Hillary's dilemma: She's not Barack Obama
Comments (23)
Monday, January 7, 2008 | 11:43 AM ET
By Henry Champ
Generally I agree with those readers who say journalists pay too much attention to the horse-race factor in elections rather than to where candidates stand on the issues. But not this time.
Not in New Hampshire and not at this juncture in this presidential campaign.
There will be plenty of time to debate issues in the months ahead, before the big vote in November. Right now, it is the numbers in the polls that is what this story is all about.
When the Republicans and Democrats allowed the states to move up their dates for the presidential primaries and caucuses — thereby squeezing the amount of time between each of these votes — it gave the momentum factor much greater weight than anyone had anticipated.
When I wrote my column from Des Moines last week, the night they counted the votes in Iowa, I was cautious with the information at hand. I called the Barack Obama victory over Hillary Clinton massive. In hindsight, that may have been an understatement.
Polling over this past weekend has shown huge shifts in support in the Democratic party race, with opinion shifting to Obama and away from Clinton.
Take the MSNBC/McClatchy sounding in New Hampshire, where the second of the selection processes takes place on Tuesday. A week ago, before the Iowa caucus vote, Clinton led Obama 30-27. On Friday, after the vote was counted, Obama was ahead 39-32.
Today, all the polls predict an Obama victory. CNN has Obama up by ten percentage points, USA Today has the margin even larger, at 13 points.
Enough of my caution. At this point, it feels safe to say that, short of some self-inflicted wound between now and the Super Tuesday primaries on February 5, Obama will be the Democratic party nominee come the convention at the end of August.
The train is leaving the station
It is true that national polls of the Democratic leadership still show Clinton ahead by 20 points. (She does especially well in the big states such as New York and California that will be the mainstays of Super Tuesday.) But there hasn't been a fresh national poll since Dec. 30th, and there are many reasons to believe that lead will quickly shorten.
African-American political friends of mine say there is no question that black voters, who have pretty much stuck with Clinton out of loyalty to her and her husband for their unwavering support of civil rights issues in the past, will cross over to Obama, particularly if he duplicates his Iowa win in New Hampshire.
As one told me, Obama is not a Jesse Jackson or an Al Sharpton or a Carol Mosley Braun, all of whom — African-Americans who ran unsuccessfully for president in the past — never really got black support. This man, an elected official, said: "When folks see he can win white votes, the dam will break."
It's already happening. In South Carolina, where Democratic party support is 50 per cent African-American, the December polls showed Clinton ahead by 15 to 20 percentage points. Today it is a statistical tie.
Some other numbers
Up until now, the Democratic party leadership has been relatively neutral when it comes to Obama, mostly because insiders didn't or wouldn't believe he could be elected.
Iowa was something of a surprise and began to change that perception. Now, these same numbers seem to be repeating themselves in New Hampshire.
Independents, who make up 45 per cent of the electorate in the Granite State are telling pollsters they intend to support Obama, by a margin of 42-25 over Clinton. For voters under 50, support is heavily in favour of the African-American senator from Illinois, 47-18. For those over 50, Clinton has the edge by a margin of 40-23.
What also seems to be getting the attention of the party insiders is that Obama is seen as the one responsible for a record Democratic vote in Iowa. The pundits say they expect a similar record turnout in New Hampshire.
Obama has never been a big favourite of the party leadership, but this is one group that knows if Democrats are to win the White House in November, getting out the vote and winning over independents is a must.
Looking down the road just a bit, half of the states on Super Tuesday are open primaries, which means independents can vote in either of the two parties' selection processes. These independents may well be the key to tipping the scales to Obama as party activists have always worried about Clinton's negative perception among many people who aren't active partisans.
The Hillary rebuttal
Somehow the Clinton campaign must find a way to stop this train. Originally it was thought New Hampshire would be the firewall if there was to be a problem in Iowa. New Hampshire, after all, was where Bill Clinton pretty much lived at the start of his successful run for the presidency in 1992.
But New Hampshire looks like it might be going up in flames. South Carolina is burning as well. Florida could have been a firewall, but there Clinton has made what is now looking like the biggest blunder of this year's primaries.
Florida moved up its primary against the wishes of the Democratic National Committee, which promptly penalized the state by removing its primary delegates from the convention.
The other Democratic candidates backed the DNC and removed their names from the ballot in protest. They, of course, had nothing to lose: Clinton was leading there by 30 points. Goaded by the press, Clinton reluctantly joined the boycott and dropped off the ballot. Winning Florida, a week before Super Tuesday would surely look good now.
