If the have-a-beer-with question still matters…

Following up on an item from yesterday, there’s been a flurry of national polls released over the last couple of days, and most offer relatively similar results about the state of the presidential campaign. AP has Obama leading McCain by six (47-41); CNN has Obama up by five (48-43); CBS has Obama up by six (45-39); and Time has Obama up by five (46-41). Whether one considers a 5 to 6 point lead impressive or not is open, apparently, to some debate, but given the sustainability of these numbers, in a time of withering attacks, I’m fairly encouraged.

But taking a closer look at the internals, some key angles jump out. Take this from the results of the Time poll, for example:

With three months to go before election day, Obama’s advantage is largest on atmospheric issues: he is seen as far more likeable and a greater force for change than McCain. Asked which candidate is most likeable, Obama beats McCain 65% to 20%; as for which is the real candidate for change, he leads 61% to 17%. Obama also beats McCain 48% to 35% on who understands voters’ concerns best, another key indicator of appeal.

Now, ideally, presidential campaigns would be all about issues, policy proposals, and substance. But since we know that’s a fantasy, these “atmospheric issues” are more than a little important.

We’ve heard endless talk over the few elections about which candidate voters would rather have a beer with, a factor that allegedly helped propel George W. Bush to the White House. But if this is an indicator, and Americans prefer a president they actually like, then Obama’s in a reasonably good position — his “likeable” number is more than triple McCain’s. Given McCain’s celebrity status — SNL, The Daily Show, guest stars in movies/television, and jocular personality — the gap shouldn’t be this enormous.

And then there’s that persistent enthusiasm gap.

McCain is lagging in enthusiasm. Forty-nine percent of Obama voters describe themselves as “very enthusiastic,” compared to just 21% of McCain backers, and a full 27% of the Republican nominee’s supporters say they are either “not very” or “not at all” enthusiastic about him, compared with 10% for Obama.

This puts McCain in a very awkward bind. He could generate more enthusiasm among Republicans, but he’d have to give up some of the other support that keeps the race close.

Publius has some sharp analysis on this.

That’s because the gap is precisely what is preventing McCain from going Democrat-lite. If he moves hard to the middle to win over Douthat’s “Obama or undecided” voters, then the enthusiasm gap gets worse as disillusioned conservatives watch him distance himself from them. However, if he tries to shore up that base, then it prevents him from winning over the “Obama or undecided” voters.

Bottom line — McCain’s in a tough bind this year. I know the burning question is why Obama’s lead isn’t bigger. Maybe the better question is why the Great Maverick is consistently losing to a freshman Senator.

True. In fact, I’d add one related point. For all the recent talk about why Obama is struggling to crack the 50% threshold in recent polls, perhaps the more salient question is why McCain is barely able to crack the 40% threshold.

On a related note, the new CBS poll noted that 20% of respondents said Obama is “very likely” to be an effective Commander in Chief, down 4 points from a month ago. McCain’s number on the same question is 38%, down eight points from July.

As Steve M. noted, “We’re supposed to read that as a sign that Obama’s trip failed, and maybe it is a sign of that, but what’s far more interesting to me is that McCain’s C-in-C numbers are dropping faster than Obama’s. Why? Why are they dropping at all? Well, both polls were conducted starting July 31, just after the Britney ad hit, and ending August 4 (Time) or August 5 (CBS). I think the problem is the McCain campaign’s clownishness. I think he looked serious to 8% more people before this clown period than he does now.”

I hate to say it,but in Pa. the reason Obama isn’t further along in the polls is because he is black.
Between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh you have Alabama. Sad!

  • Percentage-wise, Obama and McCain’s C-in-C number drops are almost identical. They each lost roughly 1/6 of their prior number.

  • Gallup apparently has Obama up by only 2. That’s the only poll Chuck Todd and Joe Scarborough mentioned a few minutes ago on Morning Joe, which is why this post of yours surprises me. They had me convinced that it’s getting closer every day. The previous guest was Mark Halperin, so I’m not sure why they ignored the poll from his current employer, or the others for that matter.

  • After eight years of Bushylvanianism, people just aren’t interested in the further escapades of the Rovian Sock Puppet Theater Channel any more—it’s about as entertaining as watching paint dry….

  • In an nutshell, if the fundamentals don’t change Obama will very likely win the election. Obama has a nice, steady lead that McCain hasn’t managed to damage with the usual petty hijinks.

    McCain tried to Swiftboat Obama and make tire gauages last election’s purple heart band-aids. It didn’t work. If McCain attempts to grab onto another gimmick it’s not necessarily going to help him– in fact it might really backfire.

    So now McCain is stuck mocking Obama OR, just maybe, talking about issues. But clearly he doesn’t want to do that. Wait until the conversation turns to health care.

  • I’d rather have a beer with a democrat any day, and here’s why. Drunk republicans are more likely to:

    1. touch my foot under a stall wall
    2. start talking about Jesus
    3. pull out a firearm and start firing wildly into the air
    4. invade my sovereign nation

  • zoe from pittsburgh said: “So now McCain is stuck mocking Obama OR, just maybe, talking about issues. But clearly he doesn’t want to do that. Wait until the conversation turns to health care.”

