The Track

They asked us last night to offer election predictions, which I was hesitant to do because I'm always wrong. That said, I can see about a million ways in which Barack Obama is vulnerable and a million ways advantages John McCain has. But on another level, it's just really difficult for me to imagine the incumbent party holding onto power in the face of an unpopular war and a bad economy. Count the fact that 81 percent of voters think the country is on the wrong track as further evidence along those lines.

Given the prevailing mood, it seems obvious that the average voter is going to want to vote for a candidate who can credibly promise that he'll pursue substantially different policies from those of George W. Bush. But McCain has promised to follow Bush on Iraq, promised to follow Bush on taxes, promised to follow Bush on housing issues, and shows no sign whatsoever of even understanding why people are frustrated with Bush. So how's he going to win?

Comments

Easy: Senator McCain already has the Only Constituency That Really Matters already working hard for him: Broadcast Media.

Take it away, Dave Gregory!

Posted by Woody | April 4, 2008 8:06 AM

Raw racism?

Benefitting from another building demolition by airplane?

A really, really good VP choice?

Posted by Shrike58 | April 4, 2008 8:08 AM

So how's he going to win?

I asked the same thing about W in 2004. The better approach is to count the ways the Democrats will manage to lose.

Posted by Bill | April 4, 2008 8:11 AM

Yesterday I saw a picture of a bumper sticker that read "Nuke their ass, take their gas." I think you underestimate how big the dumb hick population is in this country, and those people wouldn't vote for a Democrat if the ticket was Jesus/Obama '08.

Posted by 55 | April 4, 2008 8:16 AM

You're discounting the prevailing stupidity of the electorate. An unexpected event could send them scurrying to McCain like a school of fish fleeing a shark. I still say when the NSA sets off that small but nevertheless scary dirty bomb in Manhatten come late October McCain's a shoo-in. Republicans will trade a few months of the area being off limits and a few billion in losses if it means holding on to power. Neither Obama or Hillary will be able to rattle sabres and muster the needed xenophobic hatred necessary as fervently as McCain will prove capable of producing. Plus it'll be a bloodletting twofer for Bush as it'll be pinned on Iran and he'll get to saddle the next Prez with another war before he leaves office. The additional expenditures will see the gutting of Social Security and various enviromental protections as a way to pay for the bloodletting.

Posted by steve duncan | April 4, 2008 8:21 AM

Before 2004, I used to express confidence that people had enough intelligence and decency so that even if they made a mistake they would correct their error. But 2004 proved me incredibly wrong. My motto now is "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American electorate".

Posted by della Rovere | April 4, 2008 8:25 AM

It only looks close right now as some Clinton supporters (more than Obama supporters are) are with holding support for the head-to-head poll. Once Obama closes the ranks (and there's no reason to think he won't be able to do a good job on this) I don't think it'll be close.

Obama will be able to really motivate his supporters to vote even in a potential landslide type situation as well. I'll bet that before the election if he's way up in the polls he'll implore his supporters to all vote and work their hardest in order to send a big message.

Posted by Karmakin | April 4, 2008 8:28 AM

I'm politically diametrically opposed to most of Matthew's positions and those of many of his readers. But I also find it almost impossible to imagine a scenario where the GOP can retain the executive branch this cycle. Not that they deserve to. Yet I think if the GOP often makes poor policy choices, I think the Democratic party has political inclinations that are far, far worse.

Posted by MarkG | April 4, 2008 8:36 AM

Yet I think if the GOP often makes poor policy choices, I think the Democratic party has political inclinations that are far, far worse.

Oh? What, specifically do you mean?

Posted by James Gary | April 4, 2008 8:38 AM

you underestimate how big the dumb hick population is in this country

That population wasn't big enough to win the popular vote in 2000, or deliver much of a victory to the wartime incumbent against a lackluster challenger in 2004, or keep from losing both houses of Congress in 2006. Yeah, there's a large reservoir of people who believe every word Rush Limbaugh says, buys Anne Coulter's books, and keeps their TV tuned to Fox News. They're the 30% who still think Bush is doing a good job, and (alas) they'll always be with us. But they're only 30%, and their demographic is in long-term decline. Obama doesn't need their votes to win.

The thing that's striking about that 81% wrong track number is that I can't imagine the economy or Iraq or health care or gas price situations will improve in the next seven months. Come November, the GOP might be looking back fondly on the days when only 81% of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track.

Yeah, the Dems can always find new and exciting ways to blow winnable elections. But the you really can't ask for a better-tilted playing field than the one they're likely to encounter in this fall.

Posted by FMguru | April 4, 2008 8:43 AM

Anything McCain says about Iraq will alienate either half of Republican voters or all Independent voters. Likewise the economy. I don't think he has a chance.

