A Strictly Tactical Analysis

While it is very likely now that Hillary Clinton cannot overtake Barack Obama’s increased lead in delegates to the upcoming Democratic convention, the rational question superdelegates should be asking is “Who is most likely to be able to defeat John McCain in November?”

Before slicing and dicing that, it’s instructive to remember that for much of the 2004 campaign, John Kerry looked entirely competitive with George Bush. Kerry’s political strategy was to campaign nationally pretty much as he has campaigned in Massachusetts. The Republican strategy was run a campaign like they’d run one in Texas or Tennessee or Idaho.

As it turned out, the Swift Boat smear orchestrated by Karl Rove, the perception that Kerry was an out-of-touch elitist, and the still-lingering hyper-concern about terrorism, all combined to give GW four more years in the White House. In retrospect, Kerry was not the best candidate the Democrats could have fielded. Likely John Edwards would have been better. Al Gore might have actually won a rematch.

Oddly enough, the Democrats are in the same boat, no pun intended, this year. Like Kerry, Obama has already given the Republicans enough ammunition to paint him as an elitist who secretly condescends to the small town “Bubbas” who account for a significant part of lower middle income voters. He has that 20-year association with Jeremiah Wright which, although he has condemned Wright, will come back to haunt him as a judgment issue – i.e., how did he avoid figuring out that Wright is a loony racist for two decades as a parishioner? And, if he really didn’t know that, why not? Obama is obviously an intelligent, gifted man, rising from Illinois state legislator to presidential contender in a handful of years.

Obama has gotten a virtual pass from Hillary Clinton on the Wright-connected questions. He will get no such pass from McCain and the Republican strategists. It may well feature in any number of political commercials we see and hear in coming months.

Moving on to the purely analytical statistics now. While it is true Obama has polled more votes and gained more delegates than Hillary, the New York Senator has won in the big states, some of which at least they must win to capture the presidency. Obama’s victories, interestingly, are mostly in states which can be counted on to vote Republican come November.

Polls show Clinton beating McCain in states like Ohio and close in Florida, states that are shown going for McCain against Obama in the same polls. Clinton is correct in her assessment that she has won among the constituencies that Democrats must have to forge a winning coalition in November. There is polling evidence that significant numbers of Clinton Democrats plan to desert the party in November if Hillary is not the nominee. This group profiles very much like the “Reagan Democrats” who propelled the former actor to two landslide victories.

Like Kerry, Obama’s support comes mostly from the Democratic base. While there is evidence some Republicans and some independents are trending toward Obama, it’s not overwhelming. And there is polling evidence that those voters would be offset, or more than offset, by disaffected Clintonistas voting for McCain.

So what happens in November? Here’s my best guess, based on the factors described above.

If Obama is the Democratic nominee: The campaign will, electorally, be a replay of 2004, McCain picking up some states like Pennsylvania and Michigan that the Republicans haven’t carried since Reagan. The popular vote will be in the range of McCain 52-55%, Obama 45-48%. McCain will pick up about a third of Clinton Democrats. Clinton’s lukewarm commitment to support Obama if he’s the nominee is just that: lukewarm. If she loses the nomination, the next day she will suddenly rediscover a 100% commitment to being U.S. Senator from New York. She will give zero real help to Obama, and hope secretly for his defeat so that, at 64, she can run against McCain in 2012 when he’ll be 76 and maybe even not be running.

The Republicans will, as noted, make this contest about character and judgment. Although there are plenty of questions to go all around on that, GOP strategists have proved particularly adept at assassinating the character of opposition candidates. And, as noted, there is the nice guy, war hero image McCain enjoys that will be hard to destroy in a few months, even if the Democratic strategists knew how to go for the jugular, which they haven’t shown they do for a number of years now.

If Clinton is the Democratic nominee: Several red states, notably Ohio, Missouri and Florida, will be up for grabs. Clinton will grind McCain down mostly on social issues, glossing over her near-total agreement with him about defense and foreign policy. She will probably win, with a popular vote in the range of Clinton 51-52%, McCain 48-49%. In other words, it will be close, but Hillary will prevail. In this scenario, disaffected Obama supporters, of whom there will be many, will simply sit out the election. But enough of them will turn out and vote Democratic anyway that no blue state will be threatened.

The red states Hillary wins will be on the strength of her coalition-building and “Reagan Democrats,” whom she will split with McCain. She will win among women overwhelmingly. Unlike almost every other major Democratic officeholder, Hillary Clinton knows how to go for the jugular and appear reasonable while doing it. She will employ this tactic highly effectively on McCain.

National polls at this moment seem to back Hillary's contention she is the stronger nominee. She is ahead by two or three points against McCain while Obama is dead even. More importantly, she is ahead in some big states the GOP took last time out. Odd that leading Democrats are now calling for Hillary to leave the race, ensuring the nomination of a candidate who will more than likely lose to the Arizona senator. An election that, as of January 1, looked "in the bag" for the Democrats has now become a race in which they're betting on the wrong horse.

It's noteworthy that George McGovern has been among those prominent Democrats calling for Hillary to withdraw. And as we all know, McGovern is an expert on how to win a national election - right, George?

Summing up my projection, if Obama is the Democratic nominee, the next president is John McCain. If Clinton is the Democratic nominee, the next president is Hillary Rodham Clinton. Since it now seems inevitable Obama will be the Democrats' standard bearer, that means McCain is headed for the Oval Office, in my view.

My analysis is based purely on observing the game. Personally, I don’t like any of the three major candidates on the issues and it does not matter to me which one ends up in the White House. I further happen to believe the presidency, as an institution, is out of control and has been for a century; that whoever occupies the office will continue to abuse and expand executive power at the expense of the Bill of Rights and constitutionally-prescribed government.

For me, it’s like a choice between Julius Caesar and Napoleon, and there’s not really any variety in that scenario.