Poll Shows Ray of Light for McCain
Tommy Christopher
"leadership", handling Iraq, and the economy. Some choice cuts from the story: The findings underscore the difficulties ahead for Democrats as they hope to retake the White House during a time of war, with voters giving McCain far higher marks when it comes to experience, fighting terrorism and dealing with the situation in Iraq.
In head-to-head contests, the poll found, McCain leads Clinton by 6 percentage points (46% to 40%) and Obama by 2 points (44% to 42%). Neither lead is commanding given that the survey, conducted Feb. 21-25, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Even though McCain has joked about his lack of expertise on economic issues, voters picked him over Obama, 42% to 34%, as being best able to handle the economy. However, Clinton led McCain on that issue, 43% to 34%.
The story also has McCain winning the Fear vote. Literally. Bob Fear is going to vote for him:
"I just think he's older, he's more experienced, and he's got the betterment of the country in mind," said Robert Fear, 79, a registered Democrat from Newton, Ill., who said he planned to support McCain in November.How good is this news for McCain, and conversely, how bad for the Democrats? Brief analysis to follow.
There's a lot of cognitive dissonance in this poll, and McCain needs to figure out how to innoculate his advantages against that. On Iraq, for instance, he polls ahead of the Democrats, despite overwhelming public opposition to the war. Within the poll, he has a sizeable margin over the Dems on the "strongest leader" question, yet trails badly when it comes to having the ability to make changes in Washington. On the economy, as the story states, McCain will be campaigning against himself. His head-to-head margin against Obama is very slim, within the margin of error. With the Democrats still settling on a nominee, they haven't begun to campaign against McCain in earnest, so now is the time to address these issues.
The war in Iraq is a key vulnerability for McCain, but a shift to a more flexible outlook by McCain would help him a lot. He needs to figure out a way to step back from the "100 years" statement, while maintaining message integrity. He needs to show a light at the end of the tunnel.
On the economy, his best strategy is to surround himself with credible, preferably bipartisan, advisers. McCain will be battling for independent and conservative Democratic votes, and a lot of his appeal with them has to do with the perception, real or not, that he puts principles over party.
Maintaining his lead over Obama will be difficult, as negative campaigning hasn't seemed to work on him. His biggest advantage is in the "strongest leader" category, so he needs to buttress that, while avoiding the temptation to trash Obama on that count. The two are in a near-total deadlock in favorability, at 61% each, with bipartisan support about equal. The same is true of "honesty and integrity." With these two candidates going after the same voters, who like both of them, a negative campaign seems like a really bad idea.
A great way around this is the "apolattack", showcased in yesterday's denunciation by McCain of comments by a radio host at a McCain event. Whether deliberate or not, McCain gets a powerful double-dip here. In apologizing, he gets to repeat the charge, or get the media to, and he looks like a good guy for "taking responsibility", a phrase that used to mean you would accept some sort of consequence. Hillary Clinton has used this to lesser effect, but McCain is more believable. He can only go to this well a few times, though, so he should use this judiciously.
What he should not do is take Mark Halperin's advice: (sorry, analysis):
Things McCain can do when running against Obama that Clinton has been unable to do well or at all:
1. Play the national security card without hesitation.
2. Talk about the Iraq War without apologies or perceived contradiction.
3. Go at Obama unambiguously from the right.
4. Encourage interest groups, bloggers, and right-leaning media to explore Obama's past.
5. Make an issue of Obama's acknowledged drug use.
6. Allow some supporters to risk being accused of using the race card when criticizing Obama.
7. Exploit Michelle Obama's mistakes and address her controversial remarks with unrestricted censure.
8. Play dirty without alienating his party.
9. Dismiss Obama's brief national tenure from his own lofty platform of decades in the Senate – there will be no ambiguity about who has more experience as conventionally defined.
10. Use his sterling war record to reinforce his image of patriotism and valor – and contrast it with his opponent's.
11. Emphasize Barack Hussein Obama's unusual name and exotic background through a Manchurian Candidate prism.
12. Employ third party groups like the NRA to hit Obama on issues that might turn off general election voters. Perhaps an ad such as this will run in Ohio: "So, what do you really know about Barack Obama? Did you know he supports meeting with the head of terrorist states? Do you know he wants to get rid of your right to own a handgun? Do you know he is calling for the repeal of the law preventing gay marriage? Do you know he is for a trillion-dollar tax increase? What do you really know about Barack Obama?"
13. Face an electorate less consumed with "change change change" (the main priority for Democratic voters) and keenly interested in "ready from day one" as an equally important ideal.
14. Link biography (experience/courage) and leadership (straight talk) to a vision animated by detail – accentuating Obama's relative lack of specificity.
15. Give Obama his first real race against a credible Republican. (Clinton has always asserted that Obama would wilt before a fierce Republican assault.) 16. Confront Obama with a united, focused campaign absent of second-guessing, which hits the same themes and message every day.
Note: This is analysis, not advice.
One final thought: Obama needs to think seriously about choosing Hillary as his running mate. While gender has not proven to be a positive in making up voters' minds, a perception of "history denied", coupled with McCain's high approval with women, could be a strong negative for Obama. Anything less than the so-called "Dream Ticket" could end up being a nightmare for the Democrats.
Update: Response to comments- Steve S, I don't know if you read the piece correctly. The list above is from Time magazine's Mark Halperin, not me, and I introduced it as what not to do.
As for the "Apolattack", I personally find the tactic repugnant, but it is effective, although highlighting the tactic might diminish that.
Tommy Links
Tommy Christopher Uncut l TomMySpace l TommYoutube