With Barack the nominee, the question is: what now? In Kentucky exit polls, only 1 in 3 Clinton supporters said they would vote for Obama in the general election. About 4 in 10 said they would vote for McCain, and nearly 1 in 4 said they wouldn’t vote at all.
Even accounting for the potential rawness of emotion at exit polls, this is clearly an obstacle. Add to this picture the widespread outrage among women at Obama’s and the news media’s misogyny and the fact that some voters in Florida and Michigan see Obama as the agent of their disenfranchisement, and you can see how Obama has serious challenges in many states boasting huge populations and a substantial number of electoral college votes.
Perhaps these statistics can begin to explain why in the 20 states where she won, Clinton trumps McCain 50% to 43% in daily Gallup polls over the last 2 weeks, while Obama trails at 45% to McCain’s 50%. And why across the board, in a Gallup survey of all 50 states that included 11,000 registered voters, Clinton performed better than Obama when set against McCain (she led 48% to 45%; Obama loses 45% to 46%).
Her wins in swing states like Nevada, Ohio, New Mexico, Florida, Pennsylvania and Arkansas support this, and in these swing states she beat McCain according to Gallup by an even greater margin, 49% to 43% (while Obama lost).
Obama needs Hillary supporters, he cannot win without us. So how is he going to achieve this? I think the his most persuasive argument will be grounded in a move toward substance—emphasizing again and again that he and Hillary are very similar ideologically and that a vote for McCain is a vote supporting conservative Supreme Court nominations (and with them a possible overturn of Roe v. Wade, likely limitations of gay rights, etc.) regressive taxation and widening income inequality, incomplete approaches to the environment and science research, and so on.
This will be particularly interesting, though, given that Obama’s image and inspirational catchphrases have thus far been the focus of his campaign. From the “Barack Star” nickname, to “yes we can” (yes we can do what?); from t-shirts with his handsome profile to the “O” symbol that has become his trademark, he is an example of brilliant branding.
A turn to substantive issues may very well require a change in the tone of Obama’s campaign. Many Clinton supporters are disappointed or even angry—but not necessarily unreasonable. With an emphasis upon the issues, Obama can—and should—convince Hillary voters that he will represent them ideologically, even if they would have preferred her.
He will also need to avoid the kind of gaffes that have proliferated lately, from his failure to move quickly enough to disassociate himself from Reverend Wright’s toxic sermons to his cocky dismissal of a female reporter’s serious question with “just a minute, sweetie,” in a recent visit to an auto plant. These demonstrate at worst, misogyny and anti-American sentiment, and at best, an ignorant misstep. They do not help inspire confidence in those who already find Obama’s lack of experience problematic.
If Obama cannot achieve turning this corner towards substance, it is unlikely that he will gain Clinton’s supporters. If McCain ultimately wins, (as he almost certainly will, if Obama cannot win Clinton fans), those most affected will be those who rely on social welfare programs and progressive policies to help them meet their basic needs.
Obama spent much of his campaign talking about how Hillary was from the past and didn’t represent real change. In order to win now, he better hope that his denigration of Hillary’s issues-based candidacy doesn’t stop him from transcending the limitations of his relatively empty rhetoric. Now he is going to have to win over those who need help more than they need hope.
He is going to have to get down to work and sell nitty gritty policy rather than inspiration, to account for concrete plans to make progress real, and explain how he plans to pay for and implement them. To win Hillary’s supporter base, Obama is going to have to do more than inspire, because the votes he needs belong to people who can’t afford or are not willing to put inspiration above putting dinner on the table.
Merritt Baer is a Harvard Law School student in Cambridge, MA.
The part I don’t understand about Clinton supporters such as Merritt is did they support her because she was a women or because of her agenda? If it was just because she was a women then I would fault them for being sexist against the male candidate. If you are voting based on issues why is it so difficult to vote for Obama?