    That’s essentially it. If you are losing on the issues, don’t talk about the issues. Which is amazing, considering that for a while there it looked like JSMcC*nt would have Iraq and Energy on his side.

    Then someone named al Maliki ripped the (Persian) rug out from under him and the American people started to realize that gas prices have been climbing for eight years while the Republican’ts have stood in the way of any conservation or alternate energy proposals.

    Imagine what reasonable CAFE standards applied from 2001 would have done for our energy efficiency in this country today.

  • My fellow Pittsburgher Zoe touched on something that could get interesting:

    McCain tried to Swiftboat Obama and make tire gauages last election’s purple heart band-aids. It didn’t work. If McCain attempts to grab onto another gimmick it’s not necessarily going to help him– in fact it might really backfire.

    How many of these contrived symbols can the McSame camp roll out as the ‘big one’ before it hits critical mass for his doddering old man image? Conservatives and liberals alike already see him as willing to say anything (save the truth) in order to get elected. How much of this goofiness will ‘centrists’ and independents tolerate before they come to the conclusion that he’s completely out of it?

  • “Clown period”.

    LOL.

    It’s like the old saying… when you go to bed with weasels you wake up with clowns. Or something like that.

    At least the clown wig hides the comb-over.

  • Steve Benen: Now, ideally, presidential campaigns would be all about issues, policy proposals, and substance. But since we know that’s a fantasy, these “atmospheric issues” are more than a little important.

    Yup.
    That’s why Prup, on yesterday’s closing thread, is must read:

    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16469.html#comment-450115

    Every McCain attack on Barack is nothing but an attempt to erode his character over time. The decision to politic that way has made the dirty old man with the creepy grin fair game.

    You say he once boiled over and called his wife a “cunt” in public? Oh my. You say he tried to whore her out in Dakota to a cock-and-puss show? My oh my.

  • That’s what bothers me. When you dissect the election dynamic into its components, from the issues to vision to likability to enthusiasm to vigor and energy, Obama wins hands down. But the polls show a very close race. The question is why. Is it race, or something else, or both? Whatever, it doesn’t augur well for November. I think McCain will close as the election nears. That’s when “change” and a lesser experienced candidate become riskier, in my opinion – as the moment when you really have to make the decision, not just complain about how things are, comes upon you.

    It happened in Bush I vs. Clinton.

    Add to that the possibility that McCain will finally get his act together, even if it is purely an act. He’s nothing but a clueless, cantankerous old man now, stumbling about literally and verbally. He’s bound to get better. He certainly can’t do worse.

  • Well, the “Bradley effect” or “Wilder effect” may not distort polls any more, but it told us one thing. Racism drives 5%+ of the vote. Not just in the South, but all over. So, in a fair world, Obama would be 10-12% ahead.

    Now, I’ve played the race card. Can anyone trump it?

    And this:

    “Gallup apparently has Obama up by only 2.”

    Does anyone have any explanation for the divergence between the daily tracking polls and the monthly or bi-monthly polls from the big media boys? It seems to be pretty consistent that the tracking polls have the race 3-4% points closer than the others. Are they clearly more prone to statistical fluctuations, or to understimating Obama’s lead?

  • Hark: Add to that the possibility that McCain will finally get his act together, even if it is purely an act. He’s nothing but a clueless, cantankerous old man now, stumbling about literally and verbally. He’s bound to get better. He certainly can’t do worse.

    Oh, he can get worse, and every time I see him speak, he seems less coherent. I think he’s getting more tired with each passing week, and the campaign will gradually wear him down. I think it’s quite possible that he will finally blow a gasket at some point, and let loose that famous temper of his. He’s not in great shape and it must be hard to get good rest with all the travelling. I just hope someone is there to film it when he blows.

  • MSNBC right now is citing the Time poll in asking “Red Flag for Obama?” with the anchor asking “why can’t Obama pull further ahead?” He just actually asked “which candidate, do you think, is in the better position?” WTF?

    Meanwhile, Chuck Todd — this very network’s chief political analyst — said the other day on this network that a 5-6 point lead in the national poll would translate to an electoral college blowout.

    The media is looking for any excuse they can to keep this a close race and generate interest in their coverage.

  • I’d want to have a beer with McCain. I wouldn’t want Obama chain smoking around me while drinking a beer.

  • Negative advertising suppresses interest. The downtrodden masses become even more cynical and hopeless when they see this crap. They tune out politics. That’s why Republicans always use it.

  • Thanks, ROTFL…, but I hope people don’t just read it, but do it. Being told “Gee, Prup, you’re smart” feels nice, sure, but I’d rather if 90% said “you’re an idiot” if the other 10% actually acted on my suggestions.

  • PJ: That might be the most important and accurate comment on this whole topic, and which is why Obama woukl hurt himself if he ‘fought back’ in the way so many of you are demanding. See CB’s ‘deft touch’ post.

