AP is flogging to death its latest pollhttp://news.yahoo.com/... showing Hillary Clinton with a 9-point lead over McCain, while Barack Obama is shown in a statistical dead heat. Never mind that this poll is likely an outlier, with Gallup showing no measurable difference between the two Democrats vs. McCainhttp://www.gallup.com/... and Rasmussen the same thing http://www.rasmussenreports.com/.... One can hardly say for sure who will run better in November simply based on a head-to-head poll in late April.
Hillary Clinton has made her comeback by attacking Barack Obama, hard, even savagely, by championing herself as an underdog, a comeback kid, a standard-bearer for the same kind of less-educated whites who once backed George Wallace. Gallup reportshttp://www.gallup.com/... that white Democrats without a college degree support Hillary by 21 points over Obama, while among degree-holding white Democrats Obama is ahead by 19 points.
Hillary has "resurrected" her campaign (with the connivance of the media) by portraying herself as a never-say-die fighter. The commentariat love this quality. Of course, because she is behind, in a Hail-Mary situation, she is free to attack Obama with the kitchen sink while he, being ahead and fearing to alienate her supporters, has to be more measured in response.
To the extent Hillary really has had a comeback (a questionable premise to begin with since she has shaved only 5 pledged delegates off the lead Obama held after Wisconsinhttp://www.jedreport.com/...), she has done it with a single technique -- attacking Obama, with a heavy dose of race. She has done everything in her power to suggest he is a "black" candidate who will not be supported by whites in the general election. Predictably, the right-wing-led commentariat has lapped up this line of attack and keeps begging for more.
The key question is: could these same tactics that have "worked" for Hillary against Obama work against McSame, as the AP-Ipsos poll seems to suggest?
The answer has to be no. What Hillary has done against Barack is really about the easiest (and sleasiest) thing one American politician can do to another. As a white candidate, she has painted her "black" (actually multiracial) opponent as being "elitist" (a truly bizarre charge against by far the poorest of the three remaining candidates and the one who has spent by far the least time in the inner circles of Washington power) and out of touch with white people and the "working class" (disregarding of course the fact that African American working class voters overwhelmingly support Obama -- as if you can't be both black and working class). This line of attack has worked all too well, to the glee of Republicans.
But obviously this line wouldn't work against McCain, who is of course white and who would also be utterly certain to do better among white voters than Hillary. It's only too easy to attack someone within your own party (in a primary) with this racial attack, because it can be given the legitimate "frame" of "electability." Hillary's campaign can repeat ad nauseam (as it has) that Obama is not "electable" because he doesn't appeal to "working-class whites." Even McCain can't make that charge, because once Obama is the nominee it will be irrelevant.
But would Hillary even want to attack McCain with anywhere near the viciousness she's used against Obama? It is only too clear that she (and even more so her husband) have no respect for Obama -- even loathing for the man who has usurped their "rightful" claim to the nomination.http://www.newyorker.com/... At the same time, Hillary has expressed great, repeated personal admiration for McCain, infamously saying he has passed the "threshhold" to be Commander in Chief while Obama has not.
Is anyone in the Democratic Party thinking about the fact that in a general election Hillary could not use the Hail-Mary, fling-everything until something sticks strategy (remember the plagiarism charges? remember "shame on you, Barack Obama"?) because she will need to appeal to independent voters who are turned off by that type of thing? And most importantly because she will no longer have the advantage of the racial dynamic she has so cynically and despicably exploited? (Remember "as far as I know"http://www.jedreport.com/...?)