October 2008
“It’s the economy, stupid.”
That was the mantra of the Democrats in 1992, when Bill Clinton won his first term in office. Today economic issues may once again be lifting a Democrat in the polls. But Democrats really have another secret weapon hidden in an obvious spot: the popularity of Sarah Palin.
November 2004
President George W. Bush has received an unprecedented amount of criticism, even from military people, fiscal conservatives and other Republican-leaning constituencies. If the election had been held on the basis of these evaluations, it would not have been even close. Instead, Bush won by a comfortable margin. How’d that happen?
October 2004
Dear Sen. Kerry,
You must have noticed problems with your campaign during the past month or two since you have hired new strategists, and you have become more aggressive on the stump. Attacks on Bush will help, and they show a vigor that is vital for the electorate to see, but they need to be matched with better use of your own strengths—from your resume to your current policy plans.
George W. Bush has done an excellent if not-so-admirable job of defining you in the eyes of much of the electorate. Let’s put aside the shock about how you could have let that happen—there’s no time for that no. For the few weeks that remain before Election Day, I propose a campaign to educate the electorate about John Kerry. Clearly you’ve got the substance, but you need a story—to energize supporters and pull swing voters.
September 2004
The word on the street is that the Republican convention was one for the moderates. Florida Gov. Jeb Bush says calmly: That’s simply what the Republican Party is.
But if that were the whole story, where were Colin Powell, James Baker and other luminaries of moderation in the party?
Before we Americans get too excited about what we saw about President George W. Bush as presented in New York, we ought to get clear not only on what we’ve seen, but also about what we have not seen.
November 2000
“The Personal is Political” was a slogan that emerged from the cultural changes of the 1960s. It summarized the demand to take the realms of private life seriously as matters of political concern. In place of the traditional separation of public and private, the blurring of these spheres of life was at the root of many of the liberal and liberating movements of that era. The phrase first emerged from women’s liberation. While the old school maintained that the private sphere of women’s lives—including choices about work, marriage and children—was not even grist for public talk, the new consciousness found political consequences shot through all these decisions.
October 2000
Watching the vice-presidential debates brought, the embarrassing suggestion that maybe Richard Cheney and Joseph Lieberman have more presidential timber than the tops of their tickets. Maybe this election has kangaroo pairs, as an old saying goes, with the back legs stronger than the front.
Most observers were surprised when the two men around the table with Bernard Shaw acted so civil and even friendly with each other. They broke the pattern of vice-presidential contenders venting the campaign’s aggressions.
Cheney and Lieberman talked out the issues, framed their disagreements succinctly, and even seemed to enjoy each other. Central casting could not have picked better characters than Cheney as a dad and Lieberman as a kindly uncle.
George W. Bush and Al Gore have displayed very little of these dignities in their campaigning, especially in the first debate.
January 1993
It was a quirky election season. Three candidates jockied in a race designed for two.
The incumbent was a Republican, representing the moderate wing of his party. He had tried gamely to continue the legacy of his more charismatic predecessor, but he was generating more jokes than admiration. His chief rival was a Democrat from the South, a sitting governor with no experience in Washington, but with big promises to bring change and reform. While the message appealed, the messenger tended to bore, because his very academic abilities were long on information but short on dramatic style.
The third candidate did have charisma. He was an energetic outsider, a well-known character of almost folk dimensions and appeal, who excited the American people more than either of the other two, but who scared many because of his extreme proposals and his erratic personality.
The winner, of course, was Woodrow Wilson. In a close race, he defeated Republican President William Howard Taft and third-party candidate Theodore Roosevelt. The year was 1912, but the dynamics of the race and the personalities could well fit our own recent quirky season of presidential campaigning.
History never does repeat itself, but it can help explain puzzles of the present and even suggest what to expect in the future.
February 1992
Dear Mr. Clinton,
Those of us who live beyond the grave do not, unfortunately, get very full news accounts. I just heard about your tabloid troubles—when I last heard, you and your fellow Democrats were accused of being colorless! The problem as I see it is not that you might have had that scandal with Gennifer Flowers, but that you never decided how to handle it. I should know: A scandal put its shadow on my campaign in 1884. It blew over, and I went on to win the election. So, from my experience, I may have a lesson or two for you.
If you are interested in the rest of this sage political advice, click here!
August 1991
A modest proposal: Imagine a presidential campaign whose funds went not to media blitzes promoting issueless images, but directly to programs dealing with social and environmental problems. Imagine campaigns as patriotic crusades. Instead of spending and shouting to install candidates we hope will act on their promises, turn the campaigns into the actions. Let’s have politicians really walk the walk, not just talk the talk.
Continue readingSeptember 1989
Democrats are a somber lot these days, and with good reason. They have little chance of breaking the Republican grip on national politics.
The thriving economy of the 1980s and the apparent success of their policy of peace through strength has given Republicans good reason to cheer. Most important, the GOP has translated its success into enduring popularity by mastering the art of politics as celebration.
Pub Classroom 