My proposition here is that there actually were differences between the two men, but they were relatively very minor compared to what they shared. This was immediately obvious to anyone in politics at the time, because of how it was commonly contextualized. This was a fairly simple matter revolving around cultural identity and geographical politics.
Similarly, I would argue, the differences between Obama and Edwards are also relatively very minor compared to what they share--but this is not immediately obvious to anyone in politics today. Again, the reason for this is because of how our politics is contextualized, but it's due to a more complicated matter of contextualization. It's because our politics is so cramped, so distorted, so lacking in vision, so trapped in the failures of the past, and so out of touch with the root sources of past successes. This is essentially the same critique that the two men have shared, but they have made their critiques using different terms, different arguments, different examples, and different angles of attack.
I had forgotten the details of Chris's argument in his earlier diary when I wrote those words, forgotten that he had pointed out how the ideologies adopted had varied, while the reform intent had remained content. Taking this back into account makes my initial argument both stronger and more direct. In fact, it makes me think that the person I was trying to convince here was actually me, and that the sort of voters an Obama/Edwards ticket would appeal to probably didn't need it explained to them at all.
And, indeed, there seems to be some very strong evidence for this in the first round of VP polling from Survey USA, covering the five states of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Mexico and California. It's unfortunate that SUSA did not choose a very good selection of possible Democratic VPs. Both Clinton and Edwards would seem to be obvious choices to test. Still, the relative strength of Edwards--and how it manifests itself--is truly impressive. Let's take a look.
To being with, here is how SUSA itself presented its results in
Pennsylvania
Complete crosstabs here.
The Pennsylvania results show that Edwards is exceptionally strong compared to other VP candidates. The only other candidate to markedly help Obama is Governor Ed Rendell, but even he does not help when Huckabee is McCain's running mate. The 20-point spread between McCain's best showing (up three with Huckabee against Obama/Sebelius) and Obama's best showing (up 17 with Edward against McCain/Pawlenty) indicates a great deal of potential play in the electorate, at the same time that it suggests that the right VP choice could considerably narrow that play.
Given that Obama has been perceived as particularly vulnerable in Pennsylvania, he has two reasons to be pleased with this poll. First, he is comfortably ahead of McCain, even before the expended bump he should get once the primary contest is over. Second, he does not need favorite son Ed Rendell to give him an added edge. If he should want more of an edge, he can turn to Edwards--and, thus, possibly to other candidates as well, though not to Sebelius or Hagel.
Ohio
Complete crosstabs here.
Looking backwards, Ohio is ground zero of battleground states, which makes the polling here particularly important. The results are almost exactly what one would expect in light of the Pennsylvania poll: Ed Rendell recedes as a factor, and everything else is pretty much the same, overall. Ecwards is the only running mate who helps Obama, and he does so rather dramatically, doubling the margin of victory from 9 to 18 points against McCain's weakest VP.
There is an ominous note here, however. With Huckabee on the ticket, McCain either leads or ties Obama, unless Edwards is on the ticket, in which case the lead increases by 3. Taken by itself, as the bellwether for the rest of the nation, Ohio sends a very strong signal that Edwards is the candidate for the number two slot. Again, the range between McCain's strongest showing and Obama's strongest showing is a substantial 20 points.
Virginia
Complete crosstabs here.
If Ohio is the battleground state of the past, Virginia beckons as the battleground state of the future--and if it can become so, then the Democrats will be in a very strong position. Once again, Edwards shows that he can deliver--all four match-ups show him increasing Obama's lead. But the bad news is even more dire--three of McCain's four VP possibilities give him victory against at least some of Obama's VP choices. The range of flexibility is significantly decreased if Obama wants to begin the general election campaign with a decisive edge in Virginia.
This time, the range between McCain's strongest showing and Obama's strongest showing is an even greater 24 points.
New Mexico
Complete crosstabs here.
New Mexico is another old battleground state--but one that is widely expected to be safely Democratic this time, with enough hard work. It's not a given--but it's a given that it can be taken. And yet, at this point in time, it's a toss-up and only Edwards puts Obama into the lead.
This time, the range between McCain's strongest showing and Obama's strongest showing is an even greater 26 points.
California
Complete crosstabs here.
Caliufornia is safely in Obama's column, by a margin of 8 points, and only Huckabee gives McCain any chance. Yet, his margins in most match-ups are thin, and once again, only Edwards gives him a bigger margin against McCain and his running mates than Obama has by himself.
This time, the range between McCain's strongest showing and Obama's strongest showing declines to "only" 19 points.
Summary
From all the above, Edwards' superior showing is impossible to miss. Of course there could be other strong VP candidates. Clinton is a natureal choice who would almost certainly do as well, if not better in some states. But we cannot be sure she would do as well in all of them. And, of course, there is the very real concern that Obama could seem weaker if he takes her on as VP, particularly with Bill Clinton back in the picture. It's virtually certain that Richardson would do as well as Rendell did in his own home state, if not better, but it's uncertain how much he would help elsewhere. Beyond that, there is little reason to believe that any Democrat would make much of a difference at this point. To see what that means, let's take a look at some summary charts.
First we look at McCain's VPs, and the impact they have vs. Obama's VPs. That is, we combine how well each of McCain's VPs in turn does against all four of Obama's VP choices:
Obviously, this shows that McCain's VPs are stronger as a group. Almost without exception they drive up McCain's margin Pawlenty is the only truly anemic one. Both Lieberman and Romney do a respectable job. Huckabee is formidable.
Now let's turn it around, comparing Obama's VPs individually to how well they do against all four of McCain's VPs:
Here we see what we already saw above, only more clearly: Edwards is the only one who consistently helps Obama, and he does so in a consistently big way--4% is not chopped liver--that only seems small because of the enormous deficits in how badly the others perforn, most often losing ground by over 6 points.
Having made this "perfectly clear," it's time to take a closer look at how Edwards performs across the board, since he's the only one of this field seriously worth thinking about.
First, here are the margins that Edwards runs up against each of McCain's running mates in each of the states: Clearly, Huckabee is the strongest Edwards foe, but not only does Edwards best him across the board, Edwards delivers the largest gain where it is the most needed--in Virginia. This is a truly impressive performance.
Finally, we look not at shifts in margin, but at the vote total that an Edwards VP help to hold McCain to.
There are undecideds, of course, so the Obama/Edwards ticket does not get every vote that McCain doesn't. But with totals this far from 50% consistently across the board, it is obvious that Obama/Edwards would put McCain into a deep defensive hole across a wide range of states. There would be no doubt from day one who was playing offense and who was playing defense.
Conclusion
The data presented here makes it abundantly clear how strong a VP candidate Edwards would be overall. Perhaps Clinton would as strong or stronger, but it's highly doubtful that anyone else would be. And it's also possible that her presence would help motivate the GOP base. Even though they seem pretty demoralized, the weakness of most VP choices shows that McCain can make up a lot of ground under the right conditions.
What the above date does not give us is a detailed look at the inside dynamics. For that, we will need to look at crosstabs, and that's what I'll do in Part 3.
|
STATE BLOGS
