Why Obama Provides a More Compelling Contrast to McCain than Hillary

Barack Obama will provide a far more compelling contrast with John McCain in the fall election than will his rival for the nomination, Hillary Clinton. Here's why:

The polling shows that McCain is currently running substantially ahead of a "generic" Republican candidate in the fall match-up for president. Voters are considerably more favorable to McCain than to a standard-issue Republican.

To guarantee victory in November, Democrats not only need to provide a compelling, hopeful vision for the future. Just as important, we need to undermine that favorable impression of McCain.

In any political campaign, undermining the other candidate's "favorables" involves two tasks. First, you have to drive home his negatives. Second, you have to neutralize his positives.

McCain's strongest negative is his close association with the policies of the widely-reviled George Bush and the gang that brought us the Iraq W\war and economic stagnation. In fact, McCain's foreign and economic policies are virtually indistinguishable from those of Bush. When there's a difference, McCain's policies are Bush-on-steroids.

Our first task is to prove to swing voters that a vote for McCain is a vote for a Bush third term. Over and over we need to demonstrate why "if you liked Bush, you'll love McCain."

Our second problem is just as important. McCain's greatest positive is that many voters believe he is a pragmatic, independent, straight-talking maverick. We need to neutralize this positive with the truth: in fact, McCain is no straight-talker - he will say anything to win.

This is different from trying to convince the voters that McCain is a "flip-flopper." That's what Republicans did to Kerry and it implies that the candidate has no core beliefs.

We won't succeed in convincing voters that McCain is a "flip flopper" with no core beliefs - mostly because he does have core beliefs. He truly does support the core principles of Bush radical conservatism. He believes in a law-of-the-jungle economy. He doesn't think we're all in this together, but rather that we're all in this alone. He believes in the Neo-Con foreign policy of unilateral, preemptive war. He believes in trickle-down economics. He believes that the gang of special interest lobbyists that run his campaign have every right to run Washington.

McCain isn't a "flip-flopper." He sticks with his core principles. But he's perfectly willing to lie about where he stands and what he believes to secure victory. He'll say or do pretty much anything to win.

You don't need to look further than the 180 degree turn McCain made when it came to the late Jerry Falwell and the religious right. He denounced them as intolerant in 2000 when they sided against him with Bush. Yet he snuggled right up to them in 2008 when it served his purposes to get the Republican nomination.

Barack Obama is far better equipped that Hillary Clinton to project and inspiring vision of the future. But he is also better suited to credibly undercut McCain's unfavorables by driving home McCain's negative connection with Bush's policies and philosophy and neutralizing his positive "straight talker" image.

Obama's long-term unequivocal opposition to the Iraq War and his call for fundamental change in American foreign policy are far more compelling contrasts than Clinton's early support of the War and her talk of "obliterating" Iran.

Obama can credibly argue that he will lead a movement among voters to change the way things are done in Bush's Washington - to challenge the special interests - to pass universal health care - and to end unfair trade policies and trickle-down economics. Clinton is saddled by the Clinton administration's passage of NAFTA and other job-killing trade deals; her failure to pass universal health care; all of the conflicts and polarization of the 1990's; and her connection with lobbyist- consultants like former Chief Strategist Marc Penn.

The Obama candidacy offers the contrast of a 46-year-old African-American who overcame enormous odds to challenge the status quo and a 72-year-old-Washington insider whose family is worth $100 million and owns nine homes. McCain embodies the past and the status quo. Obama embodies change and the future.

The contrast with Obama is even more critical when it comes to convincing the voters that McCain will say anything to be elected.

I talked recently to Bryant Sipes from the small town of Alsey, Illinois. Sipes is a corrections officer and ardent hunter. He's also a strong Obama supporter. He called me from the truck to which he had retreated in a rainstorm that had interrupted his turkey hunting. I asked Sipes why he supported Obama.

"Simple," he said. "He tells you the truth. I'm sick of all of the politicians who will tell you anything to win, like Hillary Clinton and John McCain."

