The fight to become the Democratic Party's nominee for U.S. President has been one of the longest and most bitter in the modern history of America's political parties.
While the backroom dealings and bloodletting that gave us Harry S. Truman and Gerald Ford may have been more contentious, they were never this public.
Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have launched barrage after barrage of verbal ammunition at each other. From the much-discussed 3 a.m. ad to the sniper snafu and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, they have over the past year done each other as much harm as any Republican could have.
The Democratic battle has Republicans licking their chops. Many in the Grand Old Party who had been dreading this election season due to the unpopularity of President George W. Bush are now excited because of public fatigue over the Democratic nominees and the wounds they have inflicted on each other.
After this week’s North Carolina and Indiana primaries, pundits of both liberal and conservative persuasion are saying Obama “is” the Democratic nominee for president. While counting the Clinton's down and out has not been a wise move over the past few decades, let’s play along and agree that, yes, Obama is the nominee.
In politics, you always hear about “coattails,” meaning someone on the ticket has enough popularity and campaign cash to benefit other candidates from his or her party. When Ronald Reagan led the GOP ticket, Republicans down the ballot benefited, whether they were running for the U.S. Senate or for dog-catcher.
With Obama as the Democratic nominee, there is a strong potential that we will see coattails but no coat. And that possibility should have Republicans scared as hell.
How do you have coattails and no coat? That’s simple: Resources that a party has historically spent in certain communities – the coattails – are shifted elsewhere, even if Obama – the coat and leader of the political ticket – has no chance of winning in that new community.
I know this sounds like that hated elementary school math question: “If one train leaves Boston traveling at 50 miles per hour,…” but hear me out.
One of the biggest expenses incurred by both the Democratic and Republican parties is also one of the most crucial in any campaign. It’s called GOTV – and, no, it’s not Al Gore’s new television channel. It stands for “get out the vote.”
GOTV efforts are designed to excite and turn out core voting blocs. For Democrats, that means, among others things, getting people in African-American communities to the polls during early voting and on election day. With Obama leading the Democratic ticket, most pundits expect the African-American community to be exceptionally motivated and set turnout records.
That means Democrats’ GOTV priorities will shift. Why would the party minders spend money on driving people to the polls, phone-banking and canvassing neighborhoods in urban centers like Nashville, Memphis and Atlanta when the odds are high that, if they do nothing, voters there will still back their candidate?
Instead, an Obama candidacy would allow that money to be spent in areas that typically haven’t gotten much in the way of GOTV. Among the potential beneficiaries are more rural areas that in any other year are lucky to see a dime from the state or national parties. Now, cash can be allocated to districts where Obama may not have the slightest chance of winning but where the money has the potential to make the difference to candidates for lower offices.
That is why Tennessee Republicans should be scared as hell of Obama and the coattails with no coat. They may want to label him an emperor with no clothes and rely on the recent trend of Tennessee plumping for the GOP. But their real trouble is not with the man at the top of the ticket – it’s with the changing dynamic his candidacy will bring.
You must be logged in to comment. If you do not have an account, you can join our esteemed subscribers.