Posted by Jed Lewison on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 4:39 PM Pacific

Why hasn't Barack Obama won yet?

I keep on hearing and reading pundits puzzle over why Barack Obama hasn't put this race away already. I mean, it's already July, dammit! Shouldn't he be getting sworn next month or something?

To be fair, it's not as ridiculous question to ask in 2008 as it would be in any other year. I mean, in 2000 or 2004 if you told me at the end of July that Barack Obama had consistently led John McCain in every single national poll for the past two months, I'd have been thrilled.

But in 2008, an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose Bush's policies and want to take the country in a new direction. Substantively, John McCain shares George Bush's policy vision -- so by all rights, he should be getting walloped by Barack Obama at this point.

But even though McCain is trailing, he's not getting thoroughly crushed. Why not?

Well, most pundits seem to answer the question by focusing on Barack Obama. Certainly, he's part a key part of the equation, but almost universally, they make the mistake of underestimating John McCain's political strengths.

Obviously, much of what I post here is critical of McCain, so it might be strange to hear me say some things that will sound approving. Let me be clear though: I'm talking about voter's perceptions of McCain, not the reality of McCain's record.

In part because of that reality, there's a real temptation to write him off as the Bob Dole of 2008. But that is not a good comparison, at least as far as perceptions go -- Bob Dole never had a reputation (earned or unearned) as a maverick, and Bob Dole was never as popular as John McCain was at his peak.

John McCain clearly no longer retains the full strength of his maverick brand developed in 2000. But neither has he eroded it entirely.

Sure, substantively McCain is a down-the-line carbon copy of of Bush, but more independent voters think he will change the country's direction than think he will follow Bush's policies.

That is absolutely huge for McCain, especially in the electoral environment of 2008, which may be the biggest "change" election in modern history. (Most polls indicate historic or near-historic right track/wrong track numbers, and Bush is the least popular president in our nation's history.)

I keep on repeating this simple formula: Bush = McCain = Status Quo.

It's simplistic, but it's true.

And the fact is that McCain has been able to defend himself from that equation among a plurality of independents, and that is the only thing that is allowing him to stay close to Barack Obama.

So while most of the punditry seems to focus on what is wrong with Obama, they should also be spending time trying to understand what is right with McCain.

Likewise, while there are obviously some things that Barack Obama should do to strengthen his own profile, he needs to spend even more time hammering home the linkage between Bush and McCain.

Bush's speech before the RNC on September 1 should be a key inflection point for crystallizing that message, but the foundation must be established in August. The key issues that I'd focus on: Social Security, health care, and a comprehensive energy policy.

This is not to say that attacks on McCain's confusion, mix-ups, etc. are unproductive. At a minimum, they keep McCain off balance, and almost certainly are inflicting some damage.

But the real challenge is cementing the Bush-McCain association in the perception of voters. If and when that happens, McCain will have lost any hope of becoming president.

On the other hand, if a plurality of independent voters continue to see him as an agent of change, then we could be in real trouble.