The Presumptive Democratic Nominee?

Hillary Clinton and Gov. Ed RendellThere is a lot of talk out there in the media that, even after his defeat in Pennsylvania that can only be described as stunning --- more on the later --- Barack Obama is still the most viable Democratic choice for the nomination.

Pro-Obama pundits, including Gov. Bill Richardson, are pointing to Obama's "commanding" lead in pledged delegates, the popular vote, and campaign funds.  They also claim that more than half of Democratic voters support Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.  Certainly that may be the case after the remaining primaries are recorded, but does Obama really have a commanding lead?

In their analysis, pundits have failed to account for some important factors that leave Obama in a less viable position than Hillary Clinton going into the November election:  his losses in Ohio and Pennsylvania, key swing states; his inability to win the larger blue states; and the enduring mystery surrounding his personal life and questionable past and connections.

If indeed Obama is the "chosen one," whom a "majority" of Democrats have chosen to be their party's nominee, why has he lost the last four key states?  After Super Tuesday, Obama supporters in the media said Clinton's candidacy was over; the people had spoken and it was time for Obama to be coronated.  Yet, Clinton went on to defeat Obama in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.  Even Obama's campaign and supporters embedded in the media acknowledge that she has a good chance of winning Indiana, whose demographics slightly mirror those of Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Critical Demographics

Looking back at Pennsylvania, how did Clinton, who was outspent by her opponent 2-to-1 and viewed by many voters in exit polls as destined to not win the nomination, win the key state by 10 percentage points?

An exit poll showed that about 67 percent of voters said they thought Obama was honest or trustworthy.  Why did 33 percent of the voters think Obama was not honest or trustworthy?  Did the Jeremiah Wright and "bitter" controversies have an impact on those voters?  We do know that 60 percent of gun owners who voted chose Clinton over Obama.

Examining age and race, the story remains relatively unchanged when compared to the results in past states, except Hillary dominated 63 percent of the white vote; Obama won 90% of the black vote.

In addition, Catholic voters chose Clinton, 70 to 30 over Obama.  Clinton also won the majority of voters who were 65 and older, less affluent, and those who made their final decision during the last week of the race.

Trouble on the Horizon

Pennsylvania is too important to either party to be shrugged off.  In 2000, Al Gore won Pennsylvania, 51 percent to Bush's 47 percent.  John Kerry in 2004 won the state by just 2 percent, defeating Bush 51 percent to 49 percent.  What accounted for the difference between the Pennsylvania results in 2000 and 2004?  Ralph Nader won 2 percent of the vote in 2000 and less than 1 percent in 2004, despite his showing increasing by 200,000 votes in 2004.

Why does that matter this year?  Nader is back on the ballot and Democrats might be heading into the general election as a split party.

Emotions are high among Obama and Clinton supporters and enough constituents supporting each candidate appear to be unwilling to give up on their candidate before November.  Recall that in 2000 and 2004, the Democratic nomination was wrapped up relatively quickly in comparison to this year's contest.  Neither Obama nor Clinton has the delegates to reach the threshold and win the nomination.  It will come down to electability based on demographics in the key states, and if that is the case, Clinton will prevail.  On the other hand, if Florida and Michigan are discounted and the Party looks to the candidate with the most votes and pledged delegates, Obama will win the nomination.

A Tale of Two Democratic Parties?

The trouble is that the longer the race goes on the deeper the two factions will become entrenched behind their respective candidates and the numbers, demographics, and third-party candidacies will be advantageous to McCain.

Some evidence supporting the split in the Democratic Party has come from the Pennsylvania primary exit polls, which have identified a number of possible defections among Democratic voters.

Of the Obama supporters polled in Pennsylvania, 11 percent said that if Clinton wins the nomination they would vote for McCain; 6 percent would not vote at all.  Of the Clinton supporters polled, 15 percent said that if Obama is the nominee, they would vote for McCain; 10 percent would stay home.  If these numbers and feelings persist through to November, the Democrats are in trouble.

These defections are creating considerable and reasonable doubt that either Democratic candidate will be able to win states like Pennsylvania in November.

What to Look for in a Nominee

The race moves on to Indiana and as of today Obama has not accepted an invitation to debate Clinton in that state.  Some of his critics are pointing to his poor showing in Pennsylvania, which may have been worsened by what has been widely called his worst debate performance to date last week.  Reporters on the ground in Pennsylvania noted that Obama seemed to have made himself unavailable for a number of interviews and for the most part kept away from any dialog with the media.

If Clinton wins Indiana, Obama will face his own crisis and find it difficult to explain his electability based on popularity in states that Democrats have not carried in years.  Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming went to Bush in 2004 by at least 10 percentage points, and the margin in many of these states has surpassed 20 percentage points.  If 15 percent of Clinton's voters vote for McCain over Obama and another 10 percent don't vote at all, Obama will be even more unable to win any of these states.

So-called "battleground" states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Florida and their prominent swing demographics have been more kind to Clinton than Obama.  Also keep in mind that Bush is not running this year.  McCain, who is seen as more centrist on many of the important issues like economics and immigration might be more likely to win the swing voters and independents that Bush was unable to obtain in 2004.

In the battleground states, Clinton's appeal among these voters can make all the difference in the world in a general election.