Random thought about what an '08 candidate might do to win

[WilliamPitt]

First off is the premise put forth in the last essay I wrote:

The larger picture developing here was captured by, of all publications, the London Daily Mirror over the weekend. "Americans are the planet's biggest flag wavers," wrote veteran Mirror correspondent Dermot Purgavie. "They are reared on the conceit that theirs is the world's best and most enviable country, born only the day before yesterday but a model society with freedom, opportunity and prosperity not found, they think, in older cultures. They rejoice that 'We are No.1,' and in many ways they are. But events have revealed a creeping mildew of pain and privation, graft and injustice and much incompetence lurking beneath the glow of star-spangled superiority."

"America's sense of itself - its pride in its power and authority, its faith in its institutions and its belief in its leaders - has been profoundly damaged," continued Purgavie. "And now the talking heads in Washington predict dramatic political change and the death of the Republicans' hope of becoming the permanent government." This sentiment was echoed in a Washington Post article from Monday by Charles Babington and Chris Cillizza, who wrote, "Republican politicians in multiple states have recently decided not to run for Senate next year, stirring anxiety among Washington operatives about the effectiveness of the party's recruiting efforts and whether this signals a broader decline in GOP congressional prospects."

An epic electoral reversal for the GOP in 2006 may be in the offing, but there is a larger game afoot. We are sliding back into the kind of ideological malaise endured during the late 1970s. The end days of the Carter administration saw skyrocketing gas prices, economic stagnation, the humiliating hostage crisis in Iran, the shock and disgust derived from the crimes of Watergate and the resignation of a sitting President, and let's not forget the lingering sting of a lost war in Vietnam. All of that balled together left the country at a loss. The belief that we were special took a furious beating, and only the superlative shyster salesmanship of Ronald Reagan was able to restore faith in the desiccated mythology.

Americans, by and large, have a fundamental need to feel like they are part of something great, above the fray and beyond the rest of the world. They are fed American exceptionalism with mother's milk, and will fight like rabid wolverines to avoid being forced to believe otherwise. Anyone mystified by the public support Bush has enjoyed until very recently, despite the endless litany of disasters that have befallen us, can look to this bone-deep need as the main reason for that support. It isn't just about 9/11. Americans need to feel good about America in the same way fish need water. Americans need to believe, and will thrash around like boated marlin if that belief is undercut. That belief serves as a kind of ideological Prozac, shoving bad thoughts to the background.

Iraq. Afghanistan. The continued freedom enjoyed by Osama bin Laden. Katrina. Abu Ghraib. Frist and insider stock trading. DeLay and a handful of indictments. Rove and Libby staring down the barrel of more indictments. Bush's approval ratings are plummeting, and the entire country is beginning to wilt under the depressing reality that we are, in fact, getting screwed with our pants on. Any conceits of moral authority being put forth by the White House and the Republican Party have been washed away in a flood of graft, death, lies and corruption.

Our supply of Prozac is running short. The belief in American excellence so desperately necessary to the mental balance of the populace is being eroded by the hour, and there will be hell to pay because of it.

There's an aspect to this I left out of the essay.

Given the malaise we are entering into, one that is sure to endure (and if you accept the above premise), a successful '08 candidate may well be one who pulls the trick Reagan did: make Americans feel good about being American again. Restore the pride.

A liberal Reagan acting on Americans' feelings of despair, anger and dissolution in '08 could ride the tiger a long way.

Just a passing thought.

[napi21]

1. That's true. Reagan had one other BIG advantage foing for him.

HE WAS AN ACTOR!

I'm not sure we even have any actors now who could gain the trust and likeability that Ronnie did. Acting has changed a lot since then.

I could maybe see someone like Martin Sheen, but I don't think he has the background. At least they could claim Reagan had the experience of President of the Screen Actors Guild.

I hate the idea that our elections have really turned into screen tests for a big movie, but I sure get the feeling they have!

[JohnnyBoots]

3. As crazy as it sounds I could see george clooney being president. You

have to admit Bush is an actor too, playing the stoic competent cowboy, when he is actually a northeastern spoiled rich kid who is in over his head.

[never cry wolf]

2. That's a good passing thought

Obama's speech at the DNC came immediately to mind. That sort of tenor of pride and hope.

[mestup]

4. "A liberal Reagan acting on Americans' feelings of despair,

anger and dissolution in '08 could ride the tiger a long way."

As disagreeable as it is, I think that's what it would take. I'm surrounded by non-voters and no-longer-voters, and I swear to God if you found the right TV/movie personality, they'd jump for it.

It's very sad, but Dems can't ignore this reality in 06 and 08.

Television elects Presidents.
And the biggest billboards elect everyone else.