Whether or not it's entirely justified, most Americans believe that the Clintons will themselves say pretty much anything to win. Remember that many thought of Bill as "Slick Willie." The Clinton-McCain "gas tax holiday" is a good example. Economists say that most of this "tax break" would actually go to the oil companies who would have no incentive to lower gas prices and pass it along to consumers in the tight summer driving season. At the same time it would cost the Highway Trust Fund $9 billion -- which translates to about 300,000 lost construction jobs. No matter, it sounds good on the stump and at first blush it polls well.

Whatever else you think about Obama, he believes that if you tell the voters the truth, they have the intelligence to make the right decisions.

Obama can credibly make the case that McCain is no straight-shooter at all. Hillary would have a very tough time making that case stick.

Once the primaries are over and voters focus directly on the contrast between the two general election candidates, there is little question that Barack Obama will offer Americans the most inspiring, progressive vision for the future. But he will also provide the contrast that can convince swing voters that John McCain isn't who they think he is.

Robert Creamer is a long time political organizer and strategist and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight. How Progressives Can Win, available on amazon.com

Comments

[merle7]

This is an interesting blog. the comparison and contrast issue to McCain with the dem candidates.
But unfortunately some americans can't look beyond skin color and minister Wright to see this. They rather take the high negatives of Hillary,and the unproven and somewhat proven experience,the scandles, and the bad character flaws than to give an intelligent ,visionary,inspiring and caring AA politician a chance to help move our country in a different direction. They can't look beyond race. But I wonder what are they really afraid of ,could it be his success as a president or do they think only a white man or woman can run this country. Well people that's all this country has had, and it looks like the white man is not doing such a good job. Judging from the events of Hillary's campaign this primary season and if she's elected this country would be stagnant for years to come.

[austinobserver]

It seems that everyone wants to ignore the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Sure, the Republicans will beat the dead horse of the manufactured Wright "scandal" as long as they can, but they fear that an election between Obama and McCain would be mostly about the real issues, and there McCain would get "obliterated." With Hillary, the Republicans know they can focus on Clinton scandals, past and present, real and manufactured, and never even get to the issues. So it is really irrelevant where Hillary positions herself in terms of avoiding all-out Republican assault, though she sure has managed to alienate progressive Democrats with her pandering, war-mongering, coziness to the hard right, use of manufactured issues, support of corporate lobbyists, and general pathological lying, and is doing a good job of alienating African-American voters through her dishonest attacks on Obama.

The Republican operatives are salivating a river thinking about a Hillary nomination. We can only hope that there are not enough ill-informed Democrats to make their dreams come true.

[harmilco]

I'm appalled at Hilary Clinton's campaign strategy, namely "win at any cost". Since when does a candidate decide to change the rules in the middle of a game? What appalls me most is that she hardly seems to consider what the responsibilities of a president entail. What does she plan to do? Use the "nuclear option" against Iran! Sure she's tough, but haven't we had enough of swaggering, gun-toting foreign policy? If her plan is to actually shed a nuclear umbrella over the entire Middle East with the option of pre-emptive strikes against presumptive enemy states, then I for one want no more of of or of her, its proponent. Next to Hillary, John McCain sounds like a dove.

[CaseyBabes]

Obama for President! Gahd, how incredibly preposterous. The man is an empty suit offering absolutely nothing for the country other than "change" from the normal way of doin' things in DC. Cripes, the guy is a company man, rather a zelous company man, and once he assumes office the Washington insiders will tell Obama the way it is going to be, and it will because he has no alternative. Even if Kennedy, Biden, the WVa kliegle, Pelosi, Reid et al were to give Obama his moment (they won't) the Defense briefings will wake him up to assume Bush III.
All three candidates for the highest office are flawed, certainly a given. Yet two of them have a record of accomplishment absent with Obama. Indeed, he is a decent man who worked tirelessly for the inner city poor, but this hardly establishes any ability to defend the country. Sorta indicates he'll rely on the Dept of Defense to do the job, just like Bush, McCain & Clinton. Damn.........................

