Mike Allen at The Politico details the reasons why the ongoing controversy over Barack Obama’s comments about small-town America are bad for his campaign:
The Obama campaign contends that coverage of the San Francisco remarks is overheated and distorted. One aide said that “any logical analysis” would make it obvious that the brouhaha will not “change the pledged delegate count” — the key to the Democratic presidential nomination.
In fact, this is a potential turning point for Obama’s campaign — an episode that could be even more damaging than the attention to remarks by his minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, since this time the controversial words came out of his own mouth.
Allen lists a dozen reasons why this could be a game changer including:
1. It lets Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) off the mat at a time when even some of her top supporters had begun to despair about her prospects. Clinton hit back hard on the campaign trail Saturday. And her campaign held a conference call where former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, a Pittsburgh native, described Obama’s remarks as “condescending and disappointing” and “undercutting his message of hope.”
Think about how this campaign has gone since Clinton’s “come back” in Texas and Ohio. Obama was behind in Pennsylvania to begin with, by double digits according to every poll. In the beginning of March, we spent two weeks talking about Jeremiah Wright and Obama suffered in the polls. Then, Obama’s speech took some of that pressure off and attention shifted to Clinton’s own mis-steps, which amounted to three instances of plain-old lying. As a result, Clinton started faltering and the possibility of a shocker in Pennsylvania seemed at least possible.
Then Friday happened. Clinton has an opening that will only reinforce doubts that late-deciders in the Keystone State already have, and, if she comes away with a big win on April 22nd, there’s no way she can be forced out of the race before the convention.
6. It provides a handy excuse for people who were looking for a reason not to vote for Obama but don’t want to think of themselves as bigoted. It hurts Obama especially with the former Reagan Democrats, the culturally conservative, blue-collar workers who could be a promising voter group for him. It also antagonizes people who were concerned about his minister but might have given him the benefit of the doubt after his eloquent speech on race.
and
7. It gives the Clinton campaign new arguments for trying to recruit superdelegates, the Democratic elected officials and other insiders who get a vote on the nomination. A moderate politician from a swing district, for example, might not want to have to explain support for a candidate who is being hammered as a liberal. And Clinton’s agents can claim that for all the talk of her being divisive, Obama has provided plenty of fodder to energize Republicans.
These two are closely related because they go to the only argument that Clinton really has to convince the superdelegates to tilt her way — the idea that, notwithstanding his success in the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama is not electable in a race against John McCain. If he cannot attract the Reagan Democrat blue-collar support that Clinton has in states like Ohio, then that argument will be reinforced.
And, finally:
10. The timing is terrible. With the Pennsylvania primary nine days off, late-deciding voters are starting to tune in. Obama and Clinton are scheduled to appear separately on CNN on Sunday for a forum on, of all topics, faith and values. And ABC News is staging a Clinton-Obama debate in Philadelphia on Wednesday. So Clinton has the maximum opportunity to keep a spotlight on the issue. Besides sex, little drives the news and opinion industry more than race, religion, culture and class. So as far as chances the chattering-class will perpetuate the issue, Obama has hit the jackpot.
If this story had come out a month ago, like the Rev. Wright story did, it would likely be forgotten by now and it certainly wouldn’t have the resonance going into the vote on April 22nd that it most likely will have.
At this point, the question isn’t whether Obama will lose Pennsylvania, but by how much. A big loss there, followed by another one in small-town dominated Indiana two weeks later, would be a serious setback.
