Decision ‘08

Is Obama In Trouble?

Mathematically, no…the case for Obama’s inevitable candidacy is as strong as ever. Perceptually, however, he is reeling, there is no doubt. The fact that Obama was forced to hold a press conference once again denouncing the paranoid ravings of his former pastor is a telling indicator of how much the issue has hurt him (largely unfairly, in my view).

Hillary was already on a bit of a spurt following her big Pennsylvania win, and the latest Wright controversy has led to a doubling of her probability of gaining the nomination among the traders at Intrade (thought she still trails mightily, 21% to Obama’s 76%). Slate’s Hillary Deathwatch is a little less charitable, with Hillary holding a mere 12.6% chance of getting the nod.

Other indicators: a new Fox News poll shows that, in a significant reversal, 10% more Democrats (48% to 38%) now think Hillary is more likely to beat John McCain in November, and at least one Democrat in Mississippi is treating allegations of an Obama endorsement as an attack(!).

And yet, there’s that pesky math - and I won’t bore you again with my theory of why Obama simply can’t be denied the nomination by the Democratic Party without massive internal damage. He’s still the man to beat, but he really needs to turn the page. An Indiana win would be massive, but at the least, he has to win North Carolina convincingly…

12 Responses to “Is Obama In Trouble?”

1 Peter Says:
April 30th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I sure hope I don’t get any friends like Reverend Wright. She makes Linda Tripp look like a true blue friend.
2 Aaron Says:
April 30th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
She?

Peter, is there something you know about Wright that we don’t?
3 Clint Says:
May 1st, 2008 at 6:52 am
I’m not sure how unfair this is.

Ask yourself how this would play out if John McCain’s pastor for the last twenty years, the man who performed his marriage, baptized his kids, and was featured prominently as one of his role models in an autobiography, was discovered giving sermons like Wright’s, only with the races reversed.

If anything, Wright has been given quite a bit of a pass on his explicitly racist preaching, because he’s black. That kind of bigotry isn’t remotely acceptable, even third-hand, when it’s against blacks. Recall the destruction of Trent Lott, over vague praise for Strom Thurmond at the man’s retirement barbecue.

Remember that Senator Obama has been explicitly marketing himself as the candidate who will get us all beyond the racial divide. It hardly seems unfair, then, to ask about his twenty-year support for race-baiting. If he only attended Trinity Church because of its importance to the “black community” in Chicago (as seems likely), then perhaps we should be asking how this demonstrates the ability to talk frankly on race, or lead a national discussion on it.
4 Ryan Says:
May 1st, 2008 at 8:36 am
I disagree with Clint. I think the Wright thing has been blown up specifically because he’s black. We would make far less hay out of this if he were an angry white pastor.

In any case, Obama’s in no trouble. He’ll be fine. He’s mathematically guaranteed the nomination at this point, and he’s still picking up superdelegates at a higher rate than Clinton (he’s beating her something like 9-5 since Pennsylvania). Insofar as elections are largely determined by fundamentals, he’s still in a very strong position in the general. And he’s still polling better than Clinton in a lot of really important states in the upper Midwest and the West (and even New Jersey, of all places).

To the extent that Obama is “in trouble”, it is for the same reason it has always been: he is up against a very good candidate (Clinton, obv). That will simply not be true in the general.
5 Chris J. Breisch Says:
May 1st, 2008 at 9:16 am
It has definitely hurt Obama, and I’ll tell you how much, at least for me.

I live in Indiana and am voting in the primary next week. It’s an open primary, so all I have to do is request the ‘D’ ballot and I can vote for any Democrat I want.

I have been planning on voting for Hillary for three reasons. 1) Frankly, she scares me a lot less than Obama, 2) I have felt that McCain would have a better chance against her than Obama, 3) I have felt that the longer this runs the better it is for McCain.

I am now actually considering voting for Obama.

Why? His campaign is on the verge of self-destructing. this is quickly going from an election that the Democrats can’t lose to one they can’t win. In that case, I want the Democrats to anoint him as their chosen one as quickly as possible, and then live with their choice.

Obama trails Clinton in a matchup against McCain in every single “battleground” state. That is the worst possible news for Democrats and Obama.
6 Chris J. Breisch Says:
May 1st, 2008 at 10:30 am
Shock Poll Of The Day:

InsiderAdvantage North Carolina n=571, 4/29 Clinton 44, Obama 42

http://southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_430_370.aspx
7 Mark Says:
May 1st, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Yeah, I saw that one - still an outlier, but he needs North Carolina bad…
8 too many steves Says:
May 2nd, 2008 at 9:28 am
No offense Chris, but your ability to vote in the primary as a Democrat is part of the reason this whole Obama/Clinton fight is such a fiasco; and a self-inflicted wound besides.
9 peter Says:
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 am
The Wall Street Journal estimates that up to 15% of the Democratic voters will be crossover Republicans, with no certainty as to whether it benefits Hillary or Obama:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120968538604361075.html

I also think it is absolutely wrong to vote in another party’s primary to elect the weakest candidate. It would be like Democrats voting for Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo. It’s the Tonya Harding version of politics.
10 peter Says:
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:28 pm
On a similar theme: In 2003, I voted to recall Democratic Governor Gray Davis because he and his surrogates supported the weaker opponent in the Republican primary, dealing a fatal blow to Richard Riordan, who would probably have made a pretty good governor. I’m not sure if incompetence is a sufficient reason to impeach a governor, but gaming the system certainly is.

At least there was a happy ending: it led to Governor Arnold, who turned out to be a far better governor.
11 too many steves Says:
May 2nd, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I’m not sure its wrong if the rules allow it, although I would agree with you that it subverts democracy. I’m just surprised, shocked, and dismayed that the parties allow such a thing. I just don’t see any upside. Then again, I’m also in favor of making voting more difficult, so what the heck do I know…
12 DBrooks Says:
May 2nd, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Allowing people to vote in the primary as they choose has nothing to do with the fact that Obama’s campaign is currently “eroding.” I don’t like the idea of people voting solely to throw a wrench into the other party’s process, but the actual number of such voters is debatable, and, in most years, people will be more concerned with voting for their own party’s candidates rather than playing around in the primaries. It’s possible that enough Republicans have voted for Hillary to keep her campaign afloat, but that wouldn’t be enough to undermine Obama’s campaign unless he was experiencing self-inflicted damage all over the place.