To win Pennsylvania...
Following a harsher-than-expected loss in Ohio, Barack Obama needs to retool his campaign strategy if he hopes to score a victory in the demographically-unfavorable territory of Pennsylvania. The state has one of the oldest populations in the nation, a small African-American community and the kind of lower-income blue-collar workers that have tended towards Hillary Clinton in the voting booth this Democratic election. Obama began to make inroads with these types of voters (Hillary Clinton’s “coalition”) in the Potomac primaries and in Wisconsin the following week, but the talking-head consensus seems to be that she reclaimed her base according to March 4th exit polls. Below is a systematic gameplan that Barack Obama should use to bolster his chances of success in Pennsylvania:
1) Play up “Americanism.” Blue collar reluctance to Obama can partially be attributed to a lack of familiarity. Obama has been on the national scene for a relatively scarce amount of time—his chief competitor was wife to the President for 8 years—and he has run an insurgent campaign, identifying himself as an outsider. As such, voters who won’t prioritize giving both the candidates a thorough look-through will tend to gravitate to one who has a proven-track record of success, the one that comes across as a safe bet. Coupled with the unfounded rumors of Obama’s Muslim ties, this has tended to give voters a level of insecurity about him, even if they like what he is saying. The way to overcome both of these obstacles is to make himself the “American” candidate. It will give a sense to voters that he is one of them and will effectively counteract currents of spin that paint him as supreme “other.” He should inject more of his 2004 Democratic Convention speech into his stump speeches—talk about his father form Kenya, his mother from Kansas, how he owes his unlikely success to America. Obama’s “story” trumps Clinton’s life story and will work to assuage reservations voters might have towards voting for an outsider.
2) Emphasize underdog role. Every time Obama has had Clinton on the ropes, he has built up the narrative that a win for him should be a given. In Ohio and New Hampshire, he cut into enormous leads in a relatively short time span and was able to exceed initial expectations for how he would perform in certain demographics. But his pre-vote surge in state polls and the consequent media coverage that paints Clinton as a goner tends to obscure the unlikely chances of his success in the first place. He should continually mention that the most likely scenario in the Pennsylvania race is a Clinton win. He should force voters to buy into the notion that a vote for him is a vote against conventional wisdom. Clinton does best when she is in a position to garner sympathy and has masterfully exploited that to her advantage in New Hampshire and Ohio. Obama should do as much as he can to reverse that narrative.
3) Revisit the Iowa model. He should go back to exactly what worked in Iowa—invest significant in the state. Don’t hold the megawatt rallies in big cities initially. Start off by touring Appalachia, blue-collar havens and Republican strong holds. Hold intimate gatherings and town halls. Do everything he can to ensure voters trust him more than Clinton. He’s veered off his Iowa message as he has started pivoting towards a general election, but is he reshapes the Pennsylvania race as a repeat of his first battle for the Democratic nomination, he is surely on more solid ground.
4) Counteract Clinton’s institutional support. Clinton has the endorsement of much of Pennsylvania’s establishment including Governor Ed Rendell. She will appear with known party leaders at her campaign stops and will use their infrastructures to her advantage. Obama has fewer of these connections in the state but has one supporter in particular that could help to counterbalance Clinton’s establishment backing: Patrick Murphy. Murphy is a newly-elected congressman from Pennsylvania and an early Obama backer. He is, more importantly, the only Iraq War veteran in Congress. He should be Obama’s right hand man at campaign stops, much as Ted Kennedy was in the run up to February 5th states. He will lend credence to Obama’s claim of superior judgement on Iraq and foreign policy solely by virtue of the fact that he has witnessed firsthand the realities of American occupation.
