The latest CBS News poll, conducted March 30-April 1, has Kerry beating Bush by 5 points among RVs. That’s consistent with the Los Angeles Times data I discussed yesterday.
There’s also new and strong evidence of Bush’s eroding credibility and the public’s declining confidence in his handling of the war on terror. Check it out.
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
July 26: The Obama Coalition Revisited
It’s pretty obvious Kamala Harris’s candidacy changes the 2024 presidential race more than a little, and I wrote at New York about one avenue she has for victory that might have eluded Joe Biden:
During her brief run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2019, Kamala Harris was widely believed to be emulating Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign strategy. She treated South Carolina, the first primary state with a substantial Black electorate, as the site of her potential breakthrough. But she front-loaded resources into Iowa to prepare for that breakthrough by reassuring Black voters that she could win in the largely white jurisdiction. She had the added advantage of being from the large state of California, where the primary had just been moved up to Super Tuesday (March 3). For a thrilling moment, after her commanding performance in a June 2019 debate, Harris seemed on track to pull off this feat, threatening Joe Biden’s hold on South Carolina in the polls and surging in Iowa. But neither she nor Cory Booker, who also relied on the Obama precedent, could displace Biden as the favorite of Black voters or strike gold in the crowded Iowa field. Out of money and luck, Harris dropped out before voters voted.
Now Kamala Harris is the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee for 2024 without having to navigate any primaries. But she still faces some key strategic decisions. Joe Biden was consistently trailing Donald Trump in the polls in no small part because he was underperforming among young and non-white voters, the very heart of the much-discussed Obama coalition. Can Harris recoup some of these potential losses without sacrificing support elsewhere in the electorate? That is a question she must address at the very beginning of her general-election campaign.
There’s a chance that Harris can inject a bit of the Obama “hope and change” magic into a Democratic ticket that had previously felt like a desperate effort to defend an unpopular administration led by a low-energy incumbent, as Ron Brownstein suggests in The Atlantic:
“Polls have shown that a significant share of Americans doubt the mental capacity of Trump, who has stumbled through his own procession of verbal flubs, memory lapses, and incomprehensible tangents during stump speeches and interviews to relatively little attention in the shadow of Biden’s difficulties. Particularly if Harris picks a younger running mate, she could top a ticket that embodies the generational change that many voters indicated they were yearning for when facing a Trump-Biden rematch …
“In the best-case scenario for this line of thinking, Harris could regain ground among the younger voters and Black and Hispanic voters who have drifted away from Biden since 2020. At the same time, she could further expand Democrats’ already solid margins among college-educated women who support abortion rights.”
Team Trump seems to believe it can offset these potential gains by depicting Harris as a “California radical” and a symbol of diversity who might alienate the older white voters with whom Biden had some residual strength. Obama overcame similar race-saturated appeals in 2008, but he had a lot of help from a financial collapse and an unpopular war presided over by the party of his opponent.
Following Obama’s path has major strategic implications in terms of the battleground map. Any significant improvement over Biden’s performance among Black, Latino, and under-30 voters might put Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina — very nearly conceded to Trump in recent weeks — back into play. But erosion of Biden’s support among older and/or non-college-educated white voters could create potholes in his narrow Rust Belt path to victory in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
These strategic choices could definitely affect Harris’s choice of a running-mate, not just in terms of potentially picking a veep from a battleground state, but as a way of amplifying the shift produced by Biden’s withdrawal. Brownstein even thinks Harris might consider following Bill Clinton’s 1992 example of doubling down on her own strengths:
“The other option that energizes many Democrats would be for Harris to take the bold, historic option of selecting another woman: Whitmer. That would be a greater gamble, but a possible model would be 1992, when Bill Clinton chose Al Gore as his running mate; Gore was, like him, a centrist Baby Boomer southerner—rather than an older D.C. hand. ‘I love Josh Shapiro and I think he would be a great VP candidate, but I would double down’ with Whitmer, [Democratci consultant Mike] Mikus told me. ‘I don’t think you have to go with a moderate white guy. I think you can be bold [with a pick] that electrifies your base.’ I heard similar views from several consultants.”
