Political Experts Answered Questions on Super Tuesday

MERLE BLACK: I guess there's the possibility of that, though, you know, I think the most likely outcome is that this will get settled before the convention.

But, you know, as Tom is saying, this looks very different from the previous presidential contests that we've had, so, you can't rule it out completely.

I think the -- on the Republican side, John McCain is pulling up a -- with a fairly large advantage of delegates. And in order for either Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney to overcome him, they would really have to pull in a much larger majority than either of them has been able to do before. And I, frankly think that's very hard to do, although McCain has, I think, tremendous liabilities as a potential Republican nominee.

For the Democrats, it's very, very close. Hillary Clinton does have a lead in delegates, but Barack Obama performed well, and better among, I think, some groups than he had before. So, I think among the Democratic side, we've going to see some fierce politicking here that may go on beyond the next month or so.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Now, here's a question that zeroes in, to a larger extent, on the Republican side, and I'm going to pose this one to Tom Patterson. This person asks, "Romney and Huckabee are battling for the conservative vote, John McCain is garnering the independent/moderate vote. Can McCain, or Romney or Huckabee actually bring the Republican party together?"

THOMAS PATTERSON: Well, there's nothing like facing off against the other party to bring a party together, and I know it's going to depend a little bit on who the nominees happen to be.

I think if it's McCain-Clinton, I think we're going to see kind of a classic party-against-party campaign, very much like we saw in 2004 and 2000. If it turns out to be McCain against Obama, I think we'll see more of a campaign for the center, that both candidates will try to kind of play down partisan divisions, work off of character.

So that would, I think the scenario for the fall is going to depend on what the lineup looks like coming out of the conventions, but you know, I think, you know, partisanship isn't going to go away, this is a very deeply divided public, in terms of its feeling about Republican values and Democratic values. So, it's going to be a rough-and-tumble campaign, regardless of the tickets, but I do think who's at the top of the ticket will affect the tone of the campaign.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And to follow up on that, Professor Black -- and you can comment on what Tom Patterson just said, but -- and then we have another question asking, "In the past, hasn't it been the Democrats who've had problems unifying their Party? Has something changed with the parties where Republicans are not sure who they should support?"

MERLE BLACK: Well, the Republicans are certainly very deeply divided and part of the interesting things to come out of the exit polls is while the conservatives, self-defined conservatives, are a majority of Republican primary voters, they're splitting their votes among several candidates, and John McCain is running very weakly among most of these conservatives -- especially in the South, but not just in the South.

So, the conservative vote -- McCain would have a lot of work to do, in order to unify his party. There are two things you have to do in politics. You've got to unify your party, and then you've got to appeal to people who are not Democrats or not Republicans, as the case may be.

And McCain has got this incredible problem within the party. There's one other question on the exit poll that really illustrates this, the question on top candidate qualities, and there's one, "Does the candidate share my values?" Usually, about 50 percent of Republican voters cite that as the most important thing or characteristic they're looking at in terms of the candidate.

Now, in Georgia and Alabama, places like that, John McCain gets only 14 percent among those people who say they are looking for someone who shares my values. Sometimes he gets up into the twenties, I think in one place I saw, he's up to 33 percent, or so.

But, here's John McCain, who's widely viewed within the Republican Party as someone who doesn't really represent the values of the people who vote in the Republican Party. So, if he becomes the nominee, I think he's going to have, first of all, a tremendous problem in trying to unify this Republican Party and excite them about his candidacy.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And this question really picks up on that, and I'm going to turn to Tom Patterson for this one, and you're welcome to comment on what Merle just said.

Jenifer Wolf in New York, New York City, asks, "Would you say the political spectrum has moved far, far to the right since the 1970s," I don't think we want to go too far back in history, but considering her question, she goes on to say, "How has the conservative voice or voter impacted this election, and is there really a united conservative voice?" And you can pick up on that, and then on what Merle just said.

THOMAS PATTERSON: Oh, sure. No, I think the political spectrum did move to the right, very clearly. I think it began in the 1970s in part, as a backlash against some of the power that was flowing into Washington, some of the social programs and the like, and they crystallized, I think, around the Reagan presidency, and the Republicans had a pretty strong run. And, you know, essentially the Democrats had to re-position themselves.

And Bill Clinton ran as a new type of Democrat, more of a centrist, so trying to move the Party a little more to the right.

But, I think what the George Bush presidency has done is, there was an attempt to move it too far to the right on the part of the Bush administration, and the problems in Iraq, the problems in the economy, some of the social difficulties that have attended some of these policy changes, particularly in areas like health, and the like, I see the pendulum swinging back toward the left.

And if you look where the voters are moving in terms of party identification, the gap between those who call themselves Republicans and Democrats has increased to the Democrat's advantage.

So, you know, I think what we're seeing is a movement back toward the center, back toward the left.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Merle Black, do you want to pick up on that?