  • Obama has said he wants a VP who complements his strengths, and that he considers himself strong in foreign policy. In fact, he seems to be reasonably strong across the board. Nonetheless, he’s been having real and long-term difficulty with crossing the barrier of “looks like a Commander In Chief”. Politicians most easily get past this by a) being Republican, b) having a military background, c) being old, and d) building a “John Wayne / Curtis LeMay” reputation by continually talking tough and threatening to bomb the hell out of somebody.

    Obama is 0 for 4 on this (compared to McCain’s perfect 4), with the combination of youthfulness and no military background being particularly damaging, especially considering that a lot of white voters have problems imagining a youngish black guy ordering a bunch of senior white generals around. He could perhaps lessen his negatives here via a VP with a military background. Unconvinced voters might well be helped along either by seeing a traditional senior military type (read ‘old white guy’) being willing to take second chair to Obama, or by seeing a senior military person who is female or minority or fairly young, as a personification of the argument that you don’t have to be an old white guy to order soldiers around. Obvious possibilities would include Powell, Clark and Webb, but they all have shortcomings and there are undoubtedly many dark-horse candidates who might do a good job.

    Being taken seriously as the CiC is important in the US. I’ve noticed over the years that press coverage accords significantly more respect to a president after he’s ‘been blooded’ by ordering the military into action, even if the action is not exactly D-Day (Ford and the Mayaguez incident, Reagan and Grenada, Bush 1 and Panama, Clinton and Haiti, Bush 2 and Afghanistan). Media folks may not agree with the intervention, but it’s been my impression that they treat the president more seriously afterward.

  • I’ve noticed over the years that press coverage accords significantly more respect to a president after he’s ‘been blooded’ by ordering the military into action,

    In other words, we’re not electing a president, we’re hiring a contract killer. In what other western democracy, excluding possibly Israel. is this even a factor?

  • I’d want to have a beer with McCain. I wouldn’t want Obama chain smoking around me while drinking a beer.

    (Puts on professor hat)
    Assuming for the moment that we’re dealing here with a stab at rhetoric correctly defined, as the discovery and use of the available means of persuasion, what exactly does this utterance mean that ‘typing McCain!’ an equivalent number of times and hitting ‘send’, would not also have accomplished?

    Better trolls. please.

  • Davis X. Machina said: “In other words, we’re not electing a president, we’re hiring a contract killer. In what other western democracy, excluding possibly Israel, is this even a factor?”

    Considering we pretty much do all the military dirty work for Japan and the European Union, none of them.

    Morale Courage defines the ability to choose to send soldiers into combat when that is necessary and wise, and the ability to withstand the pressure to send them when it is unnecessary and stupid. You have to have both traits to have morale courage (also known as standing up to bullies and peer pressure).

    An American President has to have Morale Courage. George Walker Bush doesn’t.

    Neither does John Sidney McCain.

  • CB: “And then there’s that persistent enthusiasm gap.”

    My mom, a died in the wool, voted proudly for bush2, twice, Republican, says she’s unhappy with the presidential choices this year. Even though she’s a lacking-enthusiasm-for-McCain type, she’d never vote for Obama as she apparently believes he’s a “secret Muslim” (who attended a Christian church for 20+ years!). I’ve sent her factcheck this and snopes that and she refuses to change her mind. Anyway, maybe she’ll vote for Barr? That would be OK too as she lives in Colorado, which usually leans R but may go to Obama this year (esp. considering the Senate race of Udall v Schaffer).

    On VP, I know it’s only been mentioned a little, but Obama did take Sen. Jack Reed with him to the middle east and I hear they have an excellent rapport. Reed has denied being a contender, but I think he’d be excellent, esp. in the military aspect, as he’s a graduate of West Point and served as an Army ranger and paratrooper. The only (frivolous) negative I can think for Reed is that he’s short. I don’t care one whit about it, but it is a factor in some people’s minds. But maybe not so much for VP as President.

    Reed’s official bio:
    http://reed.senate.gov/biography/index.cfm

  • The day before yesterday, in NYT’s The Caucus,there was this bit:

    In a new variant, Lifetime Networks asked female voters whom they would rather carpool with and whom they would want to vacation with.[…] About 51 percent said they would rather ride with Mr Obama, while 31 percent preferred Mr McCain (only 5 percent of those who chose Mr.Obama said they would ride with Mr. McCain, while 17 percent of McCain supporters would share a ride with Mr. Obama) Six percent said they would rather ride alone.

    As for summer vacations, 49 percent said they would prefer to go off with the Obamas, while 26 percent chose the McCains. About 20 percent said they would prefer to vacation sans candidate.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    However. I have a Republican (female) acquaintance who also likes Obama better than McCain (good manners, graceful, cute, clever) but who will still vote for McCain, whom she doesn’t like one bit. Her husband was career military, as was McCain; they know better how to deal with matters of war, of which we seem to always have some (no matter that Obama might be better able to *avert* them). And her daughter is the same age as Obama and she knows her daughter is in no way able to lead the country. Case closed.

  • Hannah: Tell your Mom about the Buffalo Chip festival, and see if she’ll still consider voting for McCain. Your mom is precisely the type of person I was talking about in the comment ROTFL commended. Show her the video of him appearing and speaking there, and, if she can take it, the ‘work-safe’ version of the videos of the Festival.

  • Comments are closed.