Scatablog: Obama: passing the torch to a new generation?

Scatablog: Obama: passing the torch to a new generation?

Scatablog asks why Republicans hate Hillary Clinton so much while having overall a rather favorable view of Barack Obama.

The dislike of Clinton is related probably to her connection to Bill Clinton or "Slick Willie" as the Republicans sometimes call him.

Republicans claim that Bill was responsible for the highly divisive environment in Washington that today is preventing Congress from getting anything done.

The last time Congress was able to set aside political differences to any meaningful degree was back when Tip O'Neil was Speaker of the House.

Whether Clinton actually started the animosity is debatable. However, Hillary remains a highly-polarizing figure because of her husband. Although Bill and George Sr. are now pretty good buddies, many ground-level Republicans still hold a grudge against Clinton, or actually the Clintons.

One question the Obama campaign asks is whether Hillary as president will be able to break through the current gridlock that exists in Washington or whether instead the fireworks will only get worse.

This may explain the following news release from the campaign today:

Today 268 Iowa Republicans announced that they will caucus for Senator Barack Obama and 68 New Hampshire Republicans announced that they had changed their party registration to vote for Barack Obama in the primary, saying he is the only candidate in either party who can break through the gridlock in Washington because he has a proven record of bringing Republicans and Democrats together to solve problems. In Illinois, Obama bridged the partisan divide to extend health care to 150,000 Illinois families, pass a $100 million tax cut for working families and enact historic ethics reform.

“With all of the challenges our country faces, we cannot elect a President who will go to Washington and just get bogged down by the same partisan gridlock,” Brett Blix said. “That’s why I’m supporting Senator Obama even though I’m a Republican. He’s the only candidate in either party with a record of bringing Republicans and Democrats together to solve problems, and he will always tell you where he stands even when you disagree. There are thousands of disaffected Republicans like me who are disappointed by President Bush and the Republican presidential candidates who would consider voting for a Democrat who can bring about change we can believe in.”

Brett Blix is 30-year-old Iraq war veteran from Northwood, Iowa. He recently switched his party registration so that he can caucus for Senator Obama.

“I’ve been a Republican all my life, but the challenges we face are too great to choose a candidate based on his party—we need to the choose the candidate who can bring fundamental change to Washington and start getting things done again,” Jerry Spivak said. “Barack Obama is the only candidate who will be able to break the partisan logjam and inspire Americans to come together around real solutions.”

Jerry Spivak is a 57-year-old engineer from Nashua, New Hampshire. He recently switched his party registration so that he can vote for Senator Obama in the primary.

This public support from Republicans is yet another sign of Senator Obama’s crossover appeal. Previously, Obama received third place in a poll of Republican Iowa caucus goers – receiving more support from Republicans than Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Sam Brownback combined.

“I’ve always believed that you can only bring about real change when people come together across party lines, and I’ve seen what happens when folks put politics aside and get down to work,” Senator Obama said. “If you can’t bring people together across the old fault lines, you simply aren’t going to be able to make progress on the challenges we face.”

Handicapping Obama

If we just look at the polls, then candidate Barack Obama might seem like a real long shot right now. He would not be the horse to bet on.

However, in early Democratic polls historically are not very accurate. By "early," you could make the argument that any poll other than the actual voting is early! For example, if you would have bet on the winner of the last Democratic primary election based on polling just a week before Iowa, you would have lost.

Not only was the national polling wrong, even the polling for Iowa turned out way off the mark.

When election time is at hand, the spotlight on the candidate's becomes that much brighter. People start really thinking about who they want to support. The weaknesses and strengths of the different candidates, at least the appearance of those qualities, starts to weigh heavily on the mind.

Issues that are important to the voting population, like the Iraq War and the economy, will likely take center stage depending on how the different campaigns frame the issues. Also, the media, including bloggers, play a role as to which issues take the commanding role.

Hillary Clinton probably has the most experienced, established campaign staff and quite a lot of external organizational support. John Edwards is amassing good support from organized labor. Barack Obama arguably has the younger, most innovative team behind him.

Barack seems to have lower negatives than the other front-runners and less unfavorable history. That could make a difference when the election is actually at hand. To me, the race is much closer than indicated by the polls.

Washington Post/ABC Poll
10/29 - 11/1, 2007

Fav/Unfav

Obama 51 / 36
Clinton 50 / 46
Edwards 49 / 35

Giuliani 50 / 40
McCain 43 / 42
Thompson 33 / 37
Romney 28 / 41
Huckabee 21 / 30

Of course, this is also only a poll. But I think things could get worse for Clinton and to a lesser extent Edwards as game time approaches because of their history particularly on the Iraq War.

A lot depends on how the Obama team's Iowa strategy works. They've invested a lot of time and resources in this state. If he comes in first or second, maybe third if the race is extremely tight and Hillary is not on top, I think he has a good chance. Otherwise, he becomes a big underdog.