go mccain or go home?
by Karen Sosa
Published: April 3, 2008
In the few months since John Edwards left Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to tear into one another without moderation, Democrats have gone from being the lucky party, with most of us being happy with all of our candidates, to being the party in the weaker position, with many of us thinking we could not possibly vote for “that other one.” Nothing kills Democrats like party in-fighting, and so help us if we lose this one because we, once again, could not get our act together.
However, we cannot let exigency lead us into what could be a potentially fatal decision. The recent spate of calls for Hillary to drop out requires us to consider the consequences of either candidate exiting. Much has been said about which candidate’s supporters are more or less likely to vote for the other, usually with the conclusion that Hillary’s people are more likely to vote for Barack than vice versa. But is this really true?
Hillary Clinton’s supporters can generally be divided into two main groups. The first are the die-hard party loyals, who are unwilling to turn from the legendary Clintons in favor of a green newcomer who can say a lot about “change,” but not much about what exactly he is going to change or how. The second primary source of support for Hillary is the centrist, middle-to-low income, blue-collar American. In Ohio and Texas, Hillary garnered 15 percent more of these voters than Obama did, and they would also contribute considerably to a Clinton victory in Pennsylvania.
The concern of many Dems seems to be that the young, otherwise politically uninvolved members of “Obama Nation” will revert to type (i.e. non-voting) if Hillary wins the nomination. As a side note, I take issue with catering to a voting bloc that so obviously is only in it because of a fad-like personality cult, and not due to any real interest in policies or political practice. How can a group so zealous for Barack Obama, yet willing to let John McCain beat Hillary Clinton in the general election be described any differently? The important thing to recognize, however, is that Obama supporters who cannot bring themselves to vote for Hillary will simply stay at home.
Not so with Hillary Clinton’s supporters. Recent polls have found that 25-28 percent of Clinton supporters will vote for John McCain in a McCain-Obama match up. Only 19 percent of Obama supporters would make the party switch.
The first segment of Clinton voters that I identified, the party faithful, will vote for the Democratic nominee no matter what. At the moment, emotions are running high, and many people are too angry to conceive of supporting the other guy. But with time to cool, these party-loyal Democrats will vote Democrat as they always have done. Many of them are older women who, while thrilled to support Hillary’s run for the nomination, believe that any Democrat is better than another Republican. Many of them have been so entrenched in party politics that, even though they may really dislike Barack Obama, supporting a Republican, either with an affirmative vote or through abstention, is simply undoable.
The Hillary supporters who would defect from the party are the blue collar, middle-of-the-road voters. Many of these voters are independent of any party, and without Hillary Clinton in the race, they will become floaters waiting for traditionally moderate-friendly John McCain to swoop them up with policies not too unlike Hillary’s and with his characteristic across-the-aisle appeal. These are the voters who make swing states. These are the voters around whom every campaign swarms. Forcing Hillary out of the race would put these swing voters up for grabs again, and Barack Obama would spend much of the general election trying to steal them back from John McCain. Hillary already has them.
This “at risk” group also includes Hispanic voters, who represent about 10 percent of the eligible electorate. As the largest minority group in the country, Hispanics could be a tremendous source of votes for the Democrats this year. They strongly supported Hillary in Nevada, voting for her 3 times as often as for Obama, and in Texas, where Hilary received twice as many Hispanic votes as did Barack Obama. However, 39 percent of Hispanics identify themselves as independent, and due to the undercurrent of racism in the Hispanic community, as well as identifying with McCain’s conservative personal values, they will most likely shift to John McCain rather than to Barack Obama if Hillary drops out.
The threat posed by Obama supporters of staying home in protest of a Clinton candidacy is far outweighed by the threat posed by dissatisfied Clinton supporters. A group far too opinionated to stay at home, significant defection to McCain by these voters could be disastrous for the Democratic party. Prematurely pressuring Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race could impose far more damage on the Democratic party than will be done by extended primary campaigning, debating, and yes, even mud-slinging.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
April 14th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I think you’re unfair to Obama supporters here. You say any Obama voter who would sit out the general election if Clinton became the nominee “so obviously is only in it because of a fad-like personality cult, and not due to any real interest in policies or political practice.” Yet you rationalize the potential vote of those Clinton supporters who would switch to John McCain if she loses the nomination fight! Any Clinton or Obama supporters who are really interested in policies and political practice wouldn’t switch to the candidate (McCain) whose positions are such polar opposites of those their first choice candidate. It would be way more selfish and cultish to actively throw the election to a Republican, just because your preferred candidate lost, than to passively sit it out.
In the end, even though I’m one of them, those voters who have said they’ll stay home if Hillary (or Obama) gets the nomination are more than likely just blowing hot air anyway. In my case, I might not like Hillary today, but when I imagine a third term for George W. Bush, I’ll get over it.
April 14th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Yeah, I agree that there is a snag in my argument in that I’m like “These guys are gonna go to McCain, we should coddle to them. But man those guys who are gonna stay home are so uncommitted!” I saw it, but I just kind of left it because the way in which I tried to rationalize it to myself would in and of itself take a whole post.
For some reason, I do feel differently about a voter who changes candidates (even parties) than I do about a voter who just stays home. I suppose it’s the same reason I often say I have more patience for Republicans than I have for people who just don’t vote. In list form, here are some differences I can identify:
a) Staying home signals an apathy that I just can’t reconcile with the current state of affairs in this country.
b) The folks I’ve identified as being possible McCain voters have not been the gung-ho Hillary people. On the other hand, the Obama kids I envision staying home have been quite gung-ho for their candidate. My problem, then, is with someone who is all about their candidate but then just stays home. It calls in to question (in my mind anyway) what was really behind their so readily extinguished passion in the first place.
c) Every list should have three things.