Campaign Diaries

In addition to today’s already discussed presidential polls from Ohio and New Hampshire, three surveys from red state Obama is running ads in were released today, finding some strong numbers for Obama in North Carolina and Alaska and a wider margin in Georgia:

• In North Carolina, Civitas has the race within the margin of error: McCain is ahead 43% to 40% with Bob Barr at 2%. Last month, McCain was up by 4% - and 5% the month before that. Obama’s problem is clearly the vote of white Democrats: he gets 28% of the white vote and 64% of that of Democrats

• In Alaska, Rasmussen finds a stable race with McCain narrowly ahead in what ought to be a safe Republican state. After a 4% lead last month, he is leading 45% to 40% - 49% to 44% with leaners. McCain’s favorability rating is far superior (63% to 53%).

• Finally, in Georgia, Rasmussen shows McCain holding on 48% to 39% to 5% for Barr, though the numbers become 53% to 42% to 1% for Barr when leaners are pushed. The problem for Obama is his favorability rating: 47% only, compared to 63% for McCain. 35% of respondents have a very unfavorable view of Obama, compared to 11% for McCain.

Two remarks are immediately in order. First, the numbers in NC and AK remain extraordinary for Democrats, as no one could have predicted these states to become toss-ups so fast. Second, it is remarkable that all three polls find the same margin as they did in the respective institutes’ June poll - all within a statistically insignificant one percentage point. This is a topic I have alluded to many times in the past week or so, so I thought a longer post looking at the risks and rewards of Obama’s red state strategy had become necessary.

Both sides have something to celebrate here. Democrats will be relieved that the electorate is getting more polarized, the general election battle lines are being drawn and yet poll after poll is showing that these states are not going back home, forcing us to take seriously the fact that they might be hotly contested battleground states. On the other hand, Republicans will be relieved that Obama has had all three of these states for himself for a month now (he is running ads in all three of these states and McCain is not) and yet numbers have not moved an inch.

So how are we to interpret the stability of the numbers in states despite the fact that one side is contesting them and the other is not? The problem for the Obama campaign is that it suggests that there is a low ceiling the candidate cannot cross in states like North Carolina and Georgia. This is naturally not a surprising idea: No one expects Obama to win a substantial majority in those red states. Obama’s very high unfavorable ratings (these numbers in Georgia have got to be worrisome, especially considering Obama has been airing positive advertisement there) and his weak numbers among white Southerns attest to that.

How quickly and effortlessly Obama jumped to a the low 40s created somewhat of an illusion that he could continue his rise with a bit more of a push, but the poll numbers we have been seeing in NC and GA are the result of a depressed GOP base, energized Democrats and a large number of independents behaving as Democrats. This is what we are seeing throughout the country, and what Hillary Clinton was benefiting from as well. A late December Virginia poll had her besting all Republicans by convincing margins. To get to the mid-to-upper 40s in states in which a large part of the electorate is viscerally hostile to a Democratic candidate, not to mention an African-American one, will be much more difficult and it will first require Obama to find a way to lower those “very unfavorable” ratings that we keep seeing. He has those states to himself, and he needs to bombard them with positive ads introducing himself.

Does that mean that Obama is wasting his time and his money paying attention to these states? Certainly not. For one, he might not be moving upwards but there is no question that he is within striking distance - enough for a slight change in the way voters perceive him to lead him to clinch a series of upsets. And reaching 50% might be difficult, but that is why Democrats are hopeful that Bob Barr’s candidacy will allow Obama to win with a plurality.

Second, Obama organizing some of these Southern states solidifies his base (the first polls finding a tight race in Alaska and North Carolina were a huge surprise; now, they have become routine) and it mobilizes black voters: If successful, the Obama campaign’s hope to register thousands of new black voters could have a huge impact in North Carolina and Virginia - though it would be far from enough in more Republican states some are talking about (Georgia and Mississippi).

Third, there is an argument to be made that North Carolina and Alaska are in a certain sense more likely to fall than states like Virginia since Republicans are not defending them. Remember how supposedly safe red seats like KS-02 fell in 2006 while long-targeted districts like CT-04, NM-01 and PA-06 stayed in Republican hands? The incumbents in those latter districts had organized their defense and spent millions on advertising and turnout efforts, while those in KS-02 and PA-04 were just swept by the Democratic tsunami. Now, the McCain campaign and the RNC are spending and organizing in Virginia, but North Carolina is dominated by the efforts of the blue team. That alone is enough to make up some of the discrepancy between North Carolina and Virginia’s natural competitiveness.

And the best part for Obama is that if the McCain campaign decides it needs to invest in North Carolina and Alaska because their advantage is eroding, they will be divesting money to usually reliable red states instead of defending Ohio, Virginia, Colorado and Nevada. Yes, a GOP investment in NC will make that state less valuable for Democrats but it will give them an opening in even more competitive swing states.

It is probable, then, that Obama’s red state strategy will turn into a win-win scenario: Either they organize and advertise without a response and have a chance at pulling upsets or they force the GOP to defend states that should be on no one’s radar screen. It could also quickly turn into a lose-lose scenario, however. If Obama’s efforts to register thousands of unregistered black voters and to appeal to Southern white Democrats do not succeed, his numbers will not continue to move upwards and the McCain campaign might never feel the need to play defense.

Update: This reminds me of the situation we were in post-Wisconsin in the Democratic primary. Clinton needed to win by large margins and yet we were talking about who was going to win a particular state. That alone was a victory for Obama, who remained sure that he would remain close and keep a big delegate lead even if he lost a state. And indeed, Clinton’s narrow victories in Texas and Indiana were not - even her larger margins in Ohio and Pennsylvania were not big enough to change the fundamentals of the race (I confess I miss handicapping the Clinton-Obama showdown!). Now, we are talking about who will win Alaska and North Carolina. That alone is a victory for Obama who really does not need any of these states to get to 270 electoral votes - just as he did not need to win Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania or Indiana to keep his lead.