Time and the perception of momentum are the keys to what is going on today, particularly with an electorate mesmerized by charisma and the excitement of making history.
The talk in the New Hampshire debates on Saturday was almost entirely about "change." Who could bring it to Washington, who would be a more effective agent of change. Iowa voters may have already answered that question but, of course, you can never count someone out entirely in this business.
In his day, Bill Clinton lost in Iowa and won in New Hampshire, earning the title the Comeback Kid. Most political experts don't expect lightning to strike in the same place twice.
I leave you with this opening to a column from Sunday's Detroit Free Press. It is a complaint the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries are an unworthy anachronism when it comes to selecting a presidential nominee:
"It's happening again. For the third time in as many election cycles, two states that bear a closer resemblance to Manitoba than to Michigan are setting the agenda for both major parties' presidential derbies."
As a native-born Manitoban, I had to agree with the resemblance.
It was damn cold in Des Moines.
« Previous Post | Main | Next Post »
This discussion is now Open. Submit your Comment.
« Previous Post | Main | Next Post »
Post a Comment
Washington File »
About the Author
Henry Champ is CBC Newsworld's correspondent in Washington, D.C., delivering Canadian viewers the latest developments in the U.S. political arena. Recently, he has been a leading Canadian voice on coverage of the war on terrorism, the war in Iraq and the growing concerns over the Canada-U.S. relationship.
Recent Posts
- Vapour ads create successful campaign smokescreens
- Henry Champ
- Thursday, September 11, 2008
- The parties are over
- Henry Champ
- Friday, September 5, 2008
- The attack dog fights back
- Henry Champ
- Thursday, September 4, 2008
- The plan for Sarah Palin
- Henry Champ
- Wednesday, September 3, 2008
- Paying a high price for Palin
- Henry Champ
- Tuesday, September 2, 2008
- Subscribe to this blog
Recent Comments
- Henry why should we ask you any questions. Would you not ...
- Hillary's dilemma: She's not Barack Obama
- Hillary got the women's votes. Obama got the young ...
- Hillary's dilemma: She's not Barack Obama
- All of this talk of “change” by the Obama team is jus...
- Hillary's dilemma: She's not Barack Obama
- Has everybody been taking crazy pill? Barak lost New Hamp...
- Hillary's dilemma: She's not Barack Obama
- You see, that's the problem with polls and experts. Somet...
- Hillary's dilemma: She's not Barack Obama
Archives
- September 2008
- (6 postings)
- August 2008
- (6 postings)
- June 2008
- (3 postings)
- May 2008
- (6 postings)
- April 2008
- (3 postings)
- March 2008
- (4 postings)
- February 2008
- (5 postings)
- January 2008
- (7 postings)
- November 2007
- (2 postings)
- October 2007
- (7 postings)
- September 2007
- (1 postings)
- July 2007
- (6 postings)
- June 2007
- (5 postings)
- May 2007
- (6 postings)
- April 2007
- (6 postings)
- March 2007
- (5 postings)
- February 2007
- (7 postings)
- January 2007
- (8 postings)
- December 2006
- (7 postings)
- November 2006
- (8 postings)
- October 2006
- (10 postings)
- September 2006
- (9 postings)
- August 2006
- (9 postings)
Comments (23)
G Kennedy
Henry why should we ask you any questions. Would you not strike out like you did in NH. Obama will bomb out and McCain will be President because Americans are frightened of terrorism.
Posted January 9, 2008 12:11 PM
Charlene Smith
Woodstock,Ontario
Hillary got the women's votes.
Obama got the young votes.
McCain the Repulican.
Bush is in the Middle East and according to the news,something is going to happen between the U.S. and Iran BEFORE Bush leaves office.
That is what will be the deciding factor when it comes to voting in the next president.
Are the U.S. citizens sick of the death and destruction?
Are U.S. citizens tired of their country sinking into contempt by the rest of the world?
Are the U.S. citizens worried about their economy,health care and recession?
Who is the most able nominee to bring them out of this mess?
I agree with all who say that history will be made with either Clinton or Obama.
I also believe if they were smart,they would pull together and use the opportunity to become President and Vice-president.
From what I am seeing,people want change not just in the U.S. but in the world.
Posted January 9, 2008 09:41 AM
Jim
All of this talk of “change” by the Obama team is just that; talk. And talk is cheap. Quite obviously there is a need for change in Washington, and throughout the US – oh how the might have fallen (far) –but everyone knows this.
