There have been a couple of good diaries lately on the so-called Limbaugh Effect on the most recent set of Democratic primaries. I would particularly recommend John K. Wilson's work. I find his data fairly compelling, and it's evident to me that tactical GOP crossover votes have cost Obama somewhere between 2-5% in his margins against Hillary in the last couple of primaries.
Now, it would be one thing if Republicans were crossing over to Hillary of their own volition. It certainly isn't illegal, and I don't even know that you can call it unethical, given that it's something we've chosen to do too. The possibility for this sort of gamesmanship is yet another reason to reform the primary process. At the same time, Obama has benefited on balance from open primaries.
Of course, the independents and Republicans voting for Obama have been people that authentically like him, and might at least consider voting for him in November. Hillary's Republican votes, on the other hand, appear to be principally from people who would never consider voting for her in the general election. That is how, as Wilson points out, 6% of Hillary's voters in Mississippi said they'd be dissatisfied if she won the nomination, and the majority of them had a favorable opinion of John McCain.
But what if, rather than merely benefiting from the circumstance of the Limbaugh Effect, the Clinton campaign is actively cultivating it?. I think you can make a strong case that this is exactly what is happening.
Consider the following sequence of events:
The world wakes up on Leap Day -- the Friday before the Texas and Ohio primaries -- and Barack Obama appears poised to wrap up the Democratic nomination. He has pulled into a thin lead in the Texas polls, and is closing quickly in Ohio.
That day, Rush Limbaugh appears on Bill O'Reilly's show, and urges Republicans in Texas and Ohio to vote for Hillary:
"I want Hillary to stay in this...this is too good a soap opera,"
Remember that quote.
On Saturday, Hillary blankets Texas with her 3AM commercial, the subject of which is a favorite Republican talking point -- national security.
On Sunday, Hillary appears on 60 Minutes, and gives a Rorschach Blot answer about Obama's religious heritage -- casting just enough doubt, but not making any sort of comment that she might have to run away from later.
On Monday, Hillary "endorses" John McCain, suggesting that his experience makes him a more capable Commander-in-Chief than Barack Obama.
On Tuesday morning, the day of the primary, Bill Clinton appears on Rush Limbaugh's show, with Mark Davis guest hosting for Rush. And what does Bill say? Not really all that much; you can listen to the audio for yourself right here. Mostly, it's just a remarkably softball interview all the way around, with Clinton talking mostly about process, and very little about the issues that are supposed to be Hillary's bread-and-butter. He doesn't mention George W. Bush, for instance, nor does he mention health care. But he does say this:
I think that also Texas don't [sic] like being told that they got to get in line, that this race should be over. I think most Americans want it to go on.
Notice an echo there?
Meanwhile, in the background, there is all sort of talk coming from the Clinton camp about Florida and Michigan and superdelegates and taking the campaign to the convention: exactly the sort of chaos that a meddling Republican might seek.
- * - * -
Now, the way that I tend to look at campaign strategy is in terms of return on investment. You have a finite about of time, money, political capital: how can those best be employed to sway the most votes? Who is most easily persuaded?
Among self-identified Democrats, most of them have chosen sides. They've been saturated with campaign coverage for months; support has hardened and is more difficult to peel away than it used to be. And although this effect may be overstated, a significant number of them may line up with their respective demographic camps.
Looking at this landscape, one might very well decide that the highest return on investment comes from trying to persuade Republican voters to vote in the open primaries in Texas, Ohio, and Mississippi.
Here's why that investment looks so promising: you don't have to persuade Republicans that you should be their first choice. That is a much lower bar to clear. In fact, you don't even have to persuade them that you should be their second choice. You just have to persuade them that their first choice (John McCain) will benefit if the nomination process is prolonged, and this is worth their getting off their asses and going to the polling station.
Of course, there are a couple of things that can help with this. You don't want to appear completely unacceptable to these Dittoheads, since their vote might wind up making you the President on 'accident'. So you tip your hat to John McCain, and trump up the national security card; assuring them, in essence, that while they might not like Hillarycare and carbon permits, and least the country won't get nuked. Meanwhile, you cast doubt on your opponent, suggesting that he would be an unacceptable alternative. You're telling these voters, who would never cast a ballot for Barack Obama anyway, that they're getting two chances to stop him: you can stop him now, or your buddy John McCain can stop him later.
- * - * -
I believe the Clintons' strange actions over the past ten days or so are much easier to understand if viewed through this lens. The Clinton campaign has been dogwhistling to Dittoheads. And the thing is, this is exactly the sort of dogwhistle that progressives aren't likely to hear, since we tend to tune out conservative media to the point of being phobic about it.
John Ridley just said on Morning Joe, referring to Geraldine Ferraro: "Can you believe this is the Democratic Party?. Perhaps Ferraro's comments are part of this process too. Her talking points on political correctness are exactly the sort of specious arguments that tend to appeal to the Dittohead crowd; and guess where she went to defend her comments?
But no, John -- I can't believe this is the Democratic Party. And that's because the Clintons aren't talking to Democrats right now.