Unity?

Marc Ambinder writes about an RNC memo "that portrays the Democratic Party in a state of disarray and claims that legions of Hillary Clinton voters are poised to jump to John McCain." As Marc says, "privately, many Democrats would agree that that 'united' is not the best adjective to describe the party right now." If anything, though, I think this ought to give McCain serious pause. How is it that he's in a dead heat with an opponent who's party is an a maximum state of disunity?

It's hard for me (or anyone) to know for sure to what extent currently disgruntled Clinton supporters will unite around Obama. But everyone knows that some of them will do so. Obviously events can occur that will change people's opinions of Obama and McCain, but one's generic assumption has to be that the Democratic Party will grow more united between now and November and given current polling that spells trouble for McCain.

Comments

Not to mention a lot of McCain's support is from people who still reflexively view him as a centrist bipartisan maverick anti-Bush type. Once they see the slime machine in full gear against Obama, with his non-endorsement endorsement behind it, they'll have to reevaluate. This election will be a test of whether the public is or isn't fed up with the tactics that lost the Dems the last two, to everyone's detriment. Obama's strategy should be McSame, McSame, McSame.

Posted by Bill | June 3, 2008 4:44 PM

There's something about McCain that I'd like to come out [1], but other than that I don't think there's too much that isn't already known about him. The Dems have already thrown their "best" shot, the McSame gimmick.

Meanwhile, aside from his local papers, Obama hasn't been scrutinized. Aside from one instance he hasn't been questioned (and he got a bit testy when that happened). The MSM has let absurd lies and absurd proposals slide right past them. Certain unnamed bloggers spout his talking points without realizing how stupid they sound. Some of his connections have been featured on Fox and Youtube, but that's probably just the beginning.

In summary, good luck. My predictions at my name's link.

[1] No thanks to Ambinder: lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007477.html

Posted by My predictions | June 3, 2008 4:48 PM

Obama/Clinton need to be a ticket. It's so obvious.

Posted by Rich | June 3, 2008 4:49 PM

Incidentally, if Obama picks Hillary for Veep I will eat my entire house and all of its contents, including any stray family members in my way.

Posted by Bill | June 3, 2008 4:51 PM

lonewacko offers some content-free "analysis":

Meanwhile, aside from his local papers, Obama hasn't been scrutinized. Aside from one instance he hasn't been questioned (and he got a bit testy when that happened). The MSM has let absurd lies and absurd proposals slide right past them. Certain unnamed bloggers spout his talking points without realizing how stupid they sound. Some of his connections have been featured on Fox and Youtube, but that's probably just the beginning.

Yes, the art of slime. You're not advancing an argument here, as anyone could notice from the vague accusations and absence of specifics. You're just peddling slime.

Posted by Bill | June 3, 2008 4:56 PM

The idea that Clinton supporters will defect to McCain or stay home in significant numbers is absurd. McCain has been a highly orthodox conservative on women's issues and judicial nominations. And the stakes for the next Supreme Court nomination could scarcely be higher (i.e., replacing John Paul Stevens, a pro-Roe justice).

These polls are McCain's high water mark (excluding only the post-convention bounce).

Posted by Greg Abbott | June 3, 2008 4:56 PM

O Jephthah, judge of Israel, what a treasure hadst thou!
(For Bill)

Posted by Hamlet the Dane | June 3, 2008 4:59 PM

How is it that he's in a dead heat with an opponent who's party is an a maximum state of disunity?

Actually it should be surprising the GOP is doing so well given the unpopularity of George Bush. And contrary to your "generic assumption" I feel once America realizes Obama is really far left and McCain has been a pragmatic uniter he should improve. The debates will really determine who wins though.

Posted by Gordon Gekko | June 3, 2008 4:59 PM

Yes, the art of slime. You're not advancing an argument here, as anyone could notice from the vague accusations and absence of specifics. You're just peddling slime.

Another way of putting it would be, it's not that you're wrong about all of it. It's that you're an asshole.

Posted by Chris | June 3, 2008 5:01 PM

How is it that he's in a dead heat with an opponent who's party is an a maximum state of disunity?

Actually it should be surprising the GOP is doing so well given the unpopularity of George Bush. And contrary to your "generic assumption" I feel once America realizes Obama is really far left and McCain has been a pragmatic uniter he should improve. The debates will really determine who wins though.

Posted by Gordon Gekko | June 3, 2008 5:02 PM

I definitely think that Obama's far-left positions, like ending the war in Iraq, expanding healthcare, and trying diplomacy with those we don't like are all horrible issues for us Democrats. I am very very scared that the Repblicans will talk about how we need to stay in Iraq for at least 40 years (per the President today), that Americans have too much healthcare and need to suck it up, and that we need to continue the Bush doctrine of not talking to anyone who we don't like. Each of those issues are certain electoral winners for the Republicans.

Oh, and tell Americans how the economy is "the greatest story never told" per Fred! Thompson. Also a certain winner.

Oh noes!

Posted by JoshA | June 3, 2008 5:09 PM

I feel once America realizes Obama is really far left

Do explain how he's "far left." I'm guessing you wouldn't know a "far left" position if it had its teeth clamped to your diminutive pecker.

Posted by Bill | June 3, 2008 5:09 PM

Surely the American public will be torn between the far left concept of "don't start stupid wars" and the common sense McCain principle of "the only thing better than stupid wars are non-stop stupid wars."

Posted by cd6 | June 3, 2008 5:16 PM

P.S. Here's an example of an absurd lie.