Change; however, does not happen with the wave of a wand or the flick of a switch. Changing the direction of the huge behemoth that is the US will take time and some very strategic planning. There remain huge roadblocks to change led my oil, drug, and insurance money and the evangelical right.
It is not about change; it is about who has the savvy (experience) to make change happen in the face of these obstacles. In my book; experience and compassion will win the day over great speeches and bravado.
Barack Obama appears to be a very smart, passionate man and I really like the eloquence of his speeches. And it would do the States good to have an African-American President. But I see Obama as a little too far left even for Democrats. It is not his time. Clinton has far more experience, including that of Bill Clinton. She’s the one to make change happen.
Posted January 9, 2008 08:28 AM
graham watt
Has everybody been taking crazy pill? Barak lost New Hampshire after being poll-crowned. Hillary won New Hampshire. A week used to be a long time in politics. Now 8 hours is a long time.
Posted January 9, 2008 08:18 AM
james
You see, that's the problem with polls and experts. Sometimes even they have to eat a crow. What will the polls say now? Dewey Defeats Truman!!!
Posted January 9, 2008 07:24 AM
Paul
Halifax
Well Mr. Champ seems your prediction was incorrect. US voters are a funny bunch, seems to me that Mr. Gore was a shoo-in 2 elections ago (who will ever forget Florida) and now yourself and other journalists are backing Obama...lot's and lot's of states to go yet...seem's to me your calling this one a little bit early.
Posted January 9, 2008 07:17 AM
RRO
Windsor
Nice prediction champ, but you should probably stop making predictions in this race. Hilary has now WON New Hampshire despite the polls. What have we learned..polls mean nothing.
For all his talk, what do we know about Obama. He wrote a book and he has spent only one term in the Senate. What can he really do? He avoids real debate, and goes with whats popular. He is the poster child for Washington these days.
Hilary has been talking about changing things since Bill got in the White House. Now she has a chance to do it. She is going to win and Obama if he is smart will jump on as her VP at the first chance.
Posted January 9, 2008 05:32 AM
allan
..
Given that I sit on the other side of the vote count in New Hampshire, I'll be gentle on your prediction as we now know Hillery had the numbers afterall.
Still, much of the smart money s still switching to Obama and the polls were certainly encouraging for him so far.
Obama's greatest problem right now, I believe, is he can't depend on the youth vote to actually get out and mark their ballots.
Yes, students and other young people love to rant and cheer at political rallies, most of which are staged in the pm.
The push to get them to vote though is early morning stuff and not even Obama appears to have found the message to encourage them to get out of bed.
Not to put too fine a point on this, but one of the problems for Democrat candidates is all four of them are seem as viable candidates for the White House.
With that comes a certain comfort levels that might keep softer Democrats at home, at least until the November finals.
Posted January 9, 2008 01:42 AM
Gregg Hill
Toronto
Eat it, Champ!
Posted January 9, 2008 12:25 AM
Jason
Toronto
Champ....love the column and the prediction - Obama all the way!
Obama is becoming more than a candidate - he is a movement! finally a guy with vision, charm, charisma and a full control of words / language. He is a symbol above all else (this is why technocrats or policy experts like Hillary are not working this year.. voters dont care much about details - Bush already set that bar on that very low anyway). Plus Hillary comes off as cold and phoney.
In US politics - it is all about the messenger - and Obama is the man for that job. He is the perfect symbol it would seem for the (post-9/11, healing) times.
Posted January 8, 2008 12:11 PM
Brad
Caledonia
Perhaps Clinton's camp should consider holding some background discussions with Obama's people. "We'll throw our support behind your candidate, with a guarantee that our candidate will be your running mate". First black President & first female Vice-President? What a shakeup that would cause in the US, and what a stir that would create globally!
Posted January 8, 2008 10:48 AM
Bradley
Obama aside, what we are seeing is a reflection of a massive rejection of all things related to George W. Bush and a rogue Republican administration.
