[T]he idea that Obama's current ratings are positive proof of anything is misguided in the most elemental way. It's like looking at a puppy, then an older dog, and going with the pup on the theory it'll stay cuter forever. I did a piece for the LA Times on Hillary's polarized numbers awhile back, and talked to a bunch of pollsters for it, and they all said the same thing: Obama will get there. He's not there yet, but he'll get there...Obama will be polarized, just as John Kerry was before him, and Al Gore was before Kerry, and Bill Clinton was before Gore. Polarization is part of the process, not part of the person. Clinton, for her part, has a profile more like a president running for reelection, and so that's what her numbers look like...I'm not saying you can't speculate about who is more electable. I'm saying that I don't yet find the speculation convincing, on either side.There's more in-depth analysis of Obama's and Hillary's electoral strengths and weaknesses, so check out the post.
What's frustrating to me is that I see these forces at work. I talk to people - mostly white, mostly male - who say "I just could never bring myself to vote for Hillary." They'll rattle off all the reasons - "socialized medicine," her lack of charisma, etc. - and it's obvious that they're just repeating what they've been told. As for Obama? "I don't know," they say, "He's interesting. Seems kind of inspiring and fresh. We'll see." Then a few months later, after they've seen a couple debates on TV and read a few articles, they're saying "I could just never bring myself to vote for Obama."
Why does this happen? Name recognition. When Hillary was known and Obama was unknown, the Republican political machine was able to put out a lot of negative crap about Hillary. White Republican Christian men all over the nation heard these negative talking points from other white Republican Christian men, and believed them (because humans tend to trust information from others of their tribe). But if someone had started spouting negative crap about Obama, those same men would have said "Who?" But when Obama becomes well-known, the smear campaign can start - right from the Republican strategists all the way down through the network of white Republican Christian men - and pretty soon he'll be as reviled as Hillary.
It's worth remembering that, in 1993, Republicans were a lot more sour on Bill Clinton than on Al Gore. Guess who they hated more in 2000.
So don't trust the polls, and don't believe the pundits. Hillary Clinton, whatever her faults, is plenty electable.
0 comments:
Post a Comment