On Barack Obama's to-do list? Coalesce Democrats

When the curtain rose on Campaign '08, one storyline seemed set in stone: Democrats, bonded by their disdain for President Bush, would remain uncommonly united; Republicans, lacking a clear heir apparent, would for once prove the more fractious party.

So much for that plot, as underscored by three recent national polls.

Each showed Barack Obama with only a narrow lead, despite leading John McCain among independent voters. The key to McCain's ability to hang tough? Greater support from his fellow Republicans than Obama can claim from other Democrats.

Here are the details:

* In the Pew Research Center poll, 83% of Democrats backed Obama, 87% of Republicans supported McCain. For the entire sample, Obama led, 46% to 43%.

* In the Quinnipiac University survey, 79% of Democrats backed Obama, 83% of Republicans supported McCain. The figures for the entire sample: Obama, 47%, McCain 42%.

* The differences in party loyalty are more pronounced in the new L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll. In that survey, Obama was backed by 78% of Democrats, McCain by 90% of Republicans. The overall result: Obama, 45%; McCain 43%.

Obama has many goals to accomplish at his party's convention next week. Prime among them is solidifying his base.

-- Don Frederick

Photo credit: AFP/Getty Images 

Comments

[mediahack]

Most Obama supporters will spit venom, but the only sure way he can solidify his base is to ask Hillary to join the ticket.
He needs 90+% of the base. 78% is troubling.

[Claire Applegate]

For once--an article that states Obama has a definite issue with party loyalty at this point in time...yet it doesn't scream at Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, or any other third-party candidates for running...

[Leon A Davis]

Coalesce Democrats? There's an oxymoron if I ever heard one. CNN just ran a story about how McCain is borrowing tactics from the Clinton camp. Well that's just great. Makes it look like the Clinton and McCain people are in cahoots. (They probably are) Especially if you think about all those Hillary loyalists who swear they'll vote for McCain because Obama stole Hillary's nomination. Expect lots more stories like this. Look for polls that put HRC's favorability rating over Barack's. Lots of "woulda-shoulda-coulda" stories when Obama gets no bounce out of the convention. I bet the PUMA group is saying, "coalesce this, pal!"

[Fiona]

Obama's biggest fly in the party loyalty ointment is an aging blonde named Hillary and her husband Bill. They have done more to create problems than anyone can imagine. It's all about Hill's and Bill's egos. They've put the unity of the Democratic party on the back burner.

[Chris Stewart]

One thing that become apparent in the primaries is that the the term Democrat encompasses a more diverse base than Republicans.

It is simply harder for Democrats to unite beyond one candidate. Latinos, blacks, mid-westerners, southerners, and Californians all have different preferences. The challenge for Obama and the victory for his campaign will be to get those folks to see their common interests.

Honestly, Republicans would never win another election if Democrats could get on the same page. To be sure, this election is not about foreign policy or even the economy, it is about unity. Obama better be able to unite!

[Jeff in Orlando]

I notice the theme of the Democrat Convention is going to focus on the "average American or the little people". That makes we wonder if Hillary has paid back her campaign debt to the small vendors whose services she used during the primary. I haven't heard that she has and she could with the millions the Clintons have. I also noticed BJs had high profits. Does that mean the Democrats are going to add BJs to the hit list that includes Wal-Mart? After all, the poor people working at these stores need union protection. That will mean higher prices for the little guy or the people the Dems profess so much concern if unions are installed. To top off their "concern" for the little guy, I hope Obama picks Senator Bayh as his running mate. The Senator's wife is on the board of major companies and earns over $800,000 a year. There is the potential prospect of a conflict of interest since Bayh's wife earns money from companies the Democrats would like to curb. With the Senator's salary, the Bayhs make over $1,000,000 yearly. I know McCain is rich, but he never drips with pity for the little guy while making millions, as Democrats do, from the companies they profess to dislike and attack. They do this even though these companies employ and provide cost savings to the average American to a degree greater than any government program can provide. In addition to the Democrat leaders being out of touch with regular Americans as a result of their wealth, they are also hypocrites. So, little people of America. The Dems will profess to take care of you up until you vote on election day, and then you will be on your own as usual after that.

[kathryn Creegan]

Barrack is a gentleman. McCain is not.
I am saddened that slease and negative wins.
This from the media. We are back to the gladiator period. Honor is gone and a virue of the past.

[M. Green]

In the past month, he has allowed McCain to consistently define him and to dominate most of the narratives being told. He has not shown much more capacity than Dukakis and Kerry in defining his own narrative, and he has managed to allow all kinds of invidious definitions to be put on him, many of which are sticking.

