Tuesday, August 21, 2007

On wedges and politics

With the resignation this month of Karl Rove, we see another big change in the political scene. Rove was given credit for being the "architect" of George W. Bush's elections, and actually also served in a policy position for a while. As a political genius, of sorts, he certainly directed effective tactics leading to Bush's elections, but he may well have been not suited for helping to make policy. History will tell.

I have seen him accused of taking so-called "wedge" issues and dividing the American people with them. That is nonsense. He was not nearly the first to identify such issues and fashion a campaign around them, nor will he be the last. He just did it very effectively, much as Bill Clinton did in his elections. One can see early signs of such issues in the ongoing 2008 Presidential campaign, as well. It is what everyone tries to do....separate themselves from the opposition, on the side of a majority of voters.

It is still too early to know exactly what the wedge issues will be next year, but one can get a good idea now of what some of the candidates think they will be.

Hillary Clinton, for instance, believes that national security and related matters are going to be one. Mark the positions she has taken on the Iraq war and defense issues. She is way nearer the center than any of her current opponents, but one can see Obama trying to get over there, too. It is creating some confusion about just exactly where they stand, but clearly they are both moving to the center more than the so-called "Democratic base."

On the Republican side one can see that they clearly think that immigration is going to be a wedge issue, and I suspect they are right. Giulani, Thompson and Romney are all staking out tough stands on immigration. McCain has been left behind partly because of his support for the flawed bill that failed in June.

We see both sides mentioning the problem with corruption in the government and the distrust of all areas of government, but not as really a big issue. What we see mostly so far is a little lip service, but nobody want to offend the powerful interests that are behind it. There is too much money at stake.

This last could be the wedge issue of all wedge issues, but neither party has much credibility here. The individual candidates will have make their own cases for being trustworthy, a job that will be more difficult for those that have been part of the problem. The bright candidate will get on this bandwagon. I see a lot of disgust in the general public about politics as usual in Washington, as well as even on the local level.

What about next year? This old campaigner believes it is far too early to pick the ultimate winner, but as the campaign moves along one can get a glimmer of what might unfold. Mind you, I am not endorsing one side or the other, but here goes:

Hillary has to be the front runner and practically a shoe-in for the Democratic nomination. She clearly has the momentum, and her opposition appears to be fading. Barack Obama has added some interest to the race, and has all the Hollywood crowd backing him, but the more he talks, the more obvious it is that he is not ready for prime time.

John Edwards, the "pretty boy" of the campaign has faded, and is so far out of tune on the national security issue, that he can't be nominated. Besides, he is shallower than the dry creek beds we have here in West Texas. I just don't think he has a chance.

Bill Richardson is running for veep, and he can't bring enough electoral votes to matter. As for the rest, not a chance barring something big and unexpected happening.

Who will the veep nominee be? Up for grabs, but my view is that it will be none of the current Presidential candidates. If I were Hillary, I would pick a Southern or Midwestern governor. But that's just my thought.

The Republican race is more interesting. It is going to be interesting to see the effect of Fred Thompson joining the race officially. Right now, Rudy is in the driver's seat, even though his record on social issues is not what the Republican base likes. This has to do with the importance placed on national security primarily, but I also think that the Republicans respect him for being honest about his views and not trying to edge away from his record like Romney has. Again, the trust matter gives Rudy the edge here. We will see how that plays as the campaign progresses.

Fred Thompson is due to announce officially in a week or so. Thompson has a lot going for him....he is acceptable to the base because his record on social issues is solid from the base's viewpoint. He has been good on the national security issues as well. He has a reputation, earned or not, of not being a hard worker. And, having been in the senate, may get hit as being part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. We will have to see how he does when he gets in the arena.

My view is that Romney just can't quite make it. His switches on social issues hurt. He has money and organizational skills, but there is just something there that I can't put my finger on. I think that when Thompson gets in Romney and McCain will fade. We will see.

I have mentioned McCain a couple of times. He is a good man, and is right on the national security issue as far as Republicans are concerned. His problem is that he has taken two positions that have alienated the Republican base: immigration and the McCain-Feingold law. He is perceived as a maverick who cannot be trusted by many Republicans, and this has already doomed his candidacy.

Of the other Republicans, Huckabee has some support, but not enough to win it. He may well be a good veep candidate if Rudy should win the nomination, but I don't see him being a player for very much longer. The others are even further out of it.

I see it coming down to Thompson and Giulani. Who will win it? I have no idea at this time. There are things that would favor each of them. As the campaign progresses, perhaps I will get a better idea.

Who will win the general election in 2008? I predict that it will be another squeaker, barring anything unforeseen. Positions taken by the candidates on both sides during the nominating campaigns have to be well thought out, or they will come back to haunt them in the general. It's going to be interesting.