Alternative History
Kevin Drum writes:
I couldn't disagree more. This really, really does not give Obama enough credit. And while it's easy to love Hillary again now that we are all on the same side, let's not forget that Hillary was and is a very polarizing figure amongst independents and Republicans.
Playing a game of alternative history is always fun, so let's do it. Let's say that Hillary won Iowa and somehow performed well enough in the caucus states to pull off a victory against Barack Obama. How would she have performed compared to Obama, and how would have McCain reacted?
Chaos and negativity. First, Hillary's campaign was incredibly poorly run, with the same kind of drama and in-fighting that we are seeing from the McCain camp. With Mark Penn churning out talking points and attack ads, they'd be right in the mud with McCain. Voters would view both candidates as negative, as opposed to the current situation where Obama is viewed as much more positive. The gap in favorability between Obama and McCain? Cut it in half if Hillary were the candidate. Actually, maybe just erase it altogether.
The inspiration factor. Hillary is not an inspiring speaker or motivator. Sure, plenty of Boomer women loved her and worked their asses off for her, but you wouldn't see GOTV operations as fully staffed with excited young people as you do now. Compare Obama's caucus turnout to Hillary's. That's where you see enthusiasm and dedication. Look at Obama's small dollar fundraising versus Hillary's. Same thing. Would Hillary have invested so much time and money into voter registration and GOTV? Nope. She would be running a typical Clinton/Gore/Kerry campaign, based on daily talking points and TV ads.
The financial meltdown. How would Hillary have reacted when McCain suspended his campaign and tried to postpone the debate? No one can know for sure, but I do know that Hillary was prone to stunts and panders all through the primary. With Mark Penn in her ear, she just might have suspended her campaign too and tried to take over the negotiations in the Senate. Hell, she would have tried to stick her terrible "freeze interest rates" and "freeze foreclosures" ideas into the bailout package. I don't think Hillary has the calm or the cool of Obama, and probably wouldn't have played this as masterfully as he did in those decisive days.
Sarah Palin. If Hillary were our nominee, there is no way in hell that McCain would have picked Sarah Palin. Heck, even if Hillary was Obama's VP then Palin would not have been chosen. Palin was strictly a desperate grab for the mythical PUMA vote, and it has backfired spectacularly. I'd say that 60% of McCain's drop in the polls has been a result of Palin, the other 40% because of the financial crisis. Replace Palin with Romney, Pawlenty, or Huckabee and McCain gets an instant 3-4 point bump in the polls, maybe more. Palin has literally destroyed McCain's campaign, leaving him to hope that conservative white voters pull him across the finish line despite the campaign and despite the candidates at the top of the ticket.
Smear and fear. You think that McCain would have had a tough time finding ways to attack Hillary? Ha! Obama is actually hard to attack, because you have to make things up out of thin air. Muslim, socialist, radical, blah blah blah. With Hillary, the Republicans have warehouses full of dirt. Just start with Bill Clinton's 2001 pardons -- Marc Rich, convicted members of the Weather Underground, some Puerto Rican radicals. Or how about a Whitewater rerun? Or maybe endless ads about Hillary's snipergate lies, contrasted with McCain's real war service? Let's not get into Bill's presidential library and the secret donors behind it, or Hillary's connections to convicted Chinese donors. Trust me, it would have been just as ugly as it is now, except there would have been more truth behind the Hillary smears. Half of the stuff has been cycling through right wing media for fifteen years already.
On the plus side, Hillary is a stronger debater than Obama and would have more than held her own against McCain. He's a world class misogynist and might have allowed his patronizing attitude to come through, hurting his favorability. And yes, McCain is a terrible candidate who wouldn't have inspired his base in a world without Palin.
But don't tell me the numbers would be exactly the same with any other candidate. Obama is a once-in-a-generation politician running the smoothest campaign ever seen by a Democrat. He's a world class speaker with sky high favorability and charisma, and incredible political instincts.
With Hillary we would still be favored, but the race would be a few points tighter and nobody can convince me otherwise.
Obama has run a good campaign, but if Hillary Clinton had won the nomination (or Al Gore or John Kerry or Socks the cat) they'd all be ahead by seven points too.
I couldn't disagree more. This really, really does not give Obama enough credit. And while it's easy to love Hillary again now that we are all on the same side, let's not forget that Hillary was and is a very polarizing figure amongst independents and Republicans.
Playing a game of alternative history is always fun, so let's do it. Let's say that Hillary won Iowa and somehow performed well enough in the caucus states to pull off a victory against Barack Obama. How would she have performed compared to Obama, and how would have McCain reacted?