In checking with my personal feelings, I find that I am literally seething with anger. Instead of treating his progressive constituency with deference and respect--that's the constituency that gave him the nomination, for God's sake--Obama has treated that constituency as if it were expendable.

I am not thinking particularly of FISA or off-shore drilling. As I've said previously, I can appreciate his need to be pragmatic. But in listing so far to the "center" and in REFUSING to enunciate concise and actionable progressive themes, he has shown that he is really not much different from Pelosi and Reid.

Fact is, I can't think of a politician more contemptible than Pelosi. Obama has essentially let the DNC define his core political ethos.

I will bide my time and wait till the VP announcement is made, but like a lot of other progressives--the blogosphere is aflame with rants that are very similar to this--I think that the die is cast. Unless Obama were to maintain at least a 5 point lead, Diebold will steer the ship of state into McCain's safe harbor.

Obama, whom I previously championed, has all but lost the right to play the "yes, we can" card in my living room, while Clinton is even worse. It's an enormously complicated ethics issue, but I am tilting toward sitting out the vote in November. I suspect that millions of other voters feel likewise, which is why the floor has fallen out from under Obama.

If he wishes to treat the progressive constituency like dirt, he will lose in November, and--unless he does something spectacular like pulls Gore's name out of the hat for VP--I think there is nothing he can do at this point to restore any of the momentum he has lost.

[coolrepublica]

If I know Obama and I think I have a pretty sense of him, he may have wanted Biden or someone other than Hillary, but when he woke up this morning and saw the numbers having McCain leading he started panicking and now he is swallowing his pride and he is about to give Hillary a call.

But he doesn't know it will make no difference. He is defining himself as the guy who will kiss any frog he has to kiss to win. He will give up his wife at an auction to raise money to win. Obama cannot be trusted to run this country. It's not about his patriotism it's about trust.

[mediahack]

The Clintons are only human. This was supposed to be her time. So they are upset.
Obama could have gone without them back in early July.
But the election is in November.
He needs to humble himself, embrace the Clintons and bring them all back into the fold for a Denver love in.
If he picks Hillary, Denver gets a big bump.
If not, Denver will bump like Berlin.

[rain]

If ever a Clinton was needed, the time is now.
I really think the Clinton vote would put Obama in the lead - if only he would pick Hillary as his running mate.
This country cannot take another 4 years of GW. That's exactly what we would have with McCain.

[scootmandubious]

First of all, any Democrat reading this who cares more about the election than their own ego should immediately do the following:

Clinton supporters stop attacking Obama. And, just as importantly, Obama supporters end the sniping at Clinton already!

We should be focusing our attacks on those who have created this mess, the GOP.

All we do by attacking the other side (including snipes at the Clintons) is open old wounds, cause a defensive reaction, and McCain laughs all the way to the White House.

The truly ironic component of all this is that McCain was the man who could not energize the Conservative base in his own party. However, with media complicity, he has been able to pander his heart out.

If Democrats want to win, we have to think of the bigger picture. We need to attack the policies of the GOP and McCain/Bush, we CANNOT always operate on the defensive. If we do, we lose.

By the way, not every alleged Democrat who says they are McCain supporters and then have a post that reads like an RNC talking point is legit. Some are obviously GOP operatives whose strategy is to make it appear that there is disunity. Maybe the DNC should consider applying the same strategy against McCain on the boards?

As for any Clinton supporter who votes for McCain. Congratulations on revealing the definition of 'cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.' Anybody who does not understand what mcCain would do to the Supreme Court alone really needs to wake up.

Interestingly, many of these alleged supporters don't complain about Obama's policies. No they focus on non-issues like his alleged 'arrogance,' 'presumptuousness,' and 'cockiness.' Go ahead, search the boards, this is what you will see. And these traits about Obama are EXACTLY what the RNC is sending out.

If you think about it, it is just another way of saying Obama is 'uppity.' You know what I mean...it's like saying 'he doesn't know his place.'

What, you're gonna tell me that McCain doesn't have an ego? You're gonna imply that the notoriously hot-tempered McCain is humble?

The hypocrisy is astounding.

And that is why I feel racism is a big part of what is happening here.

[Russ]

Never underestimate the willingness of Democrats to vote against their own self interest.

[Alessandro Machi]

Hillary Clinton had it right back in February, Obama should be the VP, not the president.

http://www.HILLARY-WINS.com
http://www.CAUCUSCHEATING.com
http;//www.FAIR-REFLECTION.com
http://www.HILLARYCLINTONFORUM.net

[S.A.]

