The Media's Short Memory

If you weren't paying attention closely, you'd probably think that Barack Obama was trailing John McCain in the polls. That's because the question leaping from every reporter's lips is some variation of "why isn't Obama doing much better?" The conventional wisdom at the moment is clearly that Obama's lead (5-7 points in most national polls) isn't big enough, that in the current political climate he should be crushing McCain by huge margins.

Putting aside for a moment the merits of that particular view, it's amusing to see how far expectations have shifted in just a few short months.

Back when the primary contest was still raging, in April and May, the convention wisdom seemed to be that Obama would have a very tough time winning the general election, that he had serious flaws that would keep him from being competitive in places like Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. For instance, in a much-discussed April 13 article in The Politico entitled What Clinton Wishes She Could Say, John Harris and Jim Vandehei echoed what many political journalists and pundits were saying at the time, that "Obama has serious problems with Jewish voters (goodbye Florida), working-class whites (goodbye Ohio) and Hispanics (goodbye, New Mexico)." They noted that the Clintons themselves were convinced that "if Obama is the nominee, a likely Democratic victory would turn to a near-certain defeat." They wrote that many "Democratic lawmakers, veteran lobbyists, and campaign operatives" who weren't backing Clinton nevertheless shared her assessment of Obama's general election prospects.

And if you watched any cable news show during that time, you were treated to endless questions about how Obama could possibly win the general election in light of his poor showing among certain demographic groups and in certain key swing states.

Now, just a couple months later, there have been countless polls showing Obama ahead of McCain nationally and ahead in all of the key swing states (as well as some traditionally red states like Colorado, Virginia, and Iowa), and the question has suddenly morphed into "why isn't Obama crushing McCain?" It's weird. The goalposts have moved dramatically.

For what it's worth, I think the answer to that question is pretty simple: It's totally unrealistic to expect Obama to be crushing McCain in the polls at this stage in the contest.

For starters, no Democrat has pulled down more than 50.1% of the vote in a general election since Lyndon Johnson, so it's bizarre to expect Obama to be polling much higher than he is. Second, it's August--prior to the convention and the debates--and Obama is much less of a known commodity than his opponent. Is it really so strange that many voters remain undecided? Third, actual Democrats always do worse than the generic Republican/Democrat numbers, especially in presidential contests. This is a function both of the Republican party's superiority at character-based politics and the relatively greater emphasis placed on military issues in presidential elections.

Moreover, as Nate Silver pointed out the other day, Obama does much better in polls when matched up against other Republicans (like Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, or even George Bush). That indicates that it is really McCain who is over-performing, not Obama who is under-performing.

Which brings me to my last point. There's an assumption--a correct one I believe--that the current political climate is very favorable to Democrats. That said, I don't think it's quite as favorable as it was two years ago, when dissatisfaction with the Iraq war was at a crescendo. And in that historically lopsided election, the Democrats won the national popular vote by roughly 6 or 7 points. Most polls now show Obama leading McCain by 6 or 7 points.

So, again, I'm not sure why it is that most journalists and pundits have it in their heads that he should be leading by gigantic margins, particularly at this stage in the game.