A new NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll has some surprising numbers about the Republican Party, some of which have been described by other commentators as paradoxical. President Bush's approval numbers continue to remain in the low 30s, while 49% view the Republican Party unfavorably. A whopping 43% believe they are worse off than they were four years ago, a truly shocking number when one considers how utterly bleak the state of the nation was four years ago. 76% of voters want the next president to pursue an approach other than that of President Bush, and in a generic match-up, the Democratic nominee beats the Republican nominee in a thirteen point landslide.
Yet when John McCain is paired against Hillary Clinton, he only loses by two points, and when pitted against Obama, he only loses by three. If voters are fed up with the Republican Party and George W. Bush, and if they are eager for a Democrat to take over, why is John McCain's margin so close?
One possible argument, of course, is that McCain is actually the most electable Republican in his party. It may be, as many have suggested, that for all of the problems Republicans faced during their nomination fight, they may have serendipitously nominated their strongest possible candidate. But on closer inspection, these numbers help underscore the potential for a significant collapse in McCain's support come November.
The American people have yet to associate John McCain with George W. Bush. If they thought the two were one in the same, McCain's support would undoubtedly plummet. But John McCain has cultivated a narrative that paints him as a maverick, a politician willing to disagree with the president when required. Combined with the well-documented discomfort the two have felt for each other since their 2000 campaign, McCain has, at least to some extent, a credible rationale for pointing out differences.
Voters have also apparently disassociated McCain from the Republican Party. Despite his otherwise conservative record, McCain has confronted his own party on issues from earmarks to immigration - a reality only further validated by the right's obvious discomfort with their nominee. In fact, the media portrayal of McCain as an anti-Republican has been so universal that 44% of Democrats view him favorably, while 52% of Republicans would have preferred another nominee.
In the interim, that might sound like encouraging news to the McCain campaign. But underneath the numbers, the true weakness of the McCain candidacy comes to light. After all, McCain has yet to experience the financial arm of the Obama campaign in full force, using every opportunity to paint a McCain presidency as nothing more than a third Bush term. Already, Obama previews the campaign to come with his stump speech, arguing that, though Bush will not be on the November ballot, his policies certainly will.
It is also nearly impossible that McCain will spend nine months as the leader of his party without being painted as a serious member. Having done such a poor job of unifying his base during the primary season, McCain is already finding himself fighting a two-front war, forced to advocate pet Republican policies at a volume too loud for the general election. The more he swears to be a genuine Republican, the more the voters will begin to believe him.
The space McCain has placed between himself, his party, and the president will never appear quite as distant as it does today. On the other side of a billion dollar general election, voters will no doubt view him as a conservative Republican, closely aligned with Bush's policies and ideology.
With 76% of the voters hoping for a president who takes a different approach than Bush, that reality should give John McCain some serious pause.
Senator McCain is supposed to be a black sheep of his party. There is much cliche in that view. It assumes, for instance, that more segment (the so-called "core" voters) are defining for the party as a whole just as the most "leftist" are assumed to represent the Democratic party (which, I would add, is another falacy).
Whatever the stated differences in the two parties (and they are significant enough that I'd be very reluctant to associate myself with the Dems), nevertheless in many practical respects both parties share much common ground. Their is something definably "American" and whatever there is of genuine partisanship, it's a fact that our lives are not that much different. We are all members of one society that is uniquely American.
So, one can emphasize the partisanship -- though I'd consider voting for a Democrat that I admired as an individual. I think that we should, indeed, look more at these candidates as individuals. Surely, we shouldn't eliminate that estimation from our calculus.
I may vote for McCain. Or I might even vote for Obama (I've been considering it). I will assuredly never vote for HIlliary. In whatever judgment I make, I will look at the individual more than at the party. I think it's high time we did. The divisiveness of politics has gotten out of hand. It's one thing to have parties -- we need them both! They provide a necessary competition of ideas and they act as foils to expose the worst ideas of each side. But in recent elections, it's gone too far.
We need to look at ourselves in a more unitary way for a season, to recall that we're Americans, to figure out how to solve problems in cooperation, to find diplomacy right here at home in learning to talk to people with whom we disagree.
