April 24, 2008
Deepening Democratic Dilemma
By Robert Novak
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- When exit polls for the Pennsylvania primary came
out late Tuesday afternoon showing a puny lead of 3.6 points for
Hillary Clinton against Barack Obama, Democratic leaders who
desperately wanted her to end her candidacy were not cheered. They
were sure that this overstated Sen. Obama's strength, as exit polls
nearly always have in urban, diverse states. How was it possible,
then, that Sen. Clinton, given up for dead by her party's
establishment, won Pennsylvania in a 10-point landslide? The answer is
the dreaded Bradley Effect.
Prominent Democrats only whisper when they compare Obama, the first
African-American with a serious chance to be president, with what
happened to Los Angeles' black Mayor Tom Bradley a quarter of a
century ago. Exit polls in 1982 showed Bradley ahead for governor of
California, but he actually lost to Republican George Deukmejian.
Pollster John Zogby (who correctly predicted Clinton's double-digit
win Tuesday) said what practicing Democrats would not. "I think voters
face-to-face are not willing to say they would oppose an
African-American candidate," Zogby told me.
If there really is a Bradley Effect in 2008, Zogby sees November
peril ahead for Obama in blue states. John McCain is a potential
winner not only in Pennsylvania but also Michigan, Wisconsin and
Minnesota, and can retain Ohio. But there seems no way Clinton can
overtake Obama's lead in delegates and the popular vote. For unelected
super-delegates to deprive Obama of the nomination would so depress
African-American general election votes that the nomination would be
worthless. In a year when all normal political indicators point to
Republican defeat on all fronts, the Democratic Party faces a
deepening dilemma.
The escape route from this dilemma only a few months ago seemingly was
indicated by the sudden emergence of Obama as an extraordinary
candidate who could transcend race and ideology. But as Bill Clinton
sought to label Obama as his wife's black opponent, he increasingly
also has been identified as bearing the same ideological burdens that
brought down Democratic nominees George McGovern, Walter Mondale and
Michael Dukakis. It has gotten worse for Obama, losing every
high-population state to Clinton except his own Illinois.
Obama hit a low in Pennsylvania, despite clouds over Clinton's
credibility and her husband's dysfunctional campaigning. Popular
freshman Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, a pro-life and pro-gun
Catholic, was Obama's faithful surrogate but proved no help. Exit
polls showed Obama losing 70 percent of Catholics, 58 percent of white
Protestants and 62 percent of gun owners. Clinton carried union
members, wage-earners between $15,000 and $75,000 annually, and people
with less than a college degree. Obama was saved from total disaster
in Pennsylvania by 92 percent of the African-American vote, but the
reverse of the racial divide was Clinton's support from whites,
especially white working women.
For the first time, Democratic loyalists not necessarily committed to
Clinton are wondering whether the party's system for picking a nominee
is the problem. If all caucuses were eliminated and only primaries
used in picking nominees, Obama's lead of 130 in delegates would
become an advantage for Clinton of 45 delegates. The bigger problem is
proportional representation replacing the winner-take-all system that
enabled Republicans to get their nominee on Feb. 5 Super Tuesday.
Without the "reforms" enacted by Democrats during the decade following
the party's 1968 fiasco, Clinton might have clinched the nomination by
now.
Such regret does not affect the 2008 election, and no significant
procedural changes are likely for the future. Democratic politicians
today see no viable alternative to Barack Obama as their nominee.
Their hard assessment is that Hillary Clinton clawing her way to the
nomination could mean 25 percent McCain support from a radically
depleted African-American turnout -- a prescription for disaster.
On the other hand, Pennsylvania exit polls project a massive defection
by Clinton voters (with 32 percent of them "satisfied" only if she is
the nominee). Many of these disaffected Democrats surely will be
reconciled to Obama. Indeed, McCain privately warns key supporters to
be prepared for a massive if temporary falloff in the polls once these
unhappy Democrats return after Obama is nominated. But not all will
return, and that is Pennsylvania's warning to the Democratic Party.
--------
-C-
|
