Friday, July 25, 2008

Lessons from the Overseas Trip

Let's give this until at least the middle of next week before we conclude that Obama hasn't gotten some kind of bounce from his trip abroad; some of the polls that came in after the deadline today were pretty good for him. But one speculative conclusion might be as follows: placing more emphasis on foreign policy may not be a winner for Barack Obama -- even if he closes the gap with McCain on the issue.

We might think of it like this. Suppose that, in the status quo, 75 percent of voters base their vote on domestic policy, and those voters go to Obama 60:40. The remaining 25 percent base their votes on foreign policy, and they vote for McCain 70:30. Under this scenario, Obama would win the election by five points:

[Status Quo]     % Voting  Obama    McCain
Foreign Policy 25 30 70
Domestic Policy 75 60 40
============================================
Total 100 52.5 47.5
Now suppose this: Obama emphasizes foreign policy. As a result, he cuts his deficit with McCain on that issue from 70-30 to 65-35. But he also increases the percentage of the public that base their decision on foreign policy from 25 percent to 35 percent. (Indeed, according to a new poll from the Pew Research Center, attention to Iraq and Afghanistan has increased by about that margin within the past week). The electorate now looks as follows:
[FP Emphasis]    % Voting  Obama    McCain
Foreign Policy 35 35 65
Domestic Policy 65 60 40
============================================
Total 100 51.25 48.75
Now, instead of leading by five points, Obama leads by just two-and-a-half -- even though the strategy succeeded in improving perceptions about his ability to handle foreign policy.

What you're hoping for in the long-run, of course, is something like this:
[Long-Term?]     % Voting  Obama    McCain
Foreign Policy 25 35 65
Domestic Policy 75 60 40
============================================
Total 100 53.75 46.25
That is, in the long-run, the public's emphasis shifts back to domestic policy, which is where Obama wants it. But among those voters who do want to vote on foreign policy, he has assuaged some concerns and made some permanent gains. This results in him leading by 7.5 points rather than five.

Granted, this has been a rather arbitrary exercise. But it wouldn't surprise me if something like this is going on. You're still giving McCain a sort of home-court advantage by fighting every day over foreign policy, even if you're winning some of the skirmishes.

The other substantive takeaway is that it may be a mistake for Obama to pick a Vice President who shifts the emphasis to foreign policy. So those of you who had Mssrs. Biden, Clark, Reed, Hagel, or Nunn in the Democratic Veepstakes, it may be time for a short.

65 comments

nick said...

Does the VP really shift the public attention so dramatically, though, that we get a situation like your second chart? It seems to me that, based on your previous analysis of the impact the VP makes, a Biden, Hagel, etc. pick won't really shift the debate all that much, but will instead shore up Obama's numbers *should the debate swing towards such issues*.

In other words, the VP may just be for insurance in case the public's priorities for voting begin to migrate, rather than presenting an overall general election focus.

Anonymous said...

morning, Nate.

nice post to start the TGIF off.

I tend to agree that it seems that if Obama acknowledges his security issues he seems to be playing into a McCain issues trap.

However, if Obama pulls a rabbit out of his hat on Foreign affairs & military [like Powell for VP - or an advance agreement that Powell would serve in his cabinet] then he would trump any possible McCain move on what many believe is his strongest issue.

But the contrarian take on this might be expressed this morning by Joe Klein @ TIME "McCain's Foreign Policy Frustration ".

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1826064,00.html

His take is that Obama is intentionally needling McCain on the "Surge worked" issue. The end game ? maybe get under John's skin & get him to lose it. Show his temper & change the political landscape.

In other words, pretend to play into McCain's trap to change the political landscape.

Bold & brilliant IF it works !!!

Justin said...

Nate, I think Obama will get a bump, eventually, from the overseas trip. It takes the general American public quite awhile before they catch onto world events...look at how the Iraq war started. Eventually Americans wake up to political commentary, just not as quick as those who are politically inclined.

lilnev said...

I think the trip will give a bit of a short-term bump. Because Americans want to be proud of their country, they want to be proud of their president, they want their president to be liked and respected as their proxy on the world stage.

But I'm sure the trip wasn't done for short-term reasons. It was done to reduce the role of foreign policy in the campaign. (That's why it's in July, not October). Now it's done, he can come back and focus on the economy, and that little doubt that some people have ("Yes, but can he hold his own with other world leaders?"), consciously or unconsciously, will be assuaged. I think a lot of people have a sort of threshold test for foreign policy -- as long as he passes that threshold, they can go back to making their decision on domestic grounds.

david h said...

This is a really insightful post. Let me add one possible dynamic: The timing of the trip leaves Obama plenty of time to refocus the debate on domestic policy. I'm sure that's in the playbook. But in debates with McCain, foreign policy stuff will come up, so it's important that he doesn't look like a fish out of water when they do. And after this trip, he'll be able to deflect these questions well by saying that as president, he would restore our alliances yadda yadda. And that will sound plausible and impressive, given our memories of him in front of 200,000 adoring Berliners.

If he can convince the skeptic that he'll be "maybe OK" on foreign policy, that skeptic will probably vote primarily on some other issue, and that's good for Obama.

Honestly, I think there are few swing voters that use foreign policy as the tiebraker for choosing a president. The only large groups in the US are Hispanic economic immigrants, Cuban immigrants, Zionists and anti-war moderates. The "boot up the terrorists' ass" Americans are also many, but overwhelmingly not swing voters.

