Inside Politics

False assumption

“This will come as a shock to throngs of delirious Democrats, but the winner of the party’s nomination does not automatically become President. There will be — repeat, will be — a general election. And John McCain is already showing he is going to be one tough opponent,” New York Daily News columnist Michael Goodwin writes.

“With their party’s huge primary turnouts and record-shattering contributions, many Dems act as though the survivor of the showdown between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama wins a cakewalk to the White House. There is talk of a landslide and big gains in Congress,” Mr. Goodwin said.

“The prevailing sentiment is not that the GOP is weak. It’s that the GOP is dead.

“McCain, the aging, craggy-faced warrior, begs to differ. As if to remind swing voters he knows a thing or two about elections, he unleashed a series of hard-hitting attacks on Obama last week. If his punches didn’t get Obama’s attention, the Dem front-runner is deep in denial.

“McCain’s broadsides have covered Iraq, taxes and trade, each a key issue to many voters. The attacks had an echo of Clinton’s charge Obama is not ready, a fact that may help Clinton stave off elimination in Tuesday’s primaries. That, too, would benefit McCain. The longer Obama and Clinton keep fighting each other, the less time the winner will have for McCain.

“By then, McCain will have started to define his opponent in the most unflattering terms. And when it comes to Iraq, he will have the help of the facts on the ground.”

Texas-size effort

“In Texas, where size matters, Obama is mounting what may be the most elaborate primary campaign in any state in history: His ads are ubiquitous on radio and television, his famed online operation is bringing together people in towns way off the normal campaign trail, and his rallies — in dramatic settings, showcasing the rampant enthusiasm of his youthful supporters — are advertisements in themselves, for the pure momentum of his candidacy,” Boston Globe reporter Peter S. Canellos wrote in an article published yesterday.

“Now, with two days until the voting, Obama has been so successful at building the appearance of momentum that he has reversed the conventional wisdom: What was once considered fertile ground for Hillary Clinton is now assumed to be Obama country. A win in Texas could be Obama’s knockout blow — but a loss, amid such heightened expectations, may sting a little more than was assumed a few weeks ago.”

White voters

“One of the most notable — yet unremarked-on — lessons of this year’s Democratic presidential nominating contest is the demolition of the long-held belief that whites simply won’t vote for black candidates for higher office. Before the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3, who could have predicted the remarkable outpouring of white support for Sen. Barack Obama?” Abigail Thernstrom and Stephan Thernstrom write in the Los Angeles Times.

“As recently as 2006, when Congress held hearings on the renewal of the expiring parts of the Voting Rights Act, civil rights advocates delivered a united message, echoed by the House Judiciary Committee. ’It is rare that white voters will cross over to elect minority-preferred candidates,’ the committee’s report concluded — a statement from which there was no congressional dissent,” the writers said.

“The 43 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, it seemed, were living proof of this. Overwhelmingly, they had been elected in ’majority-minority’ districts drawn specifically for African American candidates; only a handful had been elected in districts in which most voters were not black or some combination of black and Latino.

“So it’s not surprising that, as the 2008 presidential race got under way, many observers — white and African American alike — thought Obama’s chances of winning the Democratic nomination were very poor. …

“Polling data suggested otherwise. In 2003, for instance, only 7 percent of Americans said they were unwilling to vote for a ’qualified African American candidate,’ according to a Gallup Organization survey. But many analysts refused to believe such polls, preferring to note racism’s long history in American politics or to suggest that white voters were not telling the truth to pollsters.”

Secret pact

“In public, they were oil and water. As president, Bill Clinton distrusted then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and the Republican felt the same way about Clinton. But in a shocking revelation, we’re learning that the political foes — desperate for a heroic legacy — made a secret pact to fix the nation’s most problematic programs like Social Security,” Paul Bedard writes in the Washington Whispers column of U.S. News & World Report.

“The plan crashed, however, in the Monica Lewinsky scandal. ’Monica changed everything,’ says former Clinton Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles.

“It was in 1997, when the budget was flush and partisanship at a lull, says Steven Gillon, a History Channel host and University of Oklahoma professor who reveals the deal in his upcoming page-turner ’The Pact.’ ’This was a moment where everything came together to create this possibility in 1997-98,’ he says. ’Those circumstances will probably never be duplicated.’

“Using Gingrich’s notes and interviews with Bowles and other Clintonistas, he describes months of meetings leading to a face-to-face in the Treaty Room on Oct. 28, 1997. The plan: Clinton would propose fixing Social Security and Gingrich would back it. Both would work their sides to pass it after the 1998 elections. Other deals would follow. But the Lewinsky saga broke first, returning partisanship. ’It really did matter, and it destroyed this moment of bipartisanship that both of them had worked hard for,’ says Gillon.”

’Not helpful’

Former presidential candidate New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson says Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s latest TV ad is “not helpful.”

The “3 a.m.” ad, which suggests Mrs. Clinton is more prepared than rival Sen. Barack Obama to handle a sudden crisis, is too negative, the Democrat said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“Those ads could be campaign fodder for Republicans in the fall,” said Mr. Richardson, whose endorsement is being courted by both Democrats.

“I happen to disagree with that ad that says that Senator Obama is not ready. He is ready. He has great judgment, an internationalist background,” Mr. Richardson said. “But … I think his campaign has gotten a little negative, too, so I’m not playing favorites.”

He said he won’t endorse “right now” because he is still “torn” on a decision.

• Greg Pierce can be reached at 202/636-3285 or gpierce@washingtontimes .com.