So I hope some of the Dems will give McCain a look. Go beyond the "policy" statements and look at the human being. Which one has the best chance of leading well?
Thanks for the tack onto my comment though I'm not clear exactly what its relationship is to mine. Nonetheless, regarding "doddering Reagan" -- I admired Reagan when he was president after I stopped listening to his critics telling me what he said and started paying attention to the man himself. Reading his own words, however, in his book "An American Life," as well as browsing some of the Reagan letters and diaries (these things have been published now), I am stunned. What a truly great man he was and how many citizens still don't know it.
I would be interested in hearing your particular criticisms of this great American president AFTER you've read some of these materials. However, as it stands, you are repeating cliches that are false.
McCain has written at least one book, probably more than one and has a long record. I think it would be wise to judge the man in his own words.
Do keep in mind that those who lie about candidates have their own agenda. Doesn't it make more sense to avail yourself of information in the words of the candidate himself or herself?
Someone I know who loved Reagan was criticizing Obama to me the other day, and I reminded him that people used to (and still do) say exactly the same kinds of things about Reagan. I have concerns about Obama, but I will try not to be swayed by sensationism. I will form my opinion based on the man himself, to the extent that one can. I certainly will not consider HIlliary, but not based on cliche. She has made very specific claims that eliminate her from consideration as far as I'm concerned.
Anyway, if you give in to the argument of stereotype, do so knowing that you are ignoring a chance to make judgements based upon reality. When you believe the "spin doctors" you're giving them power to make choices for you. In that case, it's hard to understand why one even bothers to vote.
We have one who is self-assured, intelligent and is running a race on the truth, why would we even consider the other 2 who have flipped flopped so ofter that I get nauseated just thinking about it.
http://www.examiner.com/blogs/Yeas_and_Nays/2008/3/14/Ventura-Will-he-or-wont-he
What would you like the answer to be?
Until Dems get good at PR, they will be swiftboated and Limbaughed and O'Reillyed.
The Democratic Party needs to take Marketing 101.
"republiCONS are waaaaaaayyyyy better at selling a lie than Democrats are at selling the truth.
Until Dems get good at PR, they will be swiftboated and Limbaughed and O'Reillyed.
The Democratic Party needs to take Marketing 101."
Democrats need to get SERIOUSLY AGGRESSIVE immediately if they are to win
the presidency and majority of Congress. Always being on the "defense" won't ever work.
Get tough. Slap those republiCONS around. EVERYBODY KNOWS that they deserve it.
If Dems don't do this, the public will be convinced they DON'T CARE about them or their problems.
AMEN. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK FELLOW DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!
In the Democratic Party, I had three people ahead of Obama who I figured as tied with Biden & Dodd.
I had Hillary tied for last with Gravel for last so you know what I mean in saying , we had all our best
taken out by a press bent on promoting the most safe, centrist and corporate friendly of candidates.
They are not eager for a Democrat to take over. Because almost everyone knows that the Democrats are lying parasites who don't care about the American people or anyone else. The Dems have proved they are the same as Bush, by steadfastly supporting all of his policies. I honestly believe that our entire federal government should be tried in the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.
But yes I knooooooooowwwwwwww what you mean, how on God's green earth can Mcain have any significant support belonging to the party of evil wreckers of the country? Well this country voted in Bush twice, so I guess that was not a misreading of the American public. I guess we are doomed to hear loud upsetting filth from Republicans, I wish I had enough money to move to, or even visit a civil foreign country like Canada or any European Union country except Britiain which surprisingly to me, has kowtowed to Bush. Unfortunately I have not stolen or had money given to me so I don't belong to the group of people who can afford to do such things as move abroad or take a decent vacation.
I think we have two terrible Dem choices and a Repuke who's crazy as a bedbug. Nader, you're looking better and better.
According to Rasmussen, 57% of Hillary supporters will not vote for Obama, and 64% of Obama supporters will not vote for Clinto.
People are dug in. In fact, when there is a declared nominee, it'll only get worse.
Well, hey, that was Roves' plan anyway - an eternal repiglican majority.
If anything, McCain's numbers will rise when the party has a nominee.