How the Democrats Can Still Lose

At the outset, I need to admit that I am supporting John McCain. However, I have not been very optimistic about his chances. As a result, I have been very surprised to see just how close this election is shaping up to be. According to Real Clear Politics, if the election was held today, John McCain would win the popular vote by a narrow margin and Barack Obama would win the Electoral College by a scant eight votes. Looking at yet another photo finish, you would think that both parties would be battling for the middle ground. However, when I listen to commentators on the Democrat side, it sounds like they are staking out positions on the far end of the spectrum. This seems like a prescription for snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

Writing in the Los Angeles Times, feminist Gloria Steinem attacked Sarah Palin, stating, "This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need." What is the evidence that Sarah Palin opposes "everything most other women want"? According to Ms. Steinem:

She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

Is this what most women believe? I did some research on the abortion issue. Gloria Steinem, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton oppose any limitations on abortion, while Sarah Palin opposes abortion. Who speaks for most women? None of them actually. Women are as conflicted on abortion as the rest of the population. Depending on how you ask the question, either 75% of women believe that abortion should not be banned or 61% believe that abortion should be banned or restricted. This is because a plurality of 38% of women polled support restrictions on abortion but not banning it altogether. When added to the 23% of women who oppose abortion, they make a majority.

Sarah Palin is a unique individual. She is a strong, independent woman who happens to be very conservative. If Democrats attack her as an extremist in a dress, they run the risk that hockey moms, armed forces moms, NRA moms and moms with special needs children will decide that Gov. Palin looks a lot more like them than Gloria Steinem.

The Nation quoted Air America host Thom Hartmann as saying, "It's not left vs. right. . . . It's all of America vs. right-wing cranks." Liberal journalist Ariana Huffington was quoted in the same article as stating, "The problem is with the media, which presents 'all sides' when often there is only one side." What message do these liberal commentators convey? If you are not with Barack Obama, you are a right wing crank who opposes all of America. There is only one side to the issues and that is the liberal side. In other words, you are either for us or against us. That is a reckless strategy guaranteed to alienate the middle. Granted, this is not Barack Obama speaking. However, Sen. Obama can certainly lose credibility if he accepts support from people who want to take the country in a direction it is not ready to go.

Sometimes people who care passionately about politics make the mistake of only talking to others who share their beliefs. It reminds me of a cartoon I saw after the 1988 election where two tweed-coated professors are talking and one says, "I voted for Dukakis. You voted for Dukakis. Who the heck voted for Bush?"

This is shaping up to be an historically close election. On the one hand, you have a Democratic ticket which has a charismatic but inexperienced presidential candidate from the left side of his party anchored by a bland yet experienced vice-presidential nominee. On the Republican side, you have an aging one-time maverick with substantial experience propped up by a brash hockey mom outsider who has even less experience than Sen. Obama. There is a yin and yang between experience and excitement on both tickets. The election will be decided in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania, most likely by a very small margin. Both parties will be well advised to rein in their more ideological supporters and shoot for the middle if they want to win.