Summertime polls are everything if you look at the history and dynamic of previous campaigns. Every democratic candidate since primaries were instituted in the mid 1960s has had a solid lead in the polls prior to Labor day. A bounce follows of up to 10 points, then the electorate slowly turns to the right as the race tightens. This is the case even if a dem wins.
At a time when when he should be clobbering McCain and the GOP, his ratings are dropping. Why? Answering questions about abortion with cloudy speak like "it's not my pay grade" and lying about his defense of the FISA bill is catching up with the flipper. The mainstream press is still in bed with him, but Joe Average voter is seeing through his thin skin. If BHO had a record (other than abortion), or if had some political accomplishments that we were aware of, it might be different. But a campaign that survives on lofty platitudes and promises that have no root in proved credibility is an empty one indeed. And worse of all, his belief in his own press wrapped in hubris will hand the election to McCain on a silver platter.
Race Isn't the Reason for Obama's Slide
I posed this simple question to a savvy political columnist for a popular black newspaper: Why hasn't Barack Obama run away with this election? Instead, according to the latest Zogby/Reuters poll he's on the slide. Republican rival John McCain now has a not insignificant poll lead over Obama. Even more galling to the Democrats: more voters say that McCain, a Republican of all things, can better manage the economy than Obama. At first glance this makes no sense. Here we have a Democratic presidential candidate with every star aligned for him that a presidential candidate could only dream of. That's a miserably failed Republican presidency, an apparent confused, disoriented, and divided Republican party, a bombed economy, an unpopular war, a cash cow campaign, a fawning media, and charisma too boot.
The columnist's retort to my question was, "Easy, he's black."
The answer was blunt, straightforward, and even a tinge bitter. It's also dead wrong. During the Democratic primary wars Obama racked up a phenomenal string of nearly a dozen victories. This effectively knocked Hillary Clinton out of the contest. He didn't do it solely with black votes. In most of these primary or caucus victories, there were few black votes to be had. He did it with white voters. They were young and old, and many of them were disenchanted cross over Republicans and independents. From the instant that Obama jumped in the presidential race, polls have been unwavering and showed that many whites were so fed up with Bush's failed policies that they'd overwhelmingly back a Democrat who stood for change, no matter what color.
For a time Obama seemed to be that candidate. When he stopped becoming that candidate, or least perceived as not being that candidate, the seeds of voter doubt crept in. None of this has anything to do with race.
The list of things that caused that doubt is long. He back-flipped and supported the FISA bill. He rejected public financing, blasted the Supreme Court's decision striking down the death penalty for child rape and in the process proclaimed that he's not against "a blanket" prohibition on the death penalty. He showcased his Bible acumen with Christian fundamentalists, backpedaled from his pledge to sit down for talks with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said he wouldn't support the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine and endorsed white conservative Georgia Rep. John Barrow in his election battle with Regina Thomas, a liberal black state representative.
The most painful Obama flop is Iraq. His much played up anti-Iraq war stance was the biggest single thing that galvanized liberals and radicals. His new line that he favors a glacially slow, vaguely laid out timetable for a phased withdrawal from Iraq seems not much different than what McCain advocates.
Obama, Team Obama, and some pundits tried to put the best face on his shifts and turns and explain them as the correction that he had to make to have any chance at centrist and conservative votes. That part makes sense. Voters don't elect American presidents on the extremes. In the serious stages of the campaign, Republicans that have run to the right move left toward the center and Democrats that have run to the left move right toward the center. Obama is simply following the formula. And besides, some argued, didn't McCain flip flop on some of his positions?
This argument doesn't wash. McCain did not pose himself as a candidate of change. Obama did. The Zogby poll showed that this is the single biggest reason for Obama's poll reversal. It's not exactly a mass exodus, but plainly a lot of liberals don't like his shifts. His support among them plunged more than 12 percent. Another ten percent said that they were undecided. That's a dangerous number, since presumably most are Democrats.
Obama is making the same potentially lethal stumble that Democratic presidential contenders John Kerry and Al Gore made in keeping McCain in a race that should by all rights be a rout. He ignored his base in the chase after the mythical Democratic votes on the right and conservative center. That base is liberals, young voters, and especially blacks. He stopped talking about change, and the war, and has been virtually mute on failing inner city public schools, criminal justice reform, the Depression-level unemployment among minority youth, gang and drug violence, the HIV/AIDS plague and immigration reform.
