THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING
Todd Domke

Why Obama's not leading by a landslide

By Todd Domke
September 18, 2008
  • Email|
  • Print|
  • Single Page|
  • |
Text size +

WHY ISN'T Barack Obama far ahead in the opinion polls?

As nominee of the "out" party during an economic downturn, unpopular war, and even more unpopular presidency, Obama should not be in a virtual tie with John McCain.

Some Obama supporters offer blanket explanations for why he's lagging in the polls: white prejudice; dishonest smears; Obama is too intellectual and voters are too stupid.

Apparently they think it's time to elect a new people.

But Obama and his allies are not blameless. They've made strategic decisions - blunders? - that could cost them the election:

Obama rejected McCain's request to have weekly Town Hall-style debates.

When Obama was the front-runner, he decided to play it safe and just accept the three established debates. But often the greatest risk is not taking any risks.

If Obama had agreed to weekly debates, this race would be more civil and constructive. When candidates debate, they don't argue about pigs and lipstick because they know they'd look foolish. They try to act more presidential. And they are less likely to run unfair attack ads if they know they'll be held accountable by the opponent and audience in a televised forum.

Town Hall debates would have allowed Obama to practice what he's been preaching about a "new politics."

Obama rejected Hillary Clinton for vice president.

He should have at least put her on his short list and thus given her some public respect.

Obama reportedly didn't pick Clinton because he didn't want to risk having her husband embarrass him. Now Obama is in the embarrassing position of needing both Clintons to vouch for him.

Obama broke his pledge to abide by public financing limits for the fall campaign.

He sacrificed some "new politics" credibility to have a money advantage over McCain. But while McCain campaigns full time in swing states, Obama must spend precious time in nonswing states for fund-raising events.

Obama didn't use his convention speech to propose specific solutions.

Instead, he reiterated platitudes - against a Greek temple background. Holy Zeus, what were his event planners thinking?

He had a chance to disprove Clinton's claim - echoed by McCain and others - that he gives "speeches, not solutions." Offering specifics carries risk, but so does being amorphous. When candidates speak only in generalities, voters are more receptive to negative ads that purport to fill in the blanks.

Obama wouldn't challenge his own Democratic Party.

Obama needs to win independent voters who favor bipartisan solutions, yet he wouldn't do what Bill Clinton did in 1992 - oppose his party's liberal orthodoxy on some high-profile issues.

In the last 40 years, Democrats have won only three of 10 presidential elections. The two Democrats who won - Jimmy Carter once and Bill Clinton twice - did not campaign as liberals, but rather as centrists.

The Democrat-controlled Congress has the lowest approval rating of any Congress in history - sinking as low as 9 percent - yet its leaders embrace Obama as if they're doing him a favor.

Some Obama supporters attacked Sarah Palin personally, falsely, and hatefully.

Their attacks built a huge, curious, sympathetic TV audience for her convention speech. When Palin spoke more impressively than seasoned politicians like her opponent, Joe Biden, she became an Obama-like star, rejuvenating the McCain campaign and the GOP.

Wisely, Obama didn't attack Palin personally, knowing that voters base their decision on presidential - not vice presidential - nominees.

Some attacks on Palin ignited debate on cultural issues Obama tried to defuse.

Obama was still recovering from his gaffe about how when small-town folks "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion. . ." Yet some Obama supporters could not resist mocking Palin for having been mayor of a small town, a hunter, and religious.

Unfortunately for Obama, small-town folks who are religious and/or own guns vote in great numbers in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Virginia.

If Obama loses, some of his surrogates may be bitter and blame those voters. They won't blame themselves for alienating voters with insults. And they won't see any inconsistency in their praising tolerance and multiculturalism while denigrating middle-American culture.

However, if Obama wins, perhaps he will begin uniting the country by asking McCain to join him for a Town Hall meeting.

Todd Domke is a Boston-area Republican political analyst, public relations strategist, and author.

  • Email
  • Email
  • Print
  • Print
  • Single page
  • Single page
  • Reprints
  • Reprints
  • Share
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Comment
 
  • Share on DiggShare on Digg
  • Tag with Del.icio.us Save this article
  • powered by Del.icio.us
Your Name Your e-mail address (for return address purposes) E-mail address of recipients (separate multiple addresses with commas) Name and both e-mail fields are required.
Message (optional)
Disclaimer: Boston.com does not share this information or keep it permanently, as it is for the sole purpose of sending this one time e-mail.