[nvliberal]

5. The last thing we need

is another stupid actor in politics.

Leave politics to people who are professionals, not amateurs.

[mestup]

8. "Leave politics to people who are professionals, not amateurs."

But isn't that what's gotten us where we are?

The largest percentage of American voters don't vote. And the largest percentage of the stragglers who actually do vote, do so based on what the television ads tell them.

So what I see is this: the "professionals," through the MSM, manipulate the "amateurs" for votes.

I'm just sayin' the Dems can't ignore this. They need a strategy.

[nvliberal]

12. Strategy is useless unless the voting machines are gone.

But tell me how running an idiot actor helps our cause.

It doesn't, and not only that, but actors already have given Democrats a bad name in some quarters.

There are plenty of qualified, INTELLIGENT officeholders out there without having to resort to some morons in Hollywood.

[Ellipsis]

14. Easy!

I do believe he was speaking metaphorically. Though any actor who has managed to make it in Hollywood Ain't Stuppid... he/she's in the Top 1% of the one percent.

... they better hurry up and strap on that saddle cuz it's gonna be a long ride.

Time for chores see ya later.

[mestup]

15. Sorry, I wasn't saying an actor SHOULD run. Just wondering with the OP

...if we've gotten to the point where people want only a comfortable leader-image to restore their trust. Regardless of actor/leader's policies. (As in Reagan. Ugh.)

You're absolutely right about the voting machines! (We're still paper-balloters here in my district and I'm grateful.)

[Ellipsis]

18. I'm just messin' with ya

It's all good :hi:

Thanks.

Check the Election forum daily, and spread the word. There are many there who work their butts off. They would do well with some modest recognition.

We are the media.

[MuseRider]

6. I could go with that as long

as it was someone who made us feel good about the right things. Reagan abused that pride and used the feel good moment to let people feel good about all the wrong headed things.

[jus_the_facts]

7. there's more to think about though as far as voting itself goes.....

....the fraud that's takin' place in every election since 2000...there in lies the biggest problem of the entire process...regardless of who believes in what message or whomever is giving the message...if nothing can be accomplished in regard to what's happening with the way our voting process is set up and how the votes are counted....then everything else is moot...too many people have been disenfranchised at the voting booths in recent years and the numbers of people voting will continue to decrease because of it.

[Donna Zen]

9. Hello Wes Clark

And why do you love America?

And you are correct: we need to realign the parties. Nothing wrong with liberal package, our policies are fine...It's all in the packaging.

As Wes would say: "We lift people up!"

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

10. Agreed

[Larkspur]

11. Good-bye Wes.

He's not for me.

[mattclearing]

17. Any elaboration?

It's been awhile since I've heard a negative on him, and I'm curious as to what your thoughts are.

[Larkspur]

21. For the same reasons I've given in the past.

1) He has no civilian political experience.
2) He never seemed to have an interest in building a civilian political career. He should have run for Arkansas governor in 2002 as a Democrat, won it, run the affairs of that office well, run and win re-election before deciding to run for President. If he didn't want to be governor, he could have run for senator or congressman.

Wes will make a fine WH advisor or cabinent head.

[mattclearing]

22. I generally agree that first-time pols should avoid the Presidency.

Clark seems to be an exception though, because of his military stature and his work as Supreme Allied Commander.

Governorship of Arkansas seems a bit below him.

Senator, maybe, but he would still seem pretty imposing up against the likes of Orrin Hatch and Harry Reid.

[Larkspur]

25. I don't find Wes imposing. He reminds me of a cross between

George C. Scott's the "Flim-flam Man" and Peter Sellers "Dr. Strangelove"

Wes might like to think of himself as the next Eisenhower, but he is not Eisenhower nor will he ever come close.

[mattclearing]

26. Supreme Allied Commander of NATO > Arkansas Governor

Why would he take a demotion?

[Larkspur]

28. FDR was a governor before becoming Ike's boss

The only way the governorship would be a demotion for Wes, is if he is afraid of losing it. Your attitude also denotes military arrogance towards civilian leadership positions. You attitude implies that elected civilian leaders are beneath military generals. Wes does not have the same stature of Eisenhower, who defeated Hitler and Mussolini. Most people did not know who Wes Clark was. In the 1950's, Eisenhower was a household name.

The reason I suggested the governorship of Arkansas was for Wes to prove that he could campaign in the civilian political realm, win that office, and prove that he could handle the affairs of that office successfully. The Arkansas Dems had offered their nomination to Wes so he would not have had to fight a bruising primary before taking on the Repuke challenger. Wes declined but then Wes was unsure about being a Dem at that point.

[mattclearing]

35. I'm afraid you've got me wