tfdl

Let’s begin here and now and then work our way to Election Day in '06. In all likelihood the three major issues that are driving the political conversation today will still be in play during the ’08 election cycle as well – Iraq, immigration and gasoline prices (although that may morph into a larger issue of overall inflation in a year or so from now). There will be another one, but we will get to that in a bit. And the “culture of corruption” is not so much an issue as it is powerful background chatter that might move sufficient moderates and independents to either sit out the election, or vote democratic.

It is unlikely that the Democrats will take both houses of Congress in November. Possible, but given the power of incumbency, it will be difficult to make sufficient headway in the Senate. The House, however, is very much in play. If the Democrats take both houses, then impeachment becomes a possibility, but that is also a long shot. They saw the backlash from the public when Clinton was impeached, and they may just marginalize Bush until he retires to Texas.

If they regain control of the House, the Democrats, however, will begin to investigate the many brewing scandals that are buzzing about the beltway. This will have serious implications for the ’08 election because it will probably take every major Republican in Congress (except perhaps McCain) out of contention for the party’s presidential nomination. Frist has proven himslef to be a weak leader beholden to "Big Medicine" and Pharma. None of the other major players - like George Allen and such - will have sufficient time to distance themselves from Bush and Cheney's failed policies, including the real stickler for Conservatives - the mushrooming deficit. Besides Mr. Allen will have a lot of 'splainin' to do about the Confederate flag in his office. And McCain will be saddled with his newfound affection for Bob Jones University and Jerry Falwell, which will make it difficult for him to hold on to moderates. Finally, Rudy is a possible candidate, but he is wrong on too many social issues to get past the wingnuts in Iowa.

Without any congressional leaders (or Rudy) in the mix, the Republican Party will stick to its usual winning formula and nominate a governor. Given how much luster will be scrubbed from the Bush name, and the fallout from the Terry Schiavo mess, Jeb will be out of contention. So, through attrition, the last one standing will probably be Romney from Massachusetts. Overall he would be a good choice – good name recognition in the party, won a governorship in a traditionally liberal state and so forth. He is also a Mormon, and that will be a deal-breaker for fundamentalist evangelicals. If he is nominated, they have indicated that they will sit it out. But with slim pickings, that is most likely who the party will choose. If he is smart (and he is), he will choose as his running mate a very conservative black candidate from the mid-Atlantic region. He will have lost the evangelical anyway, so why not show appeal to black moderates and more liberal leaning Republicans?

On the Democratic side for the next year we will hear all Hillary all the time. She will run a masterful campaign because she is very smart, and a much better campaigner than anyone thought she would be. She will do everything she can, but she will lose. Hillary will be pummeled by her record in the Senate, just as Kerry was. The Senate is a body that is dedicated to compromise. Indeed, that is how the founders designed it. It is the saucer, as Washington described it, that cools the hot rhetoric that spills over from the House.

Additionally, Hillary is on the wrong side of issues that charge the progressive base of her party. Her continued hard line on Iraq is going to be a nagging problem. She may be vulnerable on immigration, as well as that other sticky issue – the environment. Hillary will run into the same problem that many of her counterparts in the Republican Party run into – getting enough early and sustained support from the base. Her considerable war chest will be an obvious asset, but in the end she will be too polarizing, and too lacking in liberal base support.

And so this brings us to the summer of “07. I predict that there will be an ever-increasing effort to draft Al Gore to run again. His poll numbers are quite low right now – even lower than Bush’s current numbers. However, Gore has also been out of the limelight for several years now. An Inconvenient Truth, his film about global warming and climate change is due to be released this month, and I suspect that this will be his reentry onto the national scene. It has gotten very positive early reviews, and it may serve to shift the general perception of the electorate that he is a stiff and somewhat wooden figure.

In addition Gore will be a difficult character for the opposition to “swift boat”. The blogosphere is too quick now to do the fact checking and hold journalists to a more rigorous standard. That trend will continue. The American people will learn that, in fact, Gore was a vital player in establishing the Internet, that he did serve in Vietnam (although briefly), that he does know the capitals of most countries and can pronounce leaders’ names. Gore has a compelling story to tell about the years since the campaign – how he supported Bush right after 9-11, but did not support the invasion of Iraq, and his unflagging commitment to the environment. His foreign affairs experience is well known and significant.

In terms of a war chest, I thnk that many of the wealthy liberals who jettisoned him as "unelectable" last time - especially liberal kingmakers in Los Angeles, Silicon Valley, the Bay Area and Seattle - may see things in a different light a year from now. He will need a lot of "new money" from the west coast before he will get the old money from the east coast to flow his way. But flow it will.

His first major test as a candidate will be the same one in which he came up short in the 2000 campaign – selecting a running mate. This time, though, he will not be saddled with Clinton’s indiscretions, and so will not feel forced to pick someone as squeaky clean as Lieberman. And his track record in terms of Israel is certainly good enough that he need not fear losing the east coast Jewish vote.

He could choose a proven veteran like Governor Rendell from Pennsylvania. He will be in the middle of his second term by then, since it is unlikely that Lynn Swann (formerly of the Pittsburgh Steelers) will defeat him this November. A solid choice - proven campaigner, well financed, former mayor, and it would shore up support in a key state. But I don't think he will.

And since I am already out on quite a limb, why not take another step? I predict that Gore will choose a woman as a vice-presidential candidate. He might choose someone like Gov. Kathleen Sebelius from Kansas. She is on a roll, and the mid-west i sno longer a red state lock. The point here is that he will not need to make a defensive choice, and will probably make a bold one instead. If the Clintons eventually come out firmly supporting the ticket, then he will have strong backing from black leaders. Finally, thanks to the incredibly ham-handed way the Republicans have handled the immigration issue, the hispanic vote is now firmly back in the Democratic fold for at least another generation.

So there you have it. The ’08 campaign between Gore & Sebelius or Rendell, and Romney and whoever. Gore wins by a mudslide, and the troops begin to come home in late January.

Edd Conboy
Fellow, The Whitman Institute
San Francisco, CA
11 May 2006