Posted by Gary Sugar | April 4, 2008 8:44 AM

Given that John McSame will speak in Memphis today, I wonder how many news outlets will report on the fact that he voted against making MLK Jr.'s birthday a national holiday.

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | April 4, 2008 8:45 AM

Umm - steal the election?

Nah, that would never happen.

Posted by dalloway | April 4, 2008 8:45 AM

This seems right. Plus, as Matthew pointed out a few days ago, McCain is too short.

Posted by Al | April 4, 2008 8:47 AM

One thing that's always bugged me about these "wrong track" polls is they rarely, if ever, identify what respondents see as the "right track". I can easily imagine that a large percentage of the Bush dead-enders think we're on the wrong track because the US hasn't thrown its weight around enough, gays aren't ostracized enough, and the rich aren't getting enough breaks.

Posted by The Golux | April 4, 2008 8:47 AM

Don't forget that Obama can always rely on the amazing mind control powers of will.i.am.

Posted by dizzyg | April 4, 2008 8:56 AM

I can see about a million ways in which Barack Obama is vulnerable and a million ways advantages John McCain has.

Matt:

You would do your readers a service, and have an interersting topic, if you were to lay out a few of these. Nothing comes to mind for me.

Posted by glasnost | April 4, 2008 8:57 AM

Golux is right. "Wrong track" is so broad as to be essentially meaningless. Some people are furious because the troops are still in Iraq, others are furious because the govt isn't making a WWII style effort to win the war. There are at least two sideds to every issue, and people on each side are going to get angry unless they're moving quickly toward their goal. "Wrong track" polling's only useful purpose is to provide an excuse for ever increasing amounts of useless media blather.

Posted by matt foley | April 4, 2008 9:02 AM

The only problem, Matthew, with the "McSame' meme is that a strategic portion of the electorate tends to disassociate McCain with Bush. And to a lesser degree, with modern Republicanism.

But, I think you already know this considering your aggressive tactics in establishing this linkage.

Whether you agree with it or not, you still need to acknowledge the distinction that the electorate tends to make regarding McCain, and that it could lead him to victory.

Posted by DDP | April 4, 2008 9:02 AM

One of my managers, who considers himself an Independent, isn't a fan of Obama. He prefers Clinton, and since it will probably be McCain versus Obama in the fall, he will probably vote for McCain. Besides not being impressed by Obama, he insists the guy can't win the general election. He claims, for instance, that people in the Midwest are fare more racist than we might think and will never elect a black man, at least not now. I guess that's possible, far from certain.

Posted by Brian | April 4, 2008 9:04 AM

I'm sure that Mr. Yglesias could find a few items in todays Charles Krauthammer column.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040303121.html?sub=AR

Posted by SLC | April 4, 2008 9:04 AM

One thing that's always bugged me about these "wrong track" polls is they rarely, if ever, identify what respondents see as the "right track".

A lot of people are too uninformed to be able to say anything specific about this. Many of them probably couldn't even say what, specifically, we are doing wrong right now (other than maybe Iraq). When you have a lot of uninformed people, its useful to gauge their general feelings about the way things are going.

Posted by Jim W | April 4, 2008 9:05 AM

They're the 30% who still think Bush is doing a good job, and (alas) they'll always be with us.

One word: rapture.

Posted by drjimcooper | April 4, 2008 9:29 AM

One of my managers, who considers himself an Independent, isn't a fan of Obama. He prefers Clinton, and since it will probably be McCain versus Obama in the fall, he will probably vote for McCain. Besides not being impressed by Obama, he insists the guy can't win the general election. He claims, for instance, that people in the Midwest are fare more racist than we might think and will never elect a black man, at least not now. I guess that's possible, far from certain.

Yeah, but what does your dog think about it? I'm sure he has equally brilliant insights on this matter (and probably also considers himself an independent).

Posted by J.B. | April 4, 2008 9:31 AM

Go read more dailyhowler if you need to understand how powerful a friend the media is.

Human beings will believe anything if told it often enough by enough (seemingly) 'different' people.

When predicting how reality ought to be, keep on with your current approach. When predicting how reality *will* be, take the George Castanza approach and always go with the opposite of what makes sense to you.