Whitmer’s expressed disinterest in the veepstakes may take that particular option off the table, but the broader point remains: Harris does not have to — and may not be able to — simply adopt Biden’s strategy and tweak it slightly. She may be able to contemplate gains in the electorate that were unimaginable for an 81-year-old white male incumbent. But the strategic opportunity to follow Obama’s path to the White House will first depend on Harris’s ability to refocus persuadable voters on Trump’s shaky record, bad character, and extremist agenda. Biden could not do that after the debate debacle of June 27. His successor must begin taking the battle to the former president right now.
Try this site also. Good, intelligent reading.
http://gadflyer.com/
Dare I cite “nattering nabobs of negativism”?
To echo something RT said earlier, Dems’ pessimism and self-defeating psychology can be their own worst political enemy.
I live in liberal Seattle, and I’m amazed here how many people in one breath champion Kucinich / Nader / Sharpton, but then sigh that Bush will win anyway so they won’t even vote. They think that the GOP machine is unstoppable and grant it near-supernatural powers.
I often direct these people to DR to give them some positive signs and motivation!
Please give it some space, Space! Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative.
Kerry = positive, Bush = negative.
Focus, focus, focus. Don’t fall into their false numbers game. The polls are useless in telling the real story. Polls are designed to brainwash the masses and are easily manipulated to do just that. The votes will rule. Think positive and talk positive about a future with President Kerry, show everyone the right way.
Save the negative for the liars cowboy club clan. oops.
Donkey Rising is engaging in nothing less than willfull ignorance. The CBS poll contains far more bad news than good. Among the disturbing numbers:
1. Kerry TRAILS Bush in battleground states.
2. Nearly twice as many people think Bush says what he believes than think Kerry does despite the fact that Bush has been lying to them for 3 years.
3. More people still think Bush will protect the U.S. from a terrorist attack.
4. More people think Kerry has been running a mostly negative campaign.
Yes, the numbers are trending away from Bush. But still, they should be much more favorable to Kerry.
How’s this for a play on their own words. Yes they are secretive evil doers who lie and try to hide what they are up to.
Someone said the other day that Nixon would be a tremendous improvement over this president. How sad of a state of affairs America has dropped to because of the Supreme Court’s installation of this person to run our country. Fortunately real American’s will have the last word come November. You know I used to think I hated Nixon and Reagan, just goes to show you how a new reality can alter what you think you knew ( I still hate them but now I have been shown that hatred has multiple levels).
Sorry just venting.
More good news in California where the latest poll has Bush at 38% approval rate to Kerry at about 50%. Bush never had a chance in California anyway, but the numbers have shown a tremendous downward slide for Bush in the last week or two.
Maxcat, They are a bunch of liars, but if I had to choose one word to describe this administration it would be “secretive”. They put Nixon to shame. John Dean’s book makes that clear.
Hey let’s start using the “L” word applied to this administration. All of them and their kind are always so fond of throwing that at the progressives like it means something dirty and bad. Well now it does but only when applied to them. That’s right, the “L” word as in LIARS.
Goodbye Mr. Bush.
Good News today. In addition to the Pew Report poll indicating the overall approval trend continues downward — now 43% down 5 points from March, Minnesota apparently went Kerry nuts over the last month. The previous poll had a 2 point spread, but today’s Star-Tribune poll puts Bush at 38 and Kerry at 50. A mite of progress. I was hoping Ruy was back, I am looking forward to his take on the Pew.
Prediction: Israel has the green light to assassinate Arafat. If there’s a suicied bombing in Israel that kills more than a few people, Arafat is gone.
My fear is that the Administration is rapidly reaching a point where they are willing to take a gamble on sheer global chaos to win.
Am I paranoid??