Even if he follows this game plan, Obama’s chances in Pennsylvania do not look good. However, if he can keep the race within 4 or 5 points, I think he can very well make the claim that the race was a virtual tie for all intents an purposes. Winning for him in one of these “Clinton strongholds” is very similar to the experience argument in this race: Obama doesn’t need to prove he has more experience than Clinton, he just needs to show he has enough. Similarly, he doesn’t have to beat Clinton in states like Pennsylvania, he just needs to do well enough among her base to show that he can garner enough of that support to add to his coalition and carry those states in the fall.
1) Play up “Americanism.” Blue collar reluctance to Obama can partially be attributed to a lack of familiarity. Obama has been on the national scene for a relatively scarce amount of time—his chief competitor was wife to the President for 8 years—and he has run an insurgent campaign, identifying himself as an outsider. As such, voters who won’t prioritize giving both the candidates a thorough look-through will tend to gravitate to one who has a proven-track record of success, the one that comes across as a safe bet. Coupled with the unfounded rumors of Obama’s Muslim ties, this has tended to give voters a level of insecurity about him, even if they like what he is saying. The way to overcome both of these obstacles is to make himself the “American” candidate. It will give a sense to voters that he is one of them and will effectively counteract currents of spin that paint him as supreme “other.” He should inject more of his 2004 Democratic Convention speech into his stump speeches—talk about his father form Kenya, his mother from Kansas, how he owes his unlikely success to America. Obama’s “story” trumps Clinton’s life story and will work to assuage reservations voters might have towards voting for an outsider.
2) Emphasize underdog role. Every time Obama has had Clinton on the ropes, he has built up the narrative that a win for him should be a given. In Ohio and New Hampshire, he cut into enormous leads in a relatively short time span and was able to exceed initial expectations for how he would perform in certain demographics. But his pre-vote surge in state polls and the consequent media coverage that paints Clinton as a goner tends to obscure the unlikely chances of his success in the first place. He should continually mention that the most likely scenario in the Pennsylvania race is a Clinton win. He should force voters to buy into the notion that a vote for him is a vote against conventional wisdom. Clinton does best when she is in a position to garner sympathy and has masterfully exploited that to her advantage in New Hampshire and Ohio. Obama should do as much as he can to reverse that narrative.
3) Revisit the Iowa model. He should go back to exactly what worked in Iowa—invest significant in the state. Don’t hold the megawatt rallies in big cities initially. Start off by touring Appalachia, blue-collar havens and Republican strong holds. Hold intimate gatherings and town halls. Do everything he can to ensure voters trust him more than Clinton. He’s veered off his Iowa message as he has started pivoting towards a general election, but is he reshapes the Pennsylvania race as a repeat of his first battle for the Democratic nomination, he is surely on more solid ground.
4) Counteract Clinton’s institutional support. Clinton has the endorsement of much of Pennsylvania’s establishment including Governor Ed Rendell. She will appear with known party leaders at her campaign stops and will use their infrastructures to her advantage. Obama has fewer of these connections in the state but has one supporter in particular that could help to counterbalance Clinton’s establishment backing: Patrick Murphy. Murphy is a newly-elected congressman from Pennsylvania and an early Obama backer. He is, more importantly, the only Iraq War veteran in Congress. He should be Obama’s right hand man at campaign stops, much as Ted Kennedy was in the run up to February 5th states. He will lend credence to Obama’s claim of superior judgement on Iraq and foreign policy solely by virtue of the fact that he has witnessed firsthand the realities of American occupation.
Even if he follows this game plan, Obama’s chances in Pennsylvania do not look good. However, if he can keep the race within 4 or 5 points, I think he can very well make the claim that the race was a virtual tie for all intents an purposes. Winning for him in one of these “Clinton strongholds” is very similar to the experience argument in this race: Obama doesn’t need to prove he has more experience than Clinton, he just needs to show he has enough. Similarly, he doesn’t have to beat Clinton in states like Pennsylvania, he just needs to do well enough among her base to show that he can garner enough of that support to add to his coalition and carry those states in the fall.
posted by Le Tas & Me at
12:10 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home