GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
Though Hillary Clinton is in dire straights right now, one of her best nights of the campaign was her upset victory in New Hampshire. While polls accurately predicted John McCain’s 5-point victory over Mitt Romney, one poll had her trailing Obama by 9 points. She won by 3. People tried to find all kinds of ways to explain it. Was it the Bradley Effect? Was it the crying incident? One explanation was that many Independents were undecided between Obama and McCain. When they saw Obama leading Clinton by 9 points, they figured they would vote in the race that was closer and voted for McCain.
When I first heard that Independents may have been undecided between Obama and McCain, it made little sense to me. How could someone be undecided between two candidates who are so opposite? McCain is pro-Iraq War. Obama is anti-war. McCain is old and experienced. Obama is young and inexperienced. They also have little in common on domestic issues. Someone explained to me that Independents like candidates that talk about bringing both sides together and stuff like that. It’s like they want to pretend that everybody agrees on everything and that issue differences are just petty bickering and not of any substance. I still didn’t completely understand the thought process. Do swing voters try and size up which candidate from each party is the most wishy-washy and then vote in the primary where they can have the most impact getting a wishy-washy person nominated.
Someone else explained Independents in a different way. The person said that Independents tend to be most swayed by the press and like whoever the press likes. In this cycle, the press adored Barack Obama, kind of liked John McCain, didn’t care for Hillary Clinton, and detested Mitt Romney. In primary states, the general trend was that Obama and McCain would do better with Independent voters while Clinton and Romney would do better with Democratic or Republican voters. Do you notice a pattern here?
This actually makes a lot of sense. Registered Republicans and registered Democrats usually are more interested in the subject of politics than are Independents. They have followed it for a much longer time. Registered Democrats are more likely to prefer the detail-oriented Hillary Clinton over the smooth-talking Barack Obama. Their feelings about the Clintons are generally positive and were not initially formed by the press, so they were not swayed by the press when Hillary Clinton was portrayed in a negative light. Likewise, though not all registered Republicans were initially attracted to Mitt Romney, the ones who were generally did not get swayed by negative stories about Romney in the press. Most registered Republicans don’t like the press anyway. Independents, however, do not follow politics very closely. They only started tuning in shortly before the nomination season began. If they heard a negative story on Romney or Clinton or a positive one on McCain or Obama, that was likely to affect them a lot more than it would a political junkie who has already made up his of her mind.
This trend is not just true for this election cycle. In 2000, the press favored McCain and Bradley over Bush and Gore. Exit polls consistently showed Bush and Gore doing better with partisans and McCain and Bradley with Independents. This raises the question of whether registered Republicans and Democrats are the truly Independent voter (or at least Independent of the press) and whether people who call themselves Independents are actually the least Independent voters of all and are just pawns of a press that finds itself attracted to certain candidates more than others.
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
yes
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Lol, Jeffrey. I was going to respond to this exactly the way you did. So, to make it short, Clarence…
Yes.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Why do you think conservatives keep saying “THE MSM CHOSE OUR CANDIDATE”? Nobody would dispute the fact that the MSM loved McCAin and hated Romney.
I thought everyone knew this is a well known fact. It’s very simple, Independants dont have a core set of beliefs otherwise they would favor one party over another. Therfore their mind is made up from what they hear primarily in the MSM.
Now that you know, doesnt that make you feel warm inside?
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
bulldozer #3,
Oh, of course the MSM chose our candidate. According to the exit polls, half of the Republicans who caucused in Iowa were anti-Iraq war and over one third of the Republicans who voted in New Hampshire were anti-Iraq war. Do you imagine that if all those who caucused and voted had been fully informed of all the candidates, the results would have in any way resembled what they did?
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
THis is percisely why the MSM chose McCAin. In the past the base has always come together to fight the MSM. Independents also do not donate nearly like a base would. Now McACin is left without the MSM or the base or money.