[Mschmal]

Obama the hypocrite. An out of touch elitist? You be the judge.
Obama gets on "Meet the Press" and blasts the Detroit American Automakers for building the big Trucks and SUVs that Americans want but get bad fuel economy. The Ford F-150, the best selling vehicle in this country for the past 30 years sells at double the number of Toyota Camrys and Chevy Silverado does the same.

Fact Obama drives a gas guzzling 340 hp Chrysler 300C.
Hillary Clinton drives Bills Mercury Mariner Hybrid
John Edwards drives a Ford Escape Hybrid.
Even McCain passes on the Corvette powered Cadillac CTS-V and drives the V6 version.

I'm sick of everyone giving Obama a free pass like he is Elvis or someone who does no wrong. Obama talks the talk but once he is in the White House he'll be just another out of touch snob with know idea like what life is like for the rest of us. Kind of reminds me of George Bush Senior.

As for him being black, he was raised by his white grandparents and white mother. His black is skin deep.

[Jaml3000]

You need to understand that the economy is more than the US, we're in a global economy where Toyota is the #1 car maker now. China & all of Europe have higher fuel efficiency standards than we do. To understand more about the economy, look at the country's largest exporter, The Boeing Company. 100% of their orders are coming from Asia...& their newest product is a more fuel efficient plane, 787. The higher demand for automobiles will come from the billion people living in China & the near billion living in India, so it's important to be able to compete with other car makers, and we're currently at a disadvantage. The demand for oil will continue to rise, so the need for more hybrids & more fuel efficient cars will rise also. Obama is more of a forward-thinker, in that he is able to draw an accurate forecast of what the future will look like, rather than the backward-thinking McCain & Hillary who are mired w/ their Iraq decision, an outcome that Obama predicted.

Think about this.

[peskyliberal]

Please try not to use logic when talking to Obama-Bashers. It makes their brains hurt.

[ntmessage]

Hi Bob,

For once, I agree. Almost. Obama will provide a great contrast, Yes. But no, it will not be more compelling against McCain, unless your views are further left or simply outside of 80% of the general population.

Your point that voters are more favorable to McCain than a standard issue Republican is exactly why Clinton, and not Obama, provides the best competition to McCain. The obvious reason is that Obama is to the left of the standard issue Democrat while Hillarys natural more left-center position matches up better against the right center McCain.

McCains independents are more traditional swing voters. Many of Obamas independents falsely brand themselves as progressives and are actually more extreme activists to the left of the party.
McCain can pivot back to his anti Bush positions, it will be a challenge, but those positions will be recognizable. Obama on the other hand cannot pivot anywhere since he has never connected with the voters he needs to begin with. This will be another attempt to sell Obama by fitting the square peg into a round hole. This will be obvious as it was in FL, OH, and PA primaries as well as other important new swing states.

Clinton on the other hand does not need to pivot one iota. She can run as she always has. This is precisely why she is the most electable. The other two will need to resell their new and disingenuous positions to a critical public.

[MattGuillen]

Robert, this is an excellent article in that...rare as hens' teeth on the Huff Po...you manage to state your case for Obama without vitriolically smearing Hillary.

Which is to say, I don't agree with you where her electability is concerned since, as the NY Times points out this morning, even after discarding Florida and Michigan, she isn't that far behind Obama in popular votes.

Which suggests the Democratic party might have to choose between a Hillary who's won the Dem popular vote and an Obama who's won the delegates: a scenario much to similar to Gore's winning of the popular vote and Bush's delegate victory in 2000.

This wouldn't sit well with many Dems and could easily fuel a McCain assault on Democrat hypocrisy.

But, again, your article makes your point well...without the usual venom you find in these pages.

Thank you.