Posted by Chuck | April 4, 2008 9:33 AM

first post ever! here goes: as an economic conservative-turned-obamabot, i am 100% certain that barry will lose to mccain despite the fertile conditions. this cycle *just so far* has become a sort of analysis black hole. that said, matt is too deferential to mccain's strength. first off, let's be serious, we have three preposterously weak candidates left in the race. if a white male mediocre governor with past military service and an everyman quality were in this thing, all of mccain's service and hillary's machine and obama's grassroots wouldn't matter. and obama could only win this if hillary drops out, like, tomorrow. if she were out of the picture, he could immediately challenge mccain to an "honor pledge" of some kind covering campaign ethics. and then he could begin every public statement by saying "john mccain thinks nothing has changed in america since 1980. he doesn't understand that in 1980, your small business in scranton was competing with a small business in baltimore. and now you're competing with a huge business in bangladesh. john mccain says a single mother working two jobs who can't afford health insurance for her child is just not working hard enough, and if she expects her government to treat her with dignity, she's just asking for a handout. he doesn't understand that the economy has stopped working for ordinary americans." etc etc. ceteris paribus (as if!), obama would win that match up. plus, don't forget the humiliating undressing that would happen in an obama-mccain debate. but, as hillary self-fulfilling-ly said, "he can't win (if i have anything to do with it)"

Posted by al | April 4, 2008 9:34 AM

Yet I think if the GOP often makes poor policy choices, I think the Democratic party has political inclinations that are far, far worse.

Despite any inclinations, I can't imagine either Democrat or McCain acting worse than this administration. Thier abuse of executive power; the massive lack of oversight and accountability; the cronyism; the secrecy; the lack of real presidential leadership; yadda yadda.

If we can improve on what has amounted to the most arrogant and corrupt cabinets we've ever had, then I'll be thankful.

Posted by AKBY | April 4, 2008 9:35 AM

JM is the greatest of triangulators. Better than Bill Clinton, perhaps even better than LBJ.

A guy who calls Falwell et all "Agents of intolerance", while preserving a 100% anti-choice record.

Posted by Dan | April 4, 2008 9:37 AM

So how's he going to win?

Have him start talking about The Old Days. When he was on the gittin' end of the torture stick.

'cause nothing sez "Presidential" like having been tortured by gooks. (2012: Sylvester Stallone)

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | April 4, 2008 9:40 AM

I like the comment above about voting for McCain because Obama can't win.

I might vote for Abraham Lincoln since Lincoln has already proved he can do the job.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | April 4, 2008 9:44 AM

first post ever! here goes:

Congratulations! For your second post, maybe you might want to look into using "capitalization," "paragraph breaks," and maybe explore the concept that "a coherent sentence contains both a subject and a verb."

Good luck!

Posted by James Gary | April 4, 2008 9:46 AM

McCain has promised to follow Bush on Iraq, promised to follow Bush on taxes, promised to follow Bush on housing issues . . . .

Obviously, McCain will try to win by running as the CHANGE candidate.

Look at the mess these Democrats have gotten us into. Everything was find until Nancy Pelosi came along. Do you want to give them even MORE power?

It's time for a change -- vote McCain!

McCain -- a new morning in America

McCain -- a new approach

McCain -- win the war

McCain -- a new direction -- make that a new American direction for Americans in America

Posted by rm | April 4, 2008 9:50 AM

I'm sorry, James Gary. I will try to improve in the future. Yes, I mean it.

My third post will be better.

Posted by al | April 4, 2008 9:54 AM

McCain will win when the regular voters see what arrogant pricks who support the Big O are. Most voters are not fawning schoolgirls who shriek in the presence of the starlet Obama. He's already done in the general-- you are too blinded to see it. But keep telling yourselves how much smarter and better you are than the rest of the dumb Simpsons electorate. It will make you feel superior while you lose once again.

Posted by Arrogant Prick | April 4, 2008 9:55 AM

I think Obama and the Dems need to continue to hammer home the similarities of McCain the Republican and the disastrous administration of Bush the Republican. Sure, McCain's camp can claim that he's a "maverick" and has sometimes voted against his own party, but he's still a Republican. A scary Bush REPUBLICAN!

A Republican who voted for the war in Iraq, who wants to keep us there for god knows how long (but obviously not 100 years now so he says), who has no clue what "winning" looks like, who has advocated more wars w/the likes of Russia, China, and N. Korea, who wants to cut taxes for the wealthy, who can't offer a solution on the housing crisis, who can't offer a solution for healthcare, and who voted, yes voted for torture.

Posted by S | April 4, 2008 9:59 AM

first post ever!

We'll have to refer to you as "little al" because there's already a relatively infamous Al, and he uses a capital "A". (You might decide to change your name after you read his posts...)

LOL (Just kidding, Al!)

Posted by AKBY | April 4, 2008 10:00 AM

I'm sorry, James Gary. I will try to improve in the future.

Don't apologize to me--think, rather, of the possibility of other commenters actually reading your remarks, instead of just scrolling past them.

Posted by James Gary | April 4, 2008 10:01 AM

Most voters are not fawning schoolgirls who shriek in the presence of the starlet Obama.

You, sir, are incorrect. I've seen the videos. It's true, people go crazy for the Obama.

Posted by J.B. | April 4, 2008 10:01 AM

Sen Obama will win this election, even if Cheney turns the electricity off on both coasts on election day.

