance and she blew it. That is it. Each time another super delegate endorses Obama or another contest goes by, Hillary gets more desperate and goes more negative. At this point, Hillary is not even using facts to attack her opponent. She is using lies or should I say "misspeak".

[PacificGatePost]

DEMOCRATS, EASE UP A LITTLE..

[yeswecancan]

So not only is Mrs. Clinton delaying the Democrats' focus on John McCain, she is destroying our ability to make these honest policy and character distinctions with this man that, to those who have not closely examined his highly conservative record, is still seen as the Republican/Independent maverick that could offer a reasonable alternative to the flawed Democratic nominee. For Obama supporters, McCain is a big unknown and their threats of "anybody but Hillary" is most likely hot air (and unlikely to pose a real problem as Sen. Obama should still get the nomination). But for Mrs. Clinton's supporters, her continued praise of Sen. McCain signals her feverishly excited supporters that if she is not the nominee -- then it is Sen. McCain that she truly believes is the best alternative. And that, my friends, is the true story of Judas Iscariot in this political Good Friday story.

[yeswecancan]

I'm gonna try to re-post the end of my comment one final time, but I'm not very confident -- master, repair your blog!

[fignozzle]

if hillary clinton were one half of the patriot she claims to be she would have backed obama a long time ago.

[marthlois]

John - did I miss your comment today about the 4,000 lives taken by the war? I heard from Hillary and

[yeswecancan]

Hmmm, my post got cut off. So here's the ending of my earlier post again:

[yeswecancan]

The problem for Democrats is that Sen. Obama is trying to run against both Sen. McCain and Sen. Clinton, while Sen. Clinton seems bent on running against Sen. Obama ... and with Sen. McCain. And the Clintons wonder why the rest of the party is seeing red! Ronald Reagan pronounced the Republican's 11th Commandment -- thou shalt not criticize a fellow Republican. Mrs. Clinton seems to want to turn that on its head. No other candidate trailing in delegates, votes and states at this late date would still be seen as a viable candidate by the MSM but simply continuing to campaign isn't the outrage here -- it's the "kitchen sink" tactics openly embraced by her campaign. And chief among these is the baffling decision to tear Barack Obama down by building John McCain up -- he and Hillary are the only 2 candidates ready for that 3 am phone call; only Johnny and Hill are best pals and true patriots, ready to have a serious campaign about the issues, and not focusing on all the rest of that "stuff" (like race, Bill?). So not only is Mrs. Clinton delaying the Democrats' focus on John McCain, she is destroying our ability to make these honest policy and character distinctions with this man that, to those who have not closely examined his highly conservative record, is still seen as the Republican/Independent maverick that could offer a reasonable alternative to the flawed Democratic nominee. For Obama supporters, McCain is a big unknown

[billrott]

The problem is that Hillary Clinton is attempting to knee cap Obama. Obama on the other hand will not attack a fellow Democrat as unethically as Hillary. Yes, Obama has called for Hillary's experience to be vetted and called for full disclosure of documents. These calls are not unethical or negative. Calling your opponent a closet muslim on 60 Minutes that is a negative personal attack.

[BadChristian]

Clinton, "By any means necessary."

[huffhuffpass]

No country for old men

[marthlois]

Johnny - you got some 'splaining to do! They're gonna come after you now! No more Teflon John (as Abrams like to call you). Do not get me started on Hagee & Parsley - I've been waiting for this debate for a very, very long time now.

[neocon43]

I am glad you have been waiting for a long time for this.That strategy is a loser against Mccain.People already know what kind of a man he is and integrity he has.But please go ahead make my day.Also he did not sit for 20 years in these pastors church.No spinning required.

[Ramirez]

There is one clear conclusion that can be drawn from this:

[GOP4MoreTears]

Mind draw a blank?

[intellifem]

I think what's happening is the evolution of a third party in US politics. Obama represents the left wing of the party and Hillary is the center. This split has been apparent in the party since McCarthy and McGovern, et al. and now it's coming apart at the seams. Perhaps this is why the campaign has become so bitter--the 2 sides know that there's no going back. The country will never elect Obama if and will probably opt for split government, voting for a Dem congress and a Repub White House. This might happen with Hillary as the nominee also. But without FL and MI in the Dem nominating process, it's going to be McCain. End of story.

[Colonial82]

BS, old ideas of "this state is key to winning or that state is key" is over, Obama can redraw the politicial map. He can put in states into play than haven't been in play for Democrats in decades. He can have his own type of Reagan landslipe on the electoral map, especially with the economy in the tank.

[tbone99]

It'd be a pretty sad state of affairs if a Wallstreet - Excelon nuclear -Archer Midland -supported Obama would be considered the left wing.