And, this page has a few issues that people are encouraged to discuss with BHO. If someone who's familiar with asking real questions gets to ask him one of those and gets it on tape, it's going to get a lot of views both on Youtube and, particulary with the first one, on certain cable TV channels.

MattY should think of this as a learning experience.

Posted by TLB | June 3, 2008 5:22 PM

Bravo Matt! This is the elephant in the room no one is talking about as they disparage Obama today (see Haperin's list of underestimations today) and try to corner him into picking her for VP in the next couple of days. Lets hope he resists. I am fairly confident he will.

Posted by Mike | June 3, 2008 5:35 PM

wow...if bombshells like those "issues" are really the best you kids can come up with, Obama's going to have an easier time than I thought.

Posted by ae | June 3, 2008 5:43 PM

Re: Meanwhile, aside from his local papers, Obama hasn't been scrutinized.

If there really is something shady about Obama it strains belief that neither the GOP nor Hillary's campaign have plastered it all over the media. After all, the Rev Wright stuff has been trumpeted from every news outlet, and, incredibly, the rightwing blogosphere has been ignoring such red meat tidbits as gay marriage in CA and NY to focus on yet more Trinity Church "outrages" instead. I rather get the feeling that that's the worst they can dig up so they're sticking with it in hopes it will finally
drag Obama down.

Posted by JonF | June 3, 2008 5:44 PM

i guess i'm just on contrarian, 'cause when i see the candidates tied, considering how unpopular mccain is with the base i'm surprised that he's doing as well as he is.

Posted by dj spellchecka | June 3, 2008 5:44 PM

Here's what I said on Lone Wacko's political prediction post, in which he says that Obama has a .1% chance of being elected. I encourage anyone who feels like a little wager to get over there and make an offer.
***
Hello! Since you have been bold enough to lay odds on Obama being elected, I have a wager to propose to you. I'll bet ten (10) dollars to your five thousand (5,000) dollars that Obama will be elected. Since you've put the odds of an Obama presidency at .1% (or 1000-1), this 500-1 wager actually favors you, so I assume you'll show as much economic sense as you've shown political insight and take it. Please contact me so we can hammer out the details. Thanks!

Posted by tomemos | June 3, 2008 5:47 PM

P.S.

P.S.?

Here's an example of an absurd lie.

I click on the link above, and
this is the first thing I see.

Terrifying for our party's chances in November if we've already lost the survivalist vote.

If someone who's familiar with asking real questions gets to ask him one of those and gets it on tape, it's going to get a lot of views both on Youtube and, particulary with the first one, on certain cable TV channels.

Oh no! Demonstrating rhetorical skills under pressure--Barack Obama's biggest weakness! We can hope his response is at least mostly in English, and doesn't lapse into Islamo-Mexican!

if bombshells like those "issues" are really the best you kids can come up with, Obama's going to have an easier time than I thought.

13-point margin, 300+ EVs. You heard it here first.

Posted by scythia | June 3, 2008 5:57 PM

My parents fit the Hillary bill: white, working class, and from an economically depressed state (Michigan -- they did not vote in the primary because they were told their votes wouldn't count -- when you're as old as them, you look for excuses to not venture out on a snowy January day). They like her and they like her husband. My mom still claims that Obama doesn't have enough experience, but my dad is already saying that "this McCain guy doesn't sound any different than the bozo we've got now."

I wager my mom will have moved to Obama by election day.

Posted by BEmama | June 3, 2008 6:29 PM

Within the next couple of weeks, Barack Obama will publicly become the Democratic candidate, as opposed to Hillary Clinton's rival.

These "OMG da Demcraps iz frakshrd!" should check the polls again in a few weeks.

Posted by El Cid | June 3, 2008 6:33 PM

Is anyone else really looking forward to the Obama/McCain debates? I think it's pretty obvious that McCain sees Obama as an empty suit who will buckle like a belt in a stand up debate, and that attitude is making him a bit cocky and dismissive of Obama. I think McCain is in for a rude awakening when he realizes Obama won't be bowled over so easily.

Posted by Mike Mc. | June 3, 2008 6:55 PM

This doesn't bode well for Richard Stephen Hacks predictions. Not well at all. Then again it's too soon to put the crow in the oven for him yet. She hasn't conceeded after all.

Posted by Minnesota | June 3, 2008 7:54 PM

The idea that Clinton supporters will defect to McCain or stay home in significant numbers is absurd.

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

I'm not sure if Barnum would laugh or cry after reading your absurd post.

Posted by Rich | June 3, 2008 8:47 PM

1. There are women out there who tend to be Republicans who are supporting Hillary. Obama will lose those people, but it's not really a loss. The true Democrats will come around.

2. On McCain, in my Democratic circles, people have had good things to say about McCain, at least before the pandering to the Bush agenda (I question whether to call it "conservative").

Posted by mike | June 3, 2008 8:59 PM

To put it in context, this is the point in the election cycle where Dukakis was leading Bush by 17%. Thanks to his spellbinding charisma, his opponent gained over 20% in the polls and coasted to an easy win.

In case you're wondering, this year's Dukakis is John McCain, and he's not up by 17%.

Posted by Splitting Image | June 3, 2008 10:30 PM

I'm surprised nobody's pointed out that the dead-heat poll is of registered national voters. I don't know how many new voters Obama will line up on election day, new voters being fickle creatures, but it's going to be a helluva lot more than McCain.

Posted by Clarke Ries | June 4, 2008 1:52 AM