Iowa, New Hamsphire and New Mexico will return to the Democrats, and with any luck whatsoever Missouri or even Virginia can be grabbed as well. Colorado too is very much in play.

Sen Webb would be an excellent choice for VP. His credentials in all things military / nat'l security would cover a vulnerable weakspot in Barack's resume. In the simplistic mindset of the electorate, the 3am phone call stuff will matter this fall, and everyone will know that if Barack asks JIm, "What do you think Jim?", he's going to get advise worth taking.

McCain's age will be a factor as more "senior moments" play out. If he goes with Romney, expect massive magic underwear parodies with multi-million plus hits on YouTube.

It has been stated throughout the NeoCon blathersphere that Reagan's popularity at the end of his 2nd term was a waste of political capital, so expect further constitutional shredding and military aggression from Dick and the sockpuppet. But believe it or not, I think we've reached a point of fear fatigue and the national sentiment to move on and beyond will overwhelm even the voter fraud capacity of the Republican Reich.

Posted by Sachem | April 4, 2008 10:06 AM

eep. i just apologized for my typing style to a guy who runs a tek jansen website! nevermind, nevermind! a friend informs me there are "trolls" who "do this" "all day"... "for fun" (?)

sigh. ok, work time. peace out, non-trolls.

Posted by al | April 4, 2008 10:07 AM

1. The idea that whoever wins the Democratic party nomination will will the Presidency is Clinton's main justification for continuing to stay in.

2. I pity whoever wins the Presidency. Our problems are going to take longer than four years to fix, and the public will give a new President about six months to fix them.

Posted by Jason | April 4, 2008 10:20 AM

Tek Jansen is the muthafuckin bomb! Don't mess with that or you'll have a lot more than trolls to worry about.

Posted by J.B. | April 4, 2008 10:26 AM

"So how's he going to win?"

Easy, by telling stories about how his teacher inspired him to show mercy.

And calling David Letterman names.

Posted by Keljeck | April 4, 2008 10:44 AM

"So how's he going to win?"

Easy, by telling stories about how his teacher inspired him to show mercy.

And calling David Letterman names.

Posted by Keljeck | April 4, 2008 10:44 AM

James Gary:

What, specifically do you mean?

Not specifically, but generally, the Dems primarily represent the moneyed interests of organized labor (always seeking more authority and power for union bosses) and trial lawyers (economic parasites always looking for a newer, wealthier host population).

Party ideology in the Dem camp is a muddle, but leans towards collectivism with a denial of possible unintended policy consequences. It's been this way ever since the party abandoned its connection to the classical liberalism of individual liberty in favor of modern "progressive," leveling collectivism.

Posted by MarkG | April 4, 2008 10:54 AM

McCain doesn't support Bush, he's a Mavrick! Everybody says so so it must be true. He is the change canidate and the coolest kid in school. Honest.

Posted by exlitigator | April 4, 2008 11:21 AM

Not specifically, but generally, the Dems primarily represent the moneyed interests of organized labor (always seeking more authority and power for union bosses) and trial lawyers (economic parasites always looking for a newer, wealthier host population).

Given the declining influence of unions in America, they must be the worst single-issue advocacy group ever.

Posted by mpowell | April 4, 2008 11:34 AM

Oh shit. Jinxed. This is literally the first time ever I've starting to think McCain might actually win.

Al must be rejoicing.

Posted by Antid Oto | April 4, 2008 11:44 AM

The better approach is to count the ways the Democrats will manage to lose. --Bill

Bill nails it. Not that I have that much faith in the electorate, and especially in their grasp of anything touching on foreign policy (which means grasping that people can think differently from you). But the Dems' ability to shoot their own feet is nothing short of astounding.

Posted by Deborah | April 4, 2008 11:47 AM

Party ideology in the Dem camp ... leans towards ... denial of possible unintended policy consequences.

Funny. And where have you been for the past 7 years?

Posted by J.B. | April 4, 2008 12:03 PM

So I assume that MY is refusing to give a clear prediction b/c he is afraid of jinxing Obama, his preferred candidate. Does this mean that you're superstitious?

Posted by mpowell | April 4, 2008 1:14 PM

Josh Bolton said it back in 2006 - "The Dems will lose over Iran."

They didn't try it in 2006, and it cost them.

They will try it this year - a war on Iran to give the Republican candidate a "war bounce."

It will work.

It will also tie the hands of whatever administration gets in to the benefit of the military-industrial complex and the oil companies and Israel.

There's just no way Bush and Cheney are going to let that go without taking the shot.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 5, 2008 6:11 AM

McCain -- a new direction -- make that a new American direction for Americans in America

I find "a new American direction for American Americans in America" to be subtly mocking.

Posted by Bengt Larsson | April 5, 2008 7:25 PM