Welcome to the big picture where Obama coninues to bask (as McCaiin once did) in the MSM and rakes in 60 Mil per month.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Josiah, I found it ironic in New Hampshire how pro-war Republicans voted for Romney and anti-war Republicans voted for McCain. I always considered McCain to be more pro-war than Romney, even though both were pro-war. It is amazing how many Republicans told exit or entrance pollsters they opposed the war, and that position was almost universal among Democrats.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
At least we got a candidate that looks like he can beat the Democrats instead of one that started out losing in a landslide.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
bulldozer, as we saw from the NYTimes article, McCain no longer has the support of the press. However, he doesn’t need them either. He can win just on Obama’s own liberalism, his wife’s anti-America sentiments, his refusal to even wear an American flag pin on his lapel for some high-falutin reason, and McCain’s status as a war hero and center-right Republican, which is where the country is. It would be nice if McCain had the support of the MSM, but he doesn’t, and I knew he wouldn’t, especially against Obama.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
In addition, McCAin can forget about his “base” of independents. They will now begin their flock to the new MSM hero.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
John Mark, even though I voted for Romney and not McCain, I did not write this piece as a criticism of the outcome. It was more of an observation than anything else.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
6 — But anti-war doesn’t mean that a person prioritizes the war. It might mean that people that are anti-war are more likely to self-describe as moderate, which were in turn more likely to vote McCain.
Ta-da.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
6, I think maybe it indicates that the war isn’t anybody’s biggest issue anymore. Anti-war people tend to be moderates and so they went for McCain based on other issues, while pro-war people tend to be more conservative and went for Romney, just because they had a certain opinion on the war doesn’t mean they think their candidate is the best on that particular issue.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Hello, Clarence-
I must disagree w/ your anaylsis, as I do not think that indies are just pawns of the press. I’d like to offer an alternative explanation for the fact that indies like Obama and McCain (despite the obvious ideological gulf between those two candidates).
Most voters do not think ideologically. (Of those that do, they are far more likely to be “strong partisans”.) What attracts indies to McCain and Obama: their personalities, biographies and candidate skills.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
bulldozer, the media can only go so far when it comes to promoting liberals. The media heavily favored Mike Dukakis in 1988 for example, and Bush won. Independents are swayed by the media somewhat, but the Democrats have to nominate mainstream candidates. Obama is not one.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
[...] Also: Wired Does Iraq and Horror, Enter Nader Stage Left?, We Cannot Afford War, Are Independents Really Just Tools of the Press?, The War and the Damage Done, and IAEA Iran Report Released [...]
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Wow, imagine that TLG and make the exact same point.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 pm
ElectionNightHQ, I agree that what you mentioned is also a factor. Personalities, biographies, etc. I think the press was a factor too. Furthermore, the press also helped these two men by portraying McCain’s biography and Obama’s candidate skills in a much more favorable light than their coverage of Romney or Clinton.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 pm
16 — Haha, yeah. What we said was basically identical, and at the same time.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
“The media heavily favored Mike Dukakis in 1988 for example, and Bush won.”
This is because Bush had the base to rally around him and donate money to fight them. McCAins independents are less likely to donate and more likely to blow the way of the media wich will be to Obama. Conservatives are not excited and unexcited people do not give the money that will be required to take out Obama.
Dont you see this is why they wanted McCAin to be our nominee?
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Its pretty simple why Indys would like McCain and Obama the best, McCain and obama have a persona of being bipartisan, obviously indys aren’t don’t care for the all the bitter partisanship and don’t think we should be enemies of each other, thus they like McCain and Obama. Hillary Clinton is etremely partisan and down on Republicans, and that turns away alot of Indys. Guiliani was pretty partisan, which is why I think partisan talk radio forgave him for his transgression of conservatism, but didn’t do so with McCain. It also may play into why Guiliani didn’t do as well among indys.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
ElectionNightHQ, I want to repeat that this piece was not a criticism of McCain but a criticism of the lack of logic involved in someone being undecided between McCain and Obama who not only have different ideologies but very different biographies as well. Obama has done different things with his life than McCain. Both were compelling to certain voters though. That’s for sure.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
John Mark, I alluded to that in my piece, but it’s like Indys want people to just pretend there are no differences between liberals and conservatives when there are huge differences. As to bulldozer, much of the base did not like Bush in 1988 in the same way many do not like McCain now. Bush was not considered conservative enough either. One thing you will learn if you follow politics long enough is that conservatives are seldom satisfied with anybody.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
TLG #11,
I see your point, and that was probably true to an extent, but I remember seeing several news stories with quotes from people as they came out of the polls, where McCain voters were asked why they voted for McCain, to which the voters responded, “Because he’s the only Republican who opposes the war in Iraq.”
