Keeping the General in View (Swampland 4)

Linda,

I was working from the Real Clear Politics averages of a basket of national polls (Marist, Qinnipiac, Rasmussen etc). As an average it makes a reasonable stab at washing out the biases of individual polls as well as the effects of different sampling techniqiues and differnent definitions of "likely voter".

I think you interpreted me as being overly optimistic about the Dem's chances in the general. I'm not. In fact, I was saying that they need to avoid hubris. Particularly the sort of hubris that implies that it doesn't matter what we do to each other in the primary because the nominee will win the general election. I'm happy to stick with with my conclusions. Which are :

The Democratic base is staying fairly loyal regardless of which prospective nominee you ask them about, but the GOP base is not.

Nevertheless, a moderate(ish) GOP nominee with security credentials would still have a real shot at holding the middle ground and winning the general election.

The GOP can blow their chances in the general election by nominating the wrong person.

The Dems will have a fighting chance in the general election by nominating any one of their front runners.

So, the biggest factor and highest priority for the GOP is to pick the right nominee. By contrast, the biggest factor and highest priority for the Dems is to position their nominee, whoever they are, to compete effectively for the middle ground in the general election. Importantly, this means that the Dems need to avoid delivering a nominee into the general election arena who is too damaged by the primary process to compete.

So, the sort of thing we've seen over the past few days, which makes all candidates come off as vicious, small and immature is exactly what the Dems don't need. Which is why I'm happy to pile on and say that both David Geffen and the HRC operatives who started all this have been both dumb and disloyal to their party.

Geffen Loses Focus : A Comment (Swamland 3A)

From Linda at Swampland (time.com)

RB: I don't know what polls you are looking at, but keep in mind that these polls generally are taken from likely voters that are either registered as GOP or DEM. The independent voter is virtually ignored until after the primary-caucus rounds.

The way it works is voters to vote in primary-caucus must be registered with a declared party. All voters can change their party preference, including independents, if they want to vote in the primaries-caucus. This can make no difference or it can be significant.

Just a caution. But you are right that the GOP is hurting at this point. Giuliani hasn't been 'hit' yet by the negative campaigners. That could be significant.

Geffen Loses Focus (Swampland 3)

I had a look through the latest Real Clear Politics poll averages for general election head to heads. A couple of things caught my eye. Giuliani is holding up well against all democrats.

The Dems numbers against the GOP front runners are fairly closely clustered between 41 (Obama v Giuliani) and 46 (Clinton v McCain). The GOP are much more spread out with the floor being down around 30 (Romney v Obama or Edwards). This seems to say that the bedrock support is lower for the GOP than the Dems. Which means that the GOP have an excellent opportunity to commit suicide by nominating the wrong candidate.

It also seems to say that, regardless of who they nominate, the Dems are looking at roughly Gore/Kerry support levels when up against a moderate Republican with good name recoginition.

Which brings me (back on topic) to say that it's really stupid for the Dems to damage each other with independents and uncommitteds by having this sort of school yard spat.

I'd also stretch the numbers to say that neither Obama or Edwards are not that far behind on the electability stakes. Meaning that money, luck and charisma could close the gap. HRC Inc know this which is why they are leaving nothing to chance.

I think we may be confident that Bill is yelling words to that effect at people even as we sit here.

Tony Goes the Other Way (Swampland 2)

Blair's withdrawal has dropped Howard in it up to his eyebrows. It's made his whole argument fall to bits. The papers here this morning are laughing long and hard. This from the Australian's Matt Price

"This British withdrawal couldn’t have come at a worse time for the Prime Minister.

After spending the last fortnight hammering Kevin Rudd on his withdrawal policy—and injuring Barack Obama and the US Democrats in the crossfire—John Howard must face the fact that Tony Blair is retreating as well."

And that's the Murdoch paper.

We'll be sure and get the sweets and flowers out for Cheney.

Wait a minute.. the skies over Sydney habour have darkened. The air has suddenly developed an unnatural chill. A dark shape is emerging and moving across the waters towards the Prime Ministers house....

Howard Obama Post Game (Swampland 1)

This is the first of several notes that I'm posting here today which I first posted as comments on time.coms Swampland blog over a 2 week period around the time of the Howard Obama fracas and then the Geffen-Clinton-Obama affray.