[hopelessobama]

ohhhh so obama tells the truth? like about rezko, the lobbyist who run his fundraising operation, his changing excuses about wright and trinity church. obama is perhaps the biggest phony in history. he has more in common with carter then mccain does with bush. if you want jimmy carter part 2, then obama is the man.

[JamieStarr]

And yet Hillary is seen as dishonest by 60% of polled voters.

Obama has been truthful about Rezko and Wright. You may not believe him, but there has been no evidence that he has been untruthful.

Unlike Clinton, who was caught in a bold-face lie (sniper-fire) and a pandering lie (gas tax holiday).

[JulieSA]

1. Just call him "McSame" whenever you refer to him.

2. Send fake Baptist minsters to his townhall events and have them say "c***" in front of women and children. This seems to be working quite well.

[S1m0n]

"McCain isn't a "flip-flopper." He sticks with his core principles."

He certainly 'flipped' over torture. Do you think that this issue wasn't one of his core principles, after all?

Because if it isn't, what could be a John McCain core principle?

[hopelessobama]

maybe its that mccain underwent real torture and thinks being splashed in the face is nothing compared to what he went through. i think after what mccain went through, he would take waterboarding over everythng that was done to him.

[JamieStarr]

Waterboarding is "real" torture.

Just because you can do worse, that doesn't mean that the lesser is okay. Thinking like this is why we have lost our standing in the global community.

[mjc]

A post script: McCain isn't a "flip-flopper"????? You don't know the record Creamer. Only on Iraq, and even there, has he not had a major flip. Three or four years ago you heard McCain on how the war was not being executed properly but now that the "surge" was instituted everything is fine; trust Maliki; bomb Iran. Pro-life or pro-choice: which? Flipppppp!

[mjc]

Creamer always seems to attract the concrete-minded Obamacons and this blog is no different than his usual fare. We really don't have any true idea of what Obama will be like as president nor what he will propose but there have been hints that make me sure I don't want to see him as president. Cap on Social Security, the capital gains tax, his half-baked health care plan, all seem to indicate that he'll have ideas and plans more in keeping with the Republicans. He may look in the run to November as if he is a contrast, and he'll have to search hard to find some real differences with McCain, but in the end McCain is not going to have any problem defeating Obama: inexperience, bad judgement in re associates Wright, Rezko, and Ayers, his slimy presentation of his opponent and the shots of him giving her the bird, and his total lack of understanding of a large portion of Americans, some of whom may not vote but many of whom would never vote for Obama. Yep, there are contrasts and they are such that Obama will look a lot less promising to voters. McCain, whether you like him or not, is a war hero of sorts and he's had plenty of experience in the Senate. Obama can't match that at all: contrast.

[IsobelDeBrujah]

"this blog is no different than his usual fare" Yes, in that it contains the truth.

[joanndarc]

Fake-o-Hillary became the problem of Democratic party since honesty is something people are looking for this election cycle.

[graffen48]

Why are you so obsessed with Wright?? If he was Obama's mentor, I'd say he did a pretty good job of it, even if he did go overboard with some of his statements. If you could get Wright out of your head for just a few minutes and listen to what Obama has to offer this country, I think you might be surprised at what you hear. Yes, Obama was forced to disown Wright, in large part because of hysterical people like you who keep making an issue out of it.

[Chuckamok]

There is NO DOUBT that Obama poses a starker contrast to McCain, and therefore is a better candidate for the Dems than HRC.

No doubt about it.

The vast Dem majority may be delusional ... or not ... but Hill-Rod offers Pub Lite - the same ole same ole triangulation that the Dick Morris-advised BubbaJeff used to wrangle a "victory."

Hill-Rod tacks to the center, lies her ass off, belittles initiatives sacred to the BubbaJeff legacy itself, just for political expediency.

Dem loyalists could expect no more (or less) out of the despised Republican opposition.

Make no mistake - Obama has the nomination in the bag. To derail this would bing fire and brimstone down upon the Super-D's, who, make NO doubt it, are looking after their own asses FIRST.