Something on Electability
Current Democratic frontrunner John Kerry likes to go around saying that he's more electable than other Democrats because of his war record. I'm not so sure...avoided military service didn't seem to keep Clinton and the current Bush out of office. Max Cleland wasn't helped by it in Georgia. But the perception is there nonetheless, and when electability is such an important issue to voters, it's worth examining in full.
Which is why I point out this Oklahoma Presidential poll from Daily Kos, where we see Kerry at a whopping 17%. Now the leader in this poll is Wesley Clark, and the conventional blog wisdom is that Oklahoma is Clark territory all the way, so I'm not saying the military theme is irrelevant. I'm just saying that being a veteran isn't enough to tap into it. I haven't seen any South Carolina polls lately, but I'd imagine the position there is similar, though with Edwards probably in the lead instead. In recent Presidential primaries, southern voters gave Bill Clinton the nod over Bob Kerrey in 1992 and opted for George Bush instead of John McCain in 2000. Any "veteran effect" will be especially muted in Kerry's case because he followed his military service with antiwar activism, which does not go over well in some quarters.
What I'm saying here is that I don't think the path to victory is to hope some cultural infatuation with the military causes southerners to dump a popular wartime Commander-in-Chief in favor of a liberal Massachusetts Senator who happens to be a veteran. A career military officer like Clark might do better, but realistically if any Democrat wins in states like South Carolina and Oklahoma, we're seeing a landslide of historic proportions and any major Democrat probably could have won. If electability is to be the theme, I think you need to assume a close election in which the Democrats try to dominate swing areas like the midwest and southwest. Personally, I think Clark and Dean are the most electable candidates simply because they actually disagree with the President and explain why forcefully, though Edwards also might be creeping in there.
Which is why I point out this Oklahoma Presidential poll from Daily Kos, where we see Kerry at a whopping 17%. Now the leader in this poll is Wesley Clark, and the conventional blog wisdom is that Oklahoma is Clark territory all the way, so I'm not saying the military theme is irrelevant. I'm just saying that being a veteran isn't enough to tap into it. I haven't seen any South Carolina polls lately, but I'd imagine the position there is similar, though with Edwards probably in the lead instead. In recent Presidential primaries, southern voters gave Bill Clinton the nod over Bob Kerrey in 1992 and opted for George Bush instead of John McCain in 2000. Any "veteran effect" will be especially muted in Kerry's case because he followed his military service with antiwar activism, which does not go over well in some quarters.
What I'm saying here is that I don't think the path to victory is to hope some cultural infatuation with the military causes southerners to dump a popular wartime Commander-in-Chief in favor of a liberal Massachusetts Senator who happens to be a veteran. A career military officer like Clark might do better, but realistically if any Democrat wins in states like South Carolina and Oklahoma, we're seeing a landslide of historic proportions and any major Democrat probably could have won. If electability is to be the theme, I think you need to assume a close election in which the Democrats try to dominate swing areas like the midwest and southwest. Personally, I think Clark and Dean are the most electable candidates simply because they actually disagree with the President and explain why forcefully, though Edwards also might be creeping in there.
posted by Brian Ulrich at
9:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home