Gah…
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
19, DoomandGloomDoomandGloomDoomandGloom, get over it over it man! Nobody knows the future or whos going to win this race and you need to get a life besides trying to spew pessism about John McCain.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:35 pm
24 - its called analysis, maybe you should try it sometime. Thats what this site is all about asnd what elections are all about.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
22, There are definitely voters who don’t think much about the issues, and don’t really have a political philosophy, and these people are more apt to be indys. However, I don’t think that’s all there is to it. Plus if you don’t have a political philosophy than you’re going to go for whoever doesn’t sound start a civil war against other half of Red-Blue divide.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
“get over it over it man!”
yeah like ill try and get over it man but like man the MSM totatally chose man. and it like really chaps my hide man. Like I gotta get back to my pottery class man. LIke this politiacl stuff is way too much to comrehend man. Its all gooooooooood. Its not like we can effect our who is elected man. peace out bro.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Hello, Clarence-
Per your thoughtful comments #17/#21-
I didn’t view your post as an attack on McCain, or his supporters (although in rereading my comment - #13 - I can understand why you have thought that). Let me clarify a bit:
Those of us who post in this forum are very poor samples of the electorate as a whole. FWIW, my experience has been that the single greatest factor in determining a person’s vote, is whether the voter LIKES the candidate at a personal level (not an ideological one).
To me, the most clear explanation of the triumph of McCain, and the strong showing by Obama thus far, is that indies like them, due to their personal stories. You are of course right, in noting that from a biographical perspective, McCain and Obama have virtually nothing in common other than being U.S. Senators, leaving aside their drastic differences on issues. But there’s no reason why voters can’t like more than one candidate, at a personal level.
Per your thoughts:
“Independents like candidates that talk about bringing both sides together and stuff like that. It’s like they want to pretend that everybody agrees on everything and that issue differences are just petty bickering and not of any substance. I still didn’t completely understand the thought process. Do swing voters try and size up which candidate from each party is the most wishy-washy and then vote in the primary where they can have the most impact getting a wishy-washy person nominated.”
I agree that indies do like candidates that talk about bipartisanship. (Most voters do, indie or otherwise.) I myself do. But I would like to respectfully submit that the most significant fact for an indie voter (particularly in a state where they have the right to vote in either primary or caucus), is whether they LIKE the candidate at a personal level.
Anyhow, food for thought…
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:44 pm
25, Well there’s a lot of evidence that McCain was more electable - like every single scientific poll, and the fact that Romney had more base support didn’t really matter in the primary so how was it supposed to matter in the general. There’s alot of evidence that Romney was a terrible general election candidate.
There I gave you some anaylsis. But whats the point. McCain won, Romney lost, so we have to make the best out of the situation we have. There’s a fine line between anaylsis and crying over spilled - you my friend have crossed that line.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
27, “Its not like we can effect our who is elected man.” Of course we can, but its all but over now unless you’re like Huckabee and praying for a miracle. And the media didn’t pick the candidate, the voters did, maybe the voters decided to let the media influence, but thats their choice. Just like if the if everybody decided to listen to the talk-radio class and elect Romney that would be their choice and Romney would have won fair and square. But you have had two weeks to get over losing, that should be enough time, really.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Clarence,
Please allow me to offer a different point of view. I am a right-leaning independent. Which is to say that although I disagree strongly with some planks of the GOP platform, in an election I almost always find myself selecting the republican candidate because we generally share the same broad opinion about how the world should be.
To say that an independent is simply a pawn of the press is to say that a conservative is simply a pawn of Rush, Hewitt, etc. Utter nonsense. Although, I would suggest that many independent voters (myself included) choose the not press-endorsed candidate far more often than “conservatives” choose the non right-establishment candidate.
I see the other side as two very distinct groups of people. There are guys like Bill Richardson (who the MSM had no time for and who I think is truly a good person with the right intentions) and there are the majority of them, who want the country to look like European-style socialist nations.
I could see myself voting for Richardson in a general over a likable guy like Huckabee. Call me crazy.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
29 - Why is analysing the premise of this very article considered “crossing the line”? Im just stating my view of what Clarence has brought up in this post. If that is too much for you to handle you better go to another site.
