| So much of my writing, as well as other political commentary these days, is focused on the ever-fascinating Presidential race (I've thought of two topics for posts on it already today, but am trying to resist because I know pretty much all the Presidential campaign posts quickly go into the flame war file), but I want to step back and take a broader look at the opportunities in front of us in this year's election. The Presidential race has its own set of challenges, of course, between the media's love affair with McCain, the public's general favorabilities toward him, and the nasty unending Democratic fight. But if you look at the broader political landscape, I think we have a major opportunity for a sea-change election.
I am not the first to suggest that, of course- just a couple of weeks ago, the Campaign for America's Future released a report called "Progressives Rising 2008: A Sea-Change Election." It's fun reading, and I highly recommend it.
I want to lay out some of my own thoughts on this as well. It's a period where Bush and McCain are trying to sell the public on how successful the war effort has been, but events on the ground are destroying their credibility again: where the economy is teetering on the edge of a serious meltdown, but even if that doesn't happen, we'll still be stuck in a recession getting ever deeper as the election approaches; and where race, immigration, gender and identity issues will be on the forefront of everyone's mind. With all that going on, it's going to be a very intense and emotional election.
Here's why I think things favor us so strongly in terms of the big picture. |
| First, when you look at public opinion polling over the last couple of decades, I am struck with how different it is right now in comparison to the recent past. While Paul Rosenberg is right that there are some striking historical similarities on some issues such as spending on social programs, there have been some big changes in the last three years.
In 2004, while agreeing with Democrats on some issues, Republicans fought us to a draw on enough issues that the fear message Bush was pushing successfully overcame their reluctance to go along with Bush on some issues. But by 2006, Democrats had the clear edge on almost everything; on a lot of big issues like health care and the war in Iraq, a very strong edge. We were only behind Bush on certain kinds of security issues, depending on how you phrased the question, and on same-sex marriage equality. But in addition, conservatism itself as a philosophy was starting to wane in the minds of voters. The word conservative itself went from 18 points positive to 3 points negative in recent years.
On perhaps the most fundamental question of all, community vs. individualism, voters choose community. In a late 2006 Democracy Corps/Campaign for America's Future poll, voters choose "America should promote the principle of strong community and taking responsibility, because we are all in this together" by 10 points over "America should encourage individualism, personal responsibility and self-reliance." It's hard to set much more of a succinct summary of the progressive philosophy versus the conservative one.
These changes are not just weariness with Bush, although I believe that is part of it. There was a clear movement in 2005, when the combination of the Social Security privatization campaign that Bush launched, the Terri Schiavo overreach, weariness with the war in Iraq, and the Katrina disaster laying bare the lack of concern for the problems of America's poor all combined to show the American people how bankrupt conservatism had become. That was when Bush's numbers went permanently into the lower 30s, when the numbers supporting a Democratic Congress shot up, and when margins on key issues began to move dramatically in a progressive direction. When you add on top of that, the economic repercussions of Bush's no-oversight regulatory state starting to hit home with a vengeance, voters have really began to understand how serious the defects of conservatism are.
Second, the progressive movement is finally beginning to emerge from its 30-year plus period of relative slumber. New organizations have started to emerge that are multi-issue rather than single issue, and that have a broader, more comprehensive view of progressivism than the more narrow interest group politics of the past. Progressive donors and foundations are beginning to think long-term and strategically, rather than just short-term and narrowly about tactics or single issues. The labor movement, even though they spend too much time fighting each other, are showing some life and energy about organizing that I haven't seen in my lifetime. Young people are getting engaged again in the political fray, voting and volunteering at levels one dreamed of just a few years ago- a trend that was helped but did not get started by Barack Obama's campaign.
Perhaps most importantly of all, the changes in media and technology have allowed a new kind of activist to get engaged in an easy, efficient, relatively low-cost, and powerful way. MoveOn.org, blogs and other internet-based structures have created tools for millions of people who have never been very active in politics before to volunteer, give money, meet their neighbors in house parties, and contact their elected officials. Progressive bloggers have created a democratic, interactive medium where anyone with a computer can be involved.
ActBlue has created political fundraising tools that, as of this writing, had allowed lots of people to give over $42 million to candidates, a grassroots spigot of small-dollar contributions that has allowed progressive candidates a way to compete with corporate fundraising.
The third factor is the utter intellectual and political bankruptcy of modern American conservatism. They have built a great political machine, and have invested an extraordinary amount of money in their policy infrastructure, but for all their thunder and pomposity, they don't have a lot to show for their efforts. The Bush administration has been a disaster, leaving an economy in shambles and foreign policy in crisis. The old Reaganite political coalition of Christian conservatives, economic conservatives, and foreign policy neo-conservatives came apart at the seams in a dispirited 2008 primary that ended up with a candidate nobody in the conservative coalition really liked very well. The Bush thematic agenda of the "ownership society" had disappeared from Republican rhetoric years ago. The centerpiece policy proposal of Bush's second term, Social Security privatization, had gone down in flames long before the Republicans lost control of Congress.
The only big arguments the conservatives are left with are (a) their old standby- fear. I can, with complete confidence as I write this in March 2008, that John McCain will use the fear argument every single day of the general election campaign in 2008; and (b) the argument that government doesn't work, which ironically their own failures are the most powerful evidence for. In fact, after the Katrina disaster, conservatives ever since have been saying that what it proves is that government is incompetent, cynically using their own failure to argue their philosophical point. When your strongest argument is your own incompetence, you don't have a very strong hand.
A fourth factor is the much commented-on excitement and enthusiasm on our side vs. the completely dulled out lack of enthusiasm on theirs. Passion matters in politics, a whole lot more than the pundits and consultants obsessed with swing voters will tell you. An Obama candidacy will drive black and youth turnout through the rafters and most likely Democratic turnout in general. McCain and conservatives still don't like each other very much, no matter what they say for the press corps, and I expect their turnout to be flat compared to 2004 - it's hard to do so their 72-hour program without volunteers.
Fifth, the number of competitive races and states is gigantic compared to 2004. Even the DCCC and DSCC, which normally have very slim lists of targeted districts, are projecting huge numbers of targets. And at least five states, possibly more, not on Kerry's battleground list, are actively being discussed as targeted states for Obama.
Finally, there is the whole past vs. the future dynamic. There is a trend I am increasingly noticing in focus groups where people perceive that Democrats are aligned with the future and Republicans with the past. McCain's age and irritability, Republican talking points which sound exactly the same as they have for a million years regardless of circumstances, Obama's age and multicultural background, the diversity of the Democratic Presidential field, the excitement of young people about Obama, even voters' growing perception of the link between internet/new media organizing and Democrats - all of it is adding up to a sense in voters that we are the future, and Republicans are the past. The future may feel a little scary, the past may feel more comfortable in some ways, but when they think about it, voters know the future is a better way to vote that the past.
Now, the Presidential dynamics could still screw everything up, and drive the whole Democratic ticket down. My gut, though, is that the overall trends will weigh McCain down far more than McCain's advantages will allow him to change those trends. Fundamental dynamics usually overcome the specific personal characteristics of the candidates. |