_________________________

On the subject of the coalition, Linda asked that I pass on any wash up from John Howard's Obama brain burst. The latest poll from the Australian (based on interviews done just after Howards teeth met Obama's ankle) came out yesterday with these numbers

Preferred Prime Minister : Howard 37, Rudd 47
(was Howard 40, Rudd 39)

Satisified/Not : Howard 44/46 Rudd 68/13
(was Howard 44/44 Rudd 60/15)

Party Vote Coalition (Howard) 46 Labour 54
(was 44 56)

So, the personal numbers for Howard got worse and his opponent got a big boost. The preferred Prime Minister numbers are a big deal here. A lose on that number hasn't happened to Howard in 10 years in office and the gap is a record in the 21 years this poll has asked that question. It's also significant in that it tends to be a leading indicator response to recent events that shows up in the party vote over the longer run.

There was a slight bobble in the party vote the other way but this appears mostly to consist of minor party votes leaking to the conservatives. I suspect this was wingnuts to Howards right deciding he was one of them after all.

Long story short, it cost him, big time.

Cheney arrives here tomorrow. As you might imagine we're all very thrilled that he's stopping by.

I have this vision that he'll arrive at Howard's house on Sydney habour alighting directly from the deck of a Los Angeles class nuclear sub.

I forgot to say.

From the same poll :
Support for a Stay the Course approach to Iraq : 30%.
Yes, going onto Iraq was a good idea in the first place : 21%

So, really, not so much with the willing for us.

Howard Keeping His Head

Love this to bits
The silouette in the back is opposition leader Kevin Rudd (who really does look like Tin Tin)

0h No He Didn't !? (John Howard bites Obama and embarasses his country)

Well, I'd been leaving this go quiet after the midterms figuring it would take a while for the process to build enough for thoughts from across the pond to be even remotely interesting. Then John Howard went and opened his mouth.

In case you haven't heard Mr Howard bucketed Barrack Obama's deadline for troop withdrawal from Iraq and suggested if he were Al Qaeda he would be praying for a Democrat to win the White House. Yikes!

To steal a line from Aaron Sorkin and CJ Gregg; firstly, I hardly know where to start, but firstly.

You just don't do that. To wade into an ally's (or anybody else's) internal politics in such a partisan way is outrageous, unacceptable, and just plain dumb.

Not only is this dumb and insulting in general but the realpolitik downsides are enormous. We now have an entire field of presidential candidates who will not give Mr Howard or Australia so much as the time of day if (as is likely) one of them becomes president. See Terry McAuliffe's comments for a brief taste.

So, can I say right off the bat, that I'm confident the vast majority of Australians are very embarrassed and not a little concerned. I think we can also be sure that a very large majority of Americans are wondering what the hell this Howard guy thinks he's doing.

So, I guess, what an observer over here may be able to contribute is some context (which is not be construed at any point as being within driving distance of an excuse, because there is none). I suspect there are two elements to this, one is electoral panic. Mr Howard is, as of this morning's papers, looking at some of the worst numbers of his career. His opponent, Kevin Rudd (in spite of looking like Harry Potter gone grey and sounding like your social studies teacher) is at 65% approval, the voting intention is running his way 58% to 42% and he's leading Howard as preferred Prime Minister by %48 to 42%. I realise it's not necessarily easy to get a sense of these numbers if you haven't been following Australian politics, but trust me, for Mr Howard, to use a technical term, they suck buckets.

Howard has been acting rattled for a few weeks now. He knows he's in trouble and he's thrashing around looking for traction. He thought he had it with a grand new $10 billion plan to fix up problems with inland rivers and water ( a huge issue here) but this morning's poll numbers have the opposition preferred on the environment by 60% to 22% (ouch). This may be partly because the opposition front man on the environment is none other than Peter Garrett. Yes, the Midnight Oil Peter Garrett. You remember him, bald, 7 feet tall and smarter than any 5 other rock stars put together.

The other factor driving Mr Howard to this folly is his obsequious relationship with the Bush administration. If Bush and Cheney are born to rule frat boys, then John Howard is the pathetic nerd gimp that is willing to do anything (and I mean the whole National Lampoon playbook) to be let into the fraternity. Cheney is visiting us next week and it's not outside the bounds of possibility that Howard though this was a good way to earn himself a pat on the head.

Anyway all I can say is we're really embarrassed and we'll be taking local electoral steps to correct this interruption to normal service as soon as possible.