Dont be so sensitive.
February 22nd, 2008 at 5:05 pm
32, When pretty much all I can rember you on this site for is whining about McCain, its a sign to me that you need to get over it. But, whatever, its your life.
February 22nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
31 — OK, so you’re, in other words, not who Clarence was talking about. You were not a “Hmm…should I vote for Obama or McCain?” person.
FWIW — I would vote for Richardson over Huckabee, as would many on this site.
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:36 pm
You mean Bill “What’s a homosexual?” Richardson?
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Ditto on #31. I find it insulting for someone to presume that independents are so easily swayed by the MSM. If anything, independents are by nature more capable of intelligent political thought than “average” conservative or liberal voters. Independents don’t give a crap about being loyal to a political party. As for deliberating between a vote for McCain or a vote for Obama, I find both politicians equally unattractive.
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:37 pm
#35 Take a closer look at Richardson. He’d make an excellent candidate by many standards.
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Richardson has more experience than any other DEM nominee but he was thrown off the bus early.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
1) I’ve known plenty of Independents throughout my life and I can assure you that they are NOT tools of the press.
2) Even if they were, the entire subject is wholly academic unless someone is suggesting that Independents not be allowed to vote. The fact remains that, tools of the press or otherwise, Independents are still the voters who will decide this and every other election, and failing to win sufficient numbers of them results in electoral loss.
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:49 am
the answer is yes.
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:07 am
Unfortunately, the vast majority of the electorate are pretty ignorant of the facts, not just independents. And, yes, the MSM has a tremendous impact on nearly all of them. The conservatives tend to be the most informed, and largely because of talk show radio. One reason the Rush, Hannity, and others did not have a bigger impact than they did was that most of their constituents were already voting for Romney, or was choosing McCain or Huckabee for other reasons. Also, the fact that they started so late didn’t help any. James Dobson, Tony Perkins, and Richard Land had it within their sphere of influence to cause Romney to be the nominee, but they tried to get by with just implying or suggesting to their constituents that he was the best candidate. They whispered it so softly that most of their people didn’t even hear them. But, those that attended church every Sunday heard their pastors encourage them to get out and vote in huge numbers for Huckabee. Dobson said at the time that he didn’t endorse candidates, but as soon as it narrowed to McCain and Huckabee, he like said, “Uh, oh, I guess I better endorse Huckabee; we’re about to get McCain”. Too little too late on the part of a lot of people. McCain’s dirty politics in Florida, the MSM love affair with him, and the team tactics of who should campaign where to beat Mitt are amongst the reasons why we have McCain.
The bottom line is, we had a fabulous candidate in Mitt Romney, but we are stuck with McCain. I’m telling you, if you want the conservatives to get behind this McCain, you put Romney on the ticket. All these other people I hear on this site arr NO NAMES to the American public, and none will motivate and inspire like Romney. Mitt can out debate any of them with no trouble whatsoever, and it will put him in line for the Presidency in 2012, if McCain lives that long. The Mitt supporters are bitter, and McCain has better realize that if he wants enthusiastic support he puts Mitt with him. Otherwise, we barely make it to the polls, if at all.
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:26 am
Illinoisguy,
I liked Romney just fine. Probably the most competent executive to run for Chief Executive in my lifetime. But aren’t his failures in the GOP primary, particularly in the states where he had massive spending and organizational advantages, proof that he was not a fabulous candidate?
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:08 pm
I don’t think so Eric. In my opinion no candidate could have withstood the team tactics, MSM love affairs, and dirty politics. He probably did make a few mistates though, but don’t know of anyone who doesn’t. In my opinion he was, and still is, a fabulous candidate.
February 29th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
I think Independents and white males are tools of the obama campaign. I think white males are so insecure of a woman being president that they are going to vote for any man even if he is white, black, young ,old or inexspearianced just so a woman won’t win. It’s sad that they are like that . We got to do what is best for our chldren and grandchildren future and not what is best for our pride. Look what is taking place in the world today, now what do you think it’s going to be like for our grandchildren. I remember under the Clinton presidency we had a good job growth a strong stockmarket where people where becomming a millioniares of the stockmarket. How we quickly forget. we can have change under Hillary and it will be change for the good.