John Kerry will win in November by a considerable margin. Bush has betrayed his own parties agenda, betrayed democracy, and betrayed all good Americans. No amount of semantics will erase what Bush has led this country into. Nothing will wash the blood of our soldiers from his coat tails. All of America will speak and Bush will be silenced.
Joe, Kerry comes across to me as someone who–like Bill Clinton, and when he has the time to do so–prefers to be able to collect factual information and differing views and mull it over before making especially important decisions. To that I say “Hurray!! I miss that.” I agree with that part of what you said.
He does not come across to me as someone who makes decisions with a lack of self assurance, though. I think that’s what the Republicans want the public to believe. But I don’t have that perception of him at all. He comes across to me as generally quite sure-footed, in fact.
What really has to be done is a bit more organizing on the ground. Someone put up a dairy-entry on Kos about the lack of an organization in Ohio. There’s the same weakness here in Illinois.
This has got to change — rapidamente
Grush, it’s very tough to disengage your own feelings, your fear, your hope, from what is really going on out there in 50 different media markets – especially when you’re in one of the markets that is not in a target state.
Plus, the media saturation of NY leads people to buy into the “who’s up, who’s down’ mentality. If one candidate gets more press one week, it feels like they had a better week. Well, if that happens 6 weeks in a row, there’s a shift. But 1, 2, or even 3 weeks are too small of a time frame, unless we’re in October.
Sara: I too live in a swing state but in a very Republican area, West Michigan. Consequently, Kerry isn’t making any cable buys here to speak of. I suspect that the ad buys are heavier in the Detroit metro region.
I also suspect Kerry is in the process of developing a more centrist message and firming up campaign strategy. It will be a slow process for Kerry in that he doesn’t appear to be a person who makes decisions quickly or with a great deal of self assurance.
I hope he speaks out soon though on the need to finance our Iraq operations with a tax cut roll back for those higher income people. It would (1) help explain his vote on the $87 billion, (2) remind voters that we went there for no good reasons and(3) spread the sarifices of the war more equitably, something voters can identify with.
Sara,
That’s great, and encouraging. I live in New York, so the general din of life drowns out such things. Maybe Warren Buffet does have it right investing from Omaha.
Plus, I make it a point to listen to and read the enemy: Hannity, New York post, etc (plus, Page Six beats anything the Times has). So I have trouble separating signal from noise.
Still, after the Clarke testimony, Rice’s ridiculous waverings and the increasingly anarchy in Iraq, Bush should be down by 20 points.
It is simply not in Kerry’s interests to engage in the kind of tit for tat advertising war Bush undertook when he went up with his ads a few weeks ago.
Kerry needed the rest, and his primary centered staff needed to be re-organized, built out, and re-focused on tasks for the long haul. It is to Kerry’s advantage to be off the hot trail while this is done. Moreover, some other matters, such as the 911 commission were scheduled, and the better part of valor was to get out of the way and let them happen on their own., Kerry needed to raise big time money, and he is doing so effectively.
From where I sit in a battleground state, I see lots of advertising — Kerry’s stuff plus a number of good 527 efforts. I see lots of party planning meetings being announced, I see campaign staff being recruited and appointed to camapign jobs, I see announcements that surrogates are visiting town and making appearances. I would much prefer to see good organization and the finances to sustain it through to November than I would witness a hot altercation now about an issue that could easily be moot come November.
Not a very scientific or quantifiable observation here, but does anyone else sense the momentum slipping away from the Dems?
I feel as though Kerry is invisible… and that the major media is covering the candidates in proportion to their advertising spend.
Images of Bush crosscut with Iraq carnage, I’m afraid, will help him. “The world is a terrifying mess, don’t take any chances right now.” (Of course, the world is aflame because Bush decided to throw gasoline on the fire after 9/11).
One key dynamic is that Kerry really CAN’T affirmatively define himself. Bush’s deficit makes any spending on social programs impossible, cultural issues are a minefield, and there is general ‘consensus’ among the ‘elites’ on current foreign ‘policy.’
I’m concerned.