MERLE BLACK: Yeah, I think I agree with part of what Tom is saying, but the other thing is that the Bush administration has been liberal in some areas, and conservative in others. On Iraq you'd say, you know, moving in a very conservative direction, and that has really kind of poisoned the atmosphere of his second Administration.

On the other hand, a lot of the critique that Republicans and conservatives make of the president is that, you know, he didn't veto enough spending, he didn't act as a conservative. And on the immigration issue, that's another one, they'd say Bush is really moving in a very liberal kind of direction.

So, he took several positions within his own party that had the effect of disintegrating, I think, the conservatives who had voted for him in 2004, but who certainly would not vote for him if he were eligible to run again, you know, in 2008.

So, the conservatives right now, I think are in great, great disarray, and this is a time, where -- as Tom is pointing out -- the party identification was almost dead even in the 2004 election, between Democrats and Republicans, among voters. Now that has shifted to the advantage of the Democrats, so the Democrats are certainly a huge favorite to win the presidency in the fall, and to, I think, to expand their majorities in both the House and the Senate.

THOMAS PATTERSON: Oh, I think the Iraq War is the backdrop to this election, very much, as it was the backdrop to the 2006 and 2004 elections. But certainly, you know, what's happening in the economy is bringing that issue to the forefront.

It may have come in a little bit late, I mean, one of those things that strikes me about what's been happening in the primaries is that we're seeing almost a Balkanization of the electorate, and it's not getting a lot of attention.

But if you look at the breakdowns, there's a lot of demographic voting that's going on, as blacks have moved very heavily into the Obama camp, Hillary Clinton, depending very much on the Hispanic vote. You look at the differences between men and women, not only, sort of, where they're lining up in terms of which primary they're participating in, but which candidate they're supporting.

You know, I think some of the dynamics, and I think we sometimes forget that American politics is quite different, and it depends on what the field of contenders look like during the primaries as to which issues and which dimensions of the American society are going to come into play.

And the Republicans, ordinarily, have had kind of an order of succession, where there's been sort of a nearly-anointed candidate in advance of the nominating contests, and Republicans have kind of aligned behind that candidate.

That hasn't happened this time, and that's allowed some of these divisions to come in, in a larger way. And then , you look at the Democratic field -- this is historical -- we've never seen a field like this.

So, you know, I think some of the issues of the moment surrounding the candidates are taking over from these very large issues that are going to be very big in the fall, no doubt -- the economy and Iraq.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Merle Black, do you think the economy -- what would you say about the role of the economy, and the Iraq War?

MERLE BLACK: Yeah, I think the economy is the main issue for voters, both in the Democratic primaries and in the Republican Party primaries. There may be some differences, in terms of which candidates are perceived as better on those issues, and there may be some kind of rationalization going on in that process, but I think the economy -- it will be -- it is already, and will be -- the probably most important issue going forward.

But, I think we'll also have, you know, interesting debates, especially if John McCain's the nominee, about what to do in Iraq, foreign policy, those kinds of questions. They don't seem to capture as much attention of voters as the Iraq issue once did, but I think they'll come back front and center when we get into the November election.

THOMAS PATTERSON: Can I jump back in here, Judy, on the economy -- I mean, I think there's no question that the economy is moving up on, in people's minds as the most important issue facing the country. But when you look at sort of, how it's playing on the campaign trail, and whether there's any candidate on the Republican side, or any candidate on the Democratic side that's gaining a real advantage compared to opponents, in terms of his or her positioning on the economy, I think that's hard to see, so far, in the campaign.

MERLE BLACK: Yeah, I agree.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Now, here's a follow-up and I'll turn to Merle for this -- Leslie McGee of Newark, Ohio, says, "Change seems to be a no-brainer for this election year. What's the difference between the change Obama and Clinton offer, and the change that Romney, McCain, and Huckabee offer?"

MERLE BLACK: Well, I think both Obama and Hillary Clinton would offer a lot of change, in terms of public policy, at least we say, the Iraq War, tax policy -- a whole series of issues that are largely liberal issues that will be the definition of change as we go forward.

Most of the changes that the Republicans talk about -- and they're not really talking about change to the same extent, I think, as the Democrats are doing, most of those changes would not be in the same sort of direction. They'd want to keep the Bush tax cuts, they'd want to keep the estate tax -- the abolition of estate tax, what Bush put in there. That'd be very different, I think, from what the Democrats would be doing.

So, the Democrats are -- or the change here for the Democrats, I think, moves generally in a much more liberal direction then the changes that the Republicans are -- would be talking about.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you want to add anything to that, Tom?

THOMAS PATTERSON: Well, I think this is going to be a really interesting dilemma, let's say that the -- if the Democrats win. And I think Merle's earlier comment, about the Democrats being favored in the fall campaign, if they win this election, as agents of change. And I think Obama, more clearly than Hillary Clinton, but I think they both would -- as Merle has suggested -- try to change public policy.