Posted January 8, 2008 10:45 AM
Geoff Paterson
Toronto
Finally, something interesting and exciting is developing on the U.S. political front. It appears as though history will be made, either way it is looked at. Obama could become the first African American President, while Clinton could become the first Woman President. To Obama's advantage, he has youth on his side, and could make politics a little more interesting for the disenfranchised 20 to 40 year-old voters in the U.S. Clinton's advantage is her wealth of experience behind the scenes in the White House, as well as her years as a senator. Obama's disadvantage appears to be his lack of experience in politics and tackling real political issues, while Clinton's disadvantage is her perceived cold personality. Personally, I think America and the world needs a break from the Clinton and Bush Show. 16 years between the two families is ample time. A fresh change would be good for the entire world. The main thing Obama needs to do now is to clearly lay out his stand on issues and be specific about what direction he is planning to take on foreign policy issues. Hopefully he and his strategists will come up with a viable plan to get out of the quagmire created by Bush.
Posted January 8, 2008 10:40 AM
Les Hamilton
Toronto
What will be the death from a thousand cuts for Obama during the real challenge with McCain?
Obama’s cocaine use can be vaguely weighed against Bush’s riotous youth. However, since alcohol is not seen as a drug, he will be seen as having no credentials for enforcing drug laws. He talks retreat in Iraq and will be seen as weak on terrorism. He will be pilloried again about his statement abut meeting with all enemy states on the day after his election. There will be the innuendoes about his family name and past residency.
He will be shown as an agent of big government if he proposes any changes to health care. In what could be his natural power base he will be presented as an effete wannabe black person. His inexperience will be touted and he will be called a nice guy but not yet ready for the job of president.
Obama’s natural skills may help him get above the coming storm if he doesn’t lose his cool but its going to get ugly out there.
Posted January 8, 2008 10:02 AM
sean
I think Obama is the best candidate for the job because he's prudent and believes in change. For those who don't know, change means to make different. all the things that are going wrong in the U.S. what else can you say, we need change and we need to come together at a time like this. this is a man that acknowledges the problems with global warming, war in Iraq & major money issues. yea change seems needed.
Posted January 8, 2008 09:57 AM
Jacob Kasperowicz
Obama appears to be gaining strength and support but does he have what it takes to sell his ideals,in order to, implement his ideas. I find him too lackluster and tame for someone who is running for the U.S. presidency. The pit bulls of politics(the Karl Roves,Dick Cheneys) will mince him into oblivion before the elections. Graphic but,sadly,a reality in politics.
Posted January 8, 2008 09:28 AM
Dona
Hudson,QC.Canada
If Obama wins and gains the White House, and keeps his promises, I think it will be a very interesting and exciting time in America. Not only the US but the rest of the world could welcome change.
Posted January 7, 2008 09:22 PM
Wally
China
Mr. Champ:
I am an avid reader of your column. I really think that Mr. Obama has a chance of becoming the next President of the United States. He has hammered away in his speeches that Change is needed in the U.S. I have not been able to find out what change he is talking about. Where does he stand on issues of the environment, Multi million dollar give aways to defence contractors and the ever growing deficit of the U.S. Can he swing the money changers to his way of thinking, or will he be just another puppet of the system. I think the news media has an obligation to question him and let the public know what he stands for. Presidents have a tremendous amount of power and influence on the news media as to what should be reported and what is left alone. If you guys falter and dont stand up to the system, we will never get a clear picture of what change Mr. Obama is talking about. Dig in Henry and keep us in the know.
Posted January 7, 2008 04:12 PM
DGM
Vancouver
Give me a break, how can you say with a straight face that you are not captive of the 'horse race factor' The CBC has abandoned any attempt at explaning or helping Canadians understand the issues.
Your coverage resembles the analysis normally reserved for beauty contests.
Posted January 7, 2008 03:39 PM
cw
Toronto
I've been following the US presidential race only peripherally. It seems to me, though, that pollsters, pundits, the press, and everybody else is missing an important point: Oprah's endorsement of Barack Obama.
Posted January 7, 2008 03:34 PM
Jerry
seattle
Look for Obama to offer Hillary the VP spot and watch her accept. It will be what he needs (a strong ticket) and after eight years she will at last be first in line for the nomination. She will be only 68.
Posted January 7, 2008 02:27 PM
Andre
Toronto
Obama is a gifted politician, however I'm rather bored of the constant rhetoric and holier than thou attitude. I'm hoping the Democrats don't end up with their own version of Stephane Dion.
America needs leadership, not more hot air!
Posted January 7, 2008 02:11 PM
Seth Feldman
Toronto
I think the only person more worried than Hillary is Stephen Harper. Should Obama become President, he would become the last neo-con. On the other hand, who is our Obama? Has anyone seen a charismatic Canadian lately?
Posted January 7, 2008 12:11 PM