I have much respect for Bill & Hillary Clinton. They are not the reason the demo party is still split. I am a demo and see Hillary the as the one who could lead this country best, insuring our safety. Barack Obama does appear like a rock star. He seeks large crowds but when speaking his message is vague, there's no core value in him. Very troubling to me is his 20 years with his mentor and pastor Rev.Wright and church. Also, his many years of friendship with people like Ayers, Pfleger and Rezko. These people show racism and hate for america. How could Obama make such bad judgment and then want to be president of the U.S.A.? As a voter, If I think the chosen candidate is not qualified, party unity goes out the window. To me, this election is about evaluating each candidate's stand on all issues, and voting for the one I share views with and trust. John McCain is the only chioce for me now.

[Patricia]

Hey Scootmandubious:
I totally agree with you that there are a lot of RNC's out there that are pretending to be unhappy Democrats to keep the Dem Party divided and if we are gullible enough to fall for this ploy, we are definitely headed for a loss and four more years of this country's downward spiral. Democrats, we had better wake up and unify or we will definitely be headed for more wars and deaths of our children in uniform. We do not have a lot of time to do this but it is of the utmost importance that we do so. Do not fall for the RNC ploy as they head for the WhiteHouse.

[Please]

Wake up Obama supporters. We Hillary supporters are not blinded by Obama's lies and inexperience as you are. I see Obama as unqualified because he's an amateur and shady, linked to too many angry people, our enemies near and foreign support him (scary) etc. Too much for me to type here. He will tax us to h**. You vote for him if you want to. I'm a democrat turned republican and I will not vote for Barack Obama.

[Question]

I have heard that black people can't be racist. Hey, I think my 13 year old is just as qualified to be president as Barack Obama. Get it out of your head that those of us who reject Obama as president are not democrats. We are democrats and we think Obama has not formed the judgment to lead this country. A number of my relatives are not voting for Obama and we all are black. I guess that makes us racist like you say the white folks who don't vote for Obama are. Ha, you're wrong again, and it seems you are the one using racism just like Barack Obama does.

[scootmandubious]

The comments following mine have proven my point about racism to a 't.' Let me take them one at a time:

1) S.A. won't support Obama because "He seeks large crowds but when speaking his message is vague, there's no core value in him." You write that he "appears like a rock star."

First, your rock star comment is a core RNC Talking Point and is an absurd way to decide the most important election in U.S. history. Why is the fact that he can galvanize big crowds a bad thing? Just because the McCain character-assassination ads say it is?

S.A., the 2 candidates have very specific platforms and policy statements. I find it curious that an alleged Democrat would not even take the time to visit Obama's website where he clearly states specific positions on the issues. If you read it you would see his policies are fairly mainstream Democrat and extremely close to Senator Clinton's positions.

But, because of this 'feeling' you have that he is vague, without even bothering to investigate his policies, you have decided to vote for a man who has voted with George Bush 95% of the time and who has made it very clear one of his priorities will be ending a woman's right to reproductive choice?

You then toss in Rev. Wright, and his 20 years being in the church even though nothing in Obama's statements and background indicate he has ever held similar views.

Maybe you aren't aware that this Spring John McCain actively courted a pastor who was avowedly anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic? Somehow, I think if you were aware, it wouldn't matter.

2) 'Please' wrote that Obama was "unqualified because he's an amateur and shady, linked to too many angry people, our enemies near and foreign support him (scary)."

An amateur? Care to be specific? Or is it just a feeling? As for shady? One of the 2 candidates running for office was in a major political scandal that should have ended his political career. I will give you a clue who that person is....those wounded by the scandal were commonly known as "the Keating 5." That person, who speaks out against lobbyists these days has a campaign dominated by them. That man would be McCain. But what, comparable to the Keating scandal, would cause you to identify Obama as the shady one? Curious, isn't it? How do you feel about that scandal? Or have you ever taken the time to read about McCain's involvement?

Also, no true Democrat would allege that Obama would tax them to h*** as you suggested. It has been demonstrated by non-partisan analysis that Obama's tax plan would actually reduce taxes on the middle class significantly more than McCain. McCain is merely an extension of the Bush tax code. If you are wealthy, or a big business, you will save significantly. But nobody else benefits. No Democrat would just spout that Mary Matalin Mantra of spreading fear by making false assertions about Obama's economic plans. If you want Phil Gramm to head the treasury, than feel free to whine about Obama to your heart's content.

3) 'Question' suggests that their whole family of black relatives are not voting for Obama.

If there is a substantive, policy-driven reason for it, I am curious that you have chosen not to share it.

By the way, I would never suggest that all black people would, or should, vote for him.

I am willing to bet that Condi won't be voting for him, nor that very conservative Supreme Court justice.

For all I know you could be related, and if you were, I would never expect your uncle, Clarence Thomas to push the lever for Santor Obama.

Isn't it interesting that nobody is really talking policy here, just 'feelings.'

As if multi-millionaire McCain would ever consider having a beer with any one of you.