The question, I think, given what's happening with the economy, given the situation in the Middle East, is whether they're going to bring about the wholesale kind of change they're promising. I think it's going to be very difficult, I think it's going to be hard to come up with the money for spending programs, let's say, in the area of health. And I think, even if there is a drawdown in Iraq, there's the looming, and increasing problem in Afghanistan that may require some redeployment.

So, you know, I think we're going to -- we certainly have a campaign of change. Whether we're going to see wholesale change starting in January of 2009, I think that's an open question.

MERLE BLACK: You know, part of this, if I can jump in, here, part of this, I think, is the difference between campaigning and actually governing. It's one thing to campaign and take positions that the majority of your Party would be in favor of.

But it's another thing, entirely, as Tom is suggesting, to carry out policies and actually govern so that they would be satisfied with what's going on here. And in a lot of ways, the Bush administration has been kind of governing from the right, and in some ways also governing from the left in some other kind of questions, with almost disastrous political effects for the Bush administration and for any of the Republicans doing this right now.

The last time the Democrats were in office, and you know, had complete control of the House and Senate was back in, you know, 1993, 1994, with Bill Clinton. And they governed themselves out of power in two years. So, Bush, it took Bush at least six to take his party out of power.

So, the challenge is, if the Democrats will everything, here, these challenges are very, very tough to meet.

He said, "Is there any indication that John Edwards, who's from the South, would help Obama or Clinton in any of those states?" Now, we've seen Georgia, Alabama, and then the border states of Tennessee and Arkansas, voted -- South Carolina -- we've already, so we've already -- South Carolina before Edwards got out. But how do you see his vote playing?

THOMAS PATTERSON: Well, that's a good question, and I think it's, to some degree unanswerable.

It appears as if Edwards' withdrawal on the, in advance of this mega-Tuesday probably helped Obama. It did free up some people who were planning to vote for him, and if you're the challenger, and the outsider, you'd just love to have these kind of loose voters out there.

I think it's kind of, in some ways, what Bill Clinton faced when Ross Perot pulled himself out right before the Democratic Convention in 1992, and essentially almost guaranteed Clinton's election in the fall campaign.

But, you know, I think it's worked to Obama's advantage, but not overly so. I think -- and I, and he doesn't have very many delegates, so, in a sense, he can't throw his delegates to either side with great effect, and you know, we'll just see.

I was a little surprised he didn't endorse somebody when he pulled out, which seemed to me to be the optimal time to do that. But, you know, I think the Edwards Factor is really difficult to calculate at this point.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, related to that, I want to turn to Merle Black. Mary White, who's from Connecticut, asks, "If Mr. Obama goes on to win the Democratic nomination, will he be able to win down South in the general election? Isn't the South usually a conservative place?'

MERLE BLACK: Well, a couple of things, on the "Edwards Factor", I think Tom is exactly right -- it's very hard to understand or figure out where the Edwards vote went. When reporters asked some Edwards supporters here in Georgia, for example, during the last week, they did not find any consensus, one way or the other.

My suspicion is some of the white male voters for Edwards went to Obama, and probably more of the female voters went to Hillary Clinton. So, I think there may have been a kind of gender thing there.

In terms of Obama as a general election candidate in the South, that's a very interesting question, I don't know the answer. Generally, liberal Democrats don't run well across the South. John Kerry only won about 30 percent of the white Southern vote in 2004. African-American candidates who are running usually run in that general range, maybe a few points below -- it's not a huge difference, but a few points below what Kerry would have done out there.

The one factor that would be really different, though, I think, is that Obama is really mobilizing African-Americans to an unprecedented level. Last night in Georgia, African-Americans made up, I think, 52 percent of Democratic voters in Georgia. I can't remember one where African-Americans were that high.

So, there's a very large energizing effect going on with Obama as a candidate here, and I think if he were the nominee of the Party, you'd see the biggest African-American turnout in Southern states than, you know, we've ever seen. And the practical consequence of that would be that it reduces the share of the white vote that Obama would need in order to put together a majority or a plurality of the vote.

So, it could make it more competitive, on the other hand, I find it hard to believe that Obama would run well in rural, small-town parts of the South. So, he might have the other effect of mobilizing, you know, white voters in the opposite direction.

THOMAS PATTERSON: Judy, could I jump in on that?

JUDY WOODRUFF: Yeah, and I want to fold in another -- go ahead, I'll let you go ahead.

THOMAS PATTERSON: Yeah, well, looking at the primary results yesterday, and seeing how well Clinton did in the border states, which are more white than the Deep South states, you know, it looks to me like the South will hold for the Republicans.

I think where Obama's inroads are interesting in terms of thinking about where the Democrats might do better than they have the last couple of elections -- Obama has done very well in states like Iowa and Minnesota, which are now toss-up states in that particular part of the country.

And if you look at the results, starting with Iowa and what happened yesterday in Minnesota and North Dakota, another example, I think Obama runs pretty well in the Great Plains. But, it's hard for me to imagine that he's going to do a lot better than previous Democratic candidates in the South -- Southern and border states.