I think that Obama has done well to reassure the undecided groups who will decide their vote based on foreign policy.

Anonymous said...

So if we short Biden, Reed, & others, who do we long? Who helps Obama on economic issues? Bayh, I guess, or Sebelius?

At first glance the D field looks pretty weak on economics, actually...

Ben V-L said...

Nate, it's still July. Obama was wise to get the trip in NOW, so that his foreign policy credentials are established, but leaving him plenty of time to focus the election on the economy. If he picks, say, Clark as veep and makes a trip abroad in Sept/Oct, then I would share your concern. At the moment, it looks to me more like he's anticipated your point and working actively to solve the problem.

Andy said...

The issue here is one of defense - McCain might have decided to attack Obama with a "he's so inexperienced, if he ever tried to get up on the world stage he'd mess it all up via poor internationl diplomacy" line. So now Obama is innocculated againat that. That's the baseline in terms of benefits - any bounce is a bonus, but this far out 'bounces' are worth less than the innocculation effect.

stevie314159 said...

Obama doesn't really need a bump now from this trip.

What this trip needed to do was get Obama over the "CINC threshold." It probbaly did that, and it's only still July.

Now he can focus on domestic issues almost entirely and answer any foreign policy questions with "been there, done this and that."

It also probably frees him up to select a more economic oriented VP.

Remember, Obama doesn't have to beat McCain on the CINC issue, just reach a threshold where the voter can ignore the issue and move onto domestic ones.

Bob in MN said...

Looks as if at least some smart folks stay up late at night...

I agree with the foregoing posters. I think the trip also proved a number of things:

1. Foreign leaders take Obama seriously, and he commands attention and respect.

2. Foreign populations are as enraptured of him as many here.

3. The preceding two points generate the notion that he will be able to heal the ruptures and strains in foreign relations that Bush has caused.

4. His foreign policy ideas have been closely matched by developments, giving credence to his thinking.

5. The respect he engendered will allow him more easily to stay above the fray and to assume the mantle of dignified leader, making McCain evermore petty and mean-spirited.

All of which means, I think, that what Obama really needs to do now is to pick a street-fighter vice president - the person who can break out the brass knuckles and hit below the belt when necessary. Someone who is quick on his/her feet, and is nearly as verbally adept as Obama, himself. Hillary comes to mind. Maybe the Gov. of Montana (his name escapes me at the moment). Biden, I think, should be in the mix. But certainly not Mr. Nice Guy Bayh and probably not Gov. Sibelius (who strikes me as a female Obama in her demeanor and carriage).

Nick Valvo said...

Point taken, Nate. The formal element of shifting the debate to foreign policy has as much impact as anything you can actually say, messaging-wise.

But doesn't something like the Maliki comments, which largely undermine McCain's position (to many or most voters, at any rate) change this calculus? In other words, is it possible for the messaging to be so corrosive for your opponent that you can change those perceptions large scale? How would we be able to tell?

p smith said...

It never fails to amaze me how people see what they want to see from polls. Yes, the Quinnipiac polls show Obama's lead shortening but he is stily way ahead of where Kerry was. Also, the poll was taken from July 14-22 so doesn't fully record the effects of Obama's trip overseas.

Much has also been made of the Rasmussen poll in Ohio which showed McCain up by 10. Good news for McCain indeed but it is a single poll with survey work done on July 21. Survey work done after July 21 seems to show an Obama recovery eg Obama is up in Colorado per Rasmussen by 7 (3 with leaners), up in Florida by 1 (2 with leaners), up in NH by 6 (4 with leaners), up in Pennsylvania by 5 (6 with leaners.

The lesson here is clear. Unless you're a moron, don't try to extrapolate on the basis of single polls. Look at the trends and then make a judgment.

My prediction (I'm happy to be wrong, I don't seek to state my views as facts) is that the trackers are going to show a widening of Obama's lead. Rasmussen has already picked up a small surge with Obama now leading by 4 (3 with leaners) from a tie just days ago. Gallup has Obama's lead at 2 but today his worst night of polling will roll out of the figures and I expect it to increase. Let's see.

A post script. All of this week's news will be history in short time. VP choices and the conventions will be the next focus. So far we've just had the hors d'oeuvres. Enjoy

Alex S. said...

Very good post!

The whole trip was part of a battle on foreign policy experience and judgement. McCain challenged Obama to go to Iraq and he did it. The trip created so many nice pictures that the whole issue of military/foreign policy credentials is off the table.
But the McCain campaign was wise enough to have shifted the focus more on the economy. It certainly creates the picture that Obama is somewhere out there holding nice speeches while Americans can´t fill their tanks - that´s what matters in Ohio, Michigan or Pennsylvania. In addition the McCain campaign can now also spread their "He´s not one of us"-message that should work in socially conservative states, too.

So this election will be about the economy - it´s not the war, not social issues, not even health care. That´s the issue McCain CANNOT affort to concede to Obama (although he already did before, when he said that he doesn´t know much about the economy). And additionally, that´s the issue where democrats have a generic advantage.
A gas-tax holiday is a short-term solution (and holiday season will soon be over)... it will not matter in November except you expand the gas-tax holiday over the next 10 years, until off-shore drilling comes into effect. Off-shore drilling is the supposed long-term plan and seems to have an effect in the polls right now. In addition, there is