Chaos and negativity. First, Hillary's campaign was incredibly poorly run, with the same kind of drama and in-fighting that we are seeing from the McCain camp. With Mark Penn churning out talking points and attack ads, they'd be right in the mud with McCain. Voters would view both candidates as negative, as opposed to the current situation where Obama is viewed as much more positive. The gap in favorability between Obama and McCain? Cut it in half if Hillary were the candidate. Actually, maybe just erase it altogether.
The inspiration factor. Hillary is not an inspiring speaker or motivator. Sure, plenty of Boomer women loved her and worked their asses off for her, but you wouldn't see GOTV operations as fully staffed with excited young people as you do now. Compare Obama's caucus turnout to Hillary's. That's where you see enthusiasm and dedication. Look at Obama's small dollar fundraising versus Hillary's. Same thing. Would Hillary have invested so much time and money into voter registration and GOTV? Nope. She would be running a typical Clinton/Gore/Kerry campaign, based on daily talking points and TV ads.
The financial meltdown. How would Hillary have reacted when McCain suspended his campaign and tried to postpone the debate? No one can know for sure, but I do know that Hillary was prone to stunts and panders all through the primary. With Mark Penn in her ear, she just might have suspended her campaign too and tried to take over the negotiations in the Senate. Hell, she would have tried to stick her terrible "freeze interest rates" and "freeze foreclosures" ideas into the bailout package. I don't think Hillary has the calm or the cool of Obama, and probably wouldn't have played this as masterfully as he did in those decisive days.
Sarah Palin. If Hillary were our nominee, there is no way in hell that McCain would have picked Sarah Palin. Heck, even if Hillary was Obama's VP then Palin would not have been chosen. Palin was strictly a desperate grab for the mythical PUMA vote, and it has backfired spectacularly. I'd say that 60% of McCain's drop in the polls has been a result of Palin, the other 40% because of the financial crisis. Replace Palin with Romney, Pawlenty, or Huckabee and McCain gets an instant 3-4 point bump in the polls, maybe more. Palin has literally destroyed McCain's campaign, leaving him to hope that conservative white voters pull him across the finish line despite the campaign and despite the candidates at the top of the ticket.
Smear and fear. You think that McCain would have had a tough time finding ways to attack Hillary? Ha! Obama is actually hard to attack, because you have to make things up out of thin air. Muslim, socialist, radical, blah blah blah. With Hillary, the Republicans have warehouses full of dirt. Just start with Bill Clinton's 2001 pardons -- Marc Rich, convicted members of the Weather Underground, some Puerto Rican radicals. Or how about a Whitewater rerun? Or maybe endless ads about Hillary's snipergate lies, contrasted with McCain's real war service? Let's not get into Bill's presidential library and the secret donors behind it, or Hillary's connections to convicted Chinese donors. Trust me, it would have been just as ugly as it is now, except there would have been more truth behind the Hillary smears. Half of the stuff has been cycling through right wing media for fifteen years already.
On the plus side, Hillary is a stronger debater than Obama and would have more than held her own against McCain. He's a world class misogynist and might have allowed his patronizing attitude to come through, hurting his favorability. And yes, McCain is a terrible candidate who wouldn't have inspired his base in a world without Palin.
But don't tell me the numbers would be exactly the same with any other candidate. Obama is a once-in-a-generation politician running the smoothest campaign ever seen by a Democrat. He's a world class speaker with sky high favorability and charisma, and incredible political instincts.
With Hillary we would still be favored, but the race would be a few points tighter and nobody can convince me otherwise.
posted by Existenz | 1:25 AM
2 Comments:
Interesting post, Existenz. Relevantly, as many prominent experts these days have noted, Obama is a member of Generation Jones–born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and GenXers.
Here is a column by Clarence Page about GenJones in last week’s Chicago Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped1022pageoct22,0,2775732.column
And this new 5 minute GenJones video features many top pundits (including David Brooks, Clarence Page, Dick Morris, Juan Williams, Karen Tumulty, Howard Wolfson, Michael Barone, etc.) specifically talking about Obama (and Palin’s) membership in Generation Jones, as well as the surprisingly big role that GenJones is now playing in this election: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ta_Du5K0jk
Isn't Obama up by at least 7 points against McCan't?
I can only partially disagree in that Hillary has a name-brand appeal going for her that Obama doesn't have but McCain is now relying on. Her campaign was sloppy but so has his and a lot of that stuff would be "old news" by August. They would probably be about the same or Hillary would be +5 over McCain rather than Obama +7 as it is right now.
Nonetheless, Obama won precisely because he wasn't Hillary. He won because he played the game right and sincerely. McCain lost the game because he was...McCain and not McCain of 2000.
Post a Comment
<< Home