He hasn't used the campaign stump as a bully pulpit to talk about them. The continued failure to do this will cost him even more dearly with liberals, young voters, and could even sour some blacks on him. McCain's inch ahead of Obama then has little to do with race. It has everything to do with a candidate who a little more than two months out from November 4 can't make up his mind whether he's Change Obama or Conservative Obama, and risks winding being neither.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book is The Ethnic Presidency: How Race Decides the Race to the White House (Middle Passage Press, February 2008).
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Earl; your both right and wrong on this one. You cant dismiss the effect of Obama's race but you are right on point with the rest of your observation. Obama has lost the excitement and the trust of his base. I used to send him money and had planned on working real hard on getting him elected. Today i will vote for him but that is it. Why ? Because i dont trust him. I dont think he stands for anything except getting elected. His push for the middle has hurt him with his base and unfortunately he does not seem to care. He is chasing voters that are not going to vote him and he wld be better served getting his base excited. But who are we? His vote on fisa and the other flip flops cost him his credibility and once he loses that he is just another politician. I call him McCain lite and if the country is choosing btwn McCain and McCain lite we might as well choose the original. I predict he loses in November and then maybe the democrats will learn that in order to win the office you have to be the opposite of the republican party . Give us a real choice for change and we will take it. O has lost his brand and his base by the decisions his campaign has made.
Obama's problem has to do with this belief that everyone has to be positive and we're running a positive campaign. Reality is that negative campaigning works. It might not have worked on Obama until the Rev Wright and American's are bitter stuff came out. When that happened it was like Obama became one of us, the politician who's vulnerable to attacks like everyone else. Hillary started hammering him hard, he didn't fight back and we gave him a pass because the election was pretty much won and he didn't want to alienate hillary supporters post the primiaries. Ih he had gone negative vs Hillary, he would have been in a worse off state at this time. Now John McCain has already shown himself to be regular politician. ennough of all that sweet talk of new politics. The only thing that works against the republicans is hardcore negative attacks. I think Obama has done a good job in waiting for everyone to know that the McCain camp has gone very negative. now it's time for the Obama camp to hit back hard. I think they've been trying to do that in the last ocuple of days. They just have to be disciplined and hit on not more than two themes for a few days.... The celebrtiy ads against obama worked cause the republicans stuck to it
It has nothing to do with his race. It has to do with:
1. Summer time malaise
2. A little disillusionment among the far left (aka some Progressives) and
3. The Clintonistas holding out for Hillary (it really is TOO soon to expect all of them to have come home yet)
Independents and Progressives make up people choosing to believe Obama has flip flopped, when careful analysis of Obama's explanations will make them realize alot of these so called flip flops are decisions based on logical reasoning, not their dogmatic ideology or his political posturing.
I believe Obama's rationalizations for his decisons make sense, if people bother to listen instead of getting up in arms over headlines about FISA or offshore drilling without HEARING what the man is actually saying about his decisions. He shows he is a careful, thinking, man, the kind of person we should want in a leader.
I think as Obama continues to define the differences between him and McCain, and the Clintons enthusiastically and convincingly embrace Obama's candidacy at the Convention, we will see some of this change.
Furthermore, Summer time polls mean nothing!!! If they did, Dukakis would have won in 88, Gore, Kerry, etc. It's all about the Fall!
I reiterate -- the issue is not with disillusioned liberals and progressives who will return to Obama in November (having no other place to viably go), the issue is with the undecideds, independents and moderate Republicans. In other words, the problem is the Obama brand fails to energize post-primary.
I understand the impetus to believe in Obama, but this is not the time to sit pat. As David Sirota noted in his piece here today (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/seizing-the-obama-moment_b_120199.html): "Though the media's horse race coverage and the Left and Right echo chambers 'win at all cost' psychology would have us believe that elections are ends unto themselves, our Founders envisioned them as means to ends -- instruments by which the people's will is debated, politicians are pressured, and a mandate is crafted."
Perhaps a convention less tightly controlled and policed would help the process. But blind belief and naive conviction that all will be well IF ONLY we could elect Obama skirts your dynamic role in the process. The Fall is upon us, in more ways than one.
Great post Earl- its not that Obama is making those choices , necessarily, hell we're used to holding our noses and voting against republicans. Its that he and his campaign so blatantly misepresented him in order to win the primary against candidates that may have had attributes that we would have chosen instead. Too many supporters really were Obamacrats, not Democrats .
His handling of the Wright controversy was telling - how easily he would ditch the past to in orer to to please( not only ditch ,but turn on and denounce ) .So many people who backed him as a single issue candidate( his non vote against the war) without considering other factors are no different than people who vote only on abortion.
Many here claim McCain flip flops, too, so why isn't he accountable for it. Simple. When in the Senate for many years, as McCain has been, you do change your vote. You vote for a bill while it's in committee and get it to the floor. Then you vote against it when it appears on the floor. Then at campaign time you can tell supporters of the bill that you were for it. And you can tell opponents of the bill that you voted against it. Besides, bills change when amendments are added and what once was good has become bad. People in politics understand this. That's one reason why McCain's change on issues isn't considered a big deal. But when Obama comes forth and is the agent of change and a new way of doing things, well doing things the old way --changes and flip flops--is just not right.
Earl, I don't think you are really wrong, but to say race doesn't come into play is disingenuous, of course it does to some extent. That being said you are correct that he was the "agent of change" and created this image that he must now live up to. This might be true but those of us who are democrats for years realize that if you want to win the presidency you have to appeal to "all" even if we don't like some of the rhetoric. My question would rather be do you think if he wasn't the "agent of change" that he being a black man could have won in the primaries? I don't think he would have been able to win and what would his message have been? He needed to stand for something other than trying to be the next Jesse Jackson.
Earl, very good post but Race does have allot to do with this election.. Hers is one of several examples that i know of.
Some friends of mine cannot stand Mc Cain about the war in Iraq
Dislike Mc Cains immigration policy big time
Does not trust anything about Mc Cain and are afraid he will place us in harms way with more wars.
These frinds of mine are voting for him and stumple when i question them about Barak so then talk about experiance.
The nessage is Race does play a important roll in this election and allot of people have not worken up yet that we ALL are G-DS children.
Obama's slide isn't all about race; McCain is using the old soft on communism (and newer) soft on terrorism tactics to paint him as weak and that is hurting him as it always has with Democratic candidates. He's also flipped the script on who's out of touch with the working class and we can thank Hillary Clinton for tilling the ground with those seeds, but that will change. McCain won't be able to hold the "regular" guy ground when his background is better known and his statements about "who's rich" and how many houses he owns get more widely spread. Earl Ofari Hutchinson is writing like "Obamamaniacs" are becoming disillusioned with broken promises. Some of us have supported Obama, knowing he was not going to be a "liberal" messiah, but because he can mobilize people, particularly young people, and that someone needs to galvanize a new generation into politics if any of us is to have a chance at this critical moment in history. The hope is that he might grow. John Kennedy did not lead the Civil Rights Movement, he had had to be dragged into it.
Neither Obama nor HiIlary promised immediate withdrawal from Iraq, but they did promise withdrawal. Obama can still whip McCain on Iraq. He will also win back the ground lost on the economy. McCain is no populist and won't be able to hold onto that mantle. It's not time to lose heart and write post-mortems.
I agree 100%!!!!
If you've read The Audacity of Hope you would know that he really hasn't flip-flopped on anything except for FISA. Not only that, but he has always insisted that when he talks about change it is not simply a change in party or a change in lobbyists but rather a change in approach towards governing. He has explicitly stated, since before running for the Senate, that he is about pragmatic solutions to problems. That means not only ACCEPTING Republican ideas on issues but, in fact, SOLICITING their ideas at times. If you are upset that Obama isn't the fire-breathing liberal you for some dumb reason thought he would be then YOU are the one who made the mistake. And I'd rather Obama lose while being himself - a pragmatic problem solver who aims to be truly bi-partisan - than win based on some phony left-liberal pose just to win an election. The latter is not Change I Can Believe In - It's "Change" I Could Have Predicted.
"And I'd rather Obama lose while being himself - a pragmatic problem solver who aims to be truly bi-partisan - than win based on some phony left-liberal pose just to win an election."
Well, you may get your wish and we will all be the worse for it.
very honest and good post Lemeritus
Thank You! Someone who actually "gets" it!!!!
Zogby polls only contact people in the phone book - hence missing the a large fraction of technically savvy people and everyone under the age of 25 (thats a mild exaggeration). Their poll ending two days earlier had a statistically significantly different outcome and nothing really happened in those days to make the difference. I don't think Obama's swing to the middle is going to cause left-wing voters to flip to McCain (left wing voters are far too intelligent for that) but it may cost him votes by taking away the excitement his candidacy generated in young people. Will they get out and vote for him now? We'll see when Nov 3 rolls around. But using one Zogby poll to define a "slide" just does not make sense - but when you have a deadline, you have to find something to write about.
I don't get why a black man is expected to being blowing out a white war hero in America anyway? He's lead was never that great in the polls and now he's down but not by a lot. Progressives attacking their own candidate doesn't help, and neither does the MSM with their constant validation of JMacs lies and talking points. Plus the constant lies and negative adds work. The more JMac lies, the more he goes up in the polls. One more point, thntn is right, those polls don't account for cell phones. I don't believe 0 is going to win. JMac will win and we will have 4 more years of the same non sense, then Americans might wising up and put 0 in the White House, if he'll have us.
If a pollster asked me what I think...I would load my answer to favor McCain to give a false-positive, just because prior to the election I want to remind Obama NOT to do the usual flip-flop fandango to the right center. I expect Obama to moderate his views in the campaign but he does need reminding that his core base will leave him if he strays too far off-book and becomes just another whiny limp-wrist Democrat. Right now he's not framing the argument very well and is wavering against a guy who looks like Moe of the Three Stooges. It's not because he's black.
Ohhh that'll teach'em.
I've since decided he's conservative Obama and accordingly I've stopped helping him.
It didn't take much did it?
I think you need to listen to Obama's landmark speech. You seem to think he was a Candidate just for left leaning Liberals like myself. That's not what got me to Obama, if that was the case I would have kept going for Kucinich.
Remember, this is the man who said(in 2004 at the DNC Convention):
"Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us -- the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of "anything goes." Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there"s the United States of America...There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America."
This could be reiterated now, once again, in 2008. Obama does not represent Liberal America, or Conservative America, he represents the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, like it or not. We all bleed the same color.
Stirring rhetoric in which we desperately want to believe -- just to hear English spoken again moved many a voter. But what does it mean? What about FISA? What about off-shore drilling? Do you really think Obama can deliver on health care if he refuses to deal honestly with tax increases? What should our party aspire to -- or have we left (no pun intended) our agenda behind in the post-partisan world?
I don't think his race is significant in polls today but I think it will have an impact on election day.
Thank you, It is not a campaign issue. Race will only become a reality on election day
OBAMA HAS NEVER STRAYED FROM 16 MONTH WITHDRAWAL.
LATELY HE'S PLACED MORE EMPHASIS ON SAFELY COMING HME- NOT A FLIP FLOP!
A FLIP-FLOP S WHEN THE BUSH TAX CUTS "OFFENDED YOUR CONSCIENCE" & NOW YOU TRUMPET THEM!
LOOK AT ALL OBAMA'S SPEECHES THRUOUT THE PRIMARIES- 16 MOTHS- SAFE PACE- NEVER STRAYED FROM THAT!
And it is because he's black. I mean George W beat McCain in a primary, and he's dumber than McCain.
Things haven't changed that much when a Harvard grad running for prez is called elitist- Had he gone to Morehouse they'd be saying he's a "black separatist.
Wrong.
All you have to do is look at past candidates and ask yourself how much respect THEIR ideas received and you can trace jsut about every public reaction--including from blacks themselves--to Obama's race.
It's called being stuck in the syndrome of having to offer "twice as much to get half the credit."
Obama's problem is that he has to be nearly perfect. Where previous candidates were NEVER examined to the extent Obama has been (in spite of them having as little or less experience--and a lot less intelligence--compared to Obama: Bush, Reagan...What kind of military experience did Clinton have?...).
Even McCain's nasty ads take it to a new level...because he can-- and with impunity, too. People are quicker to overlook or forgive the white guy's foibles while the black guy's are quickly used to reinforce what they wanted to think was the case all along.
The problem is that Americans just can not relate to an intelligent guy.
Posted August 20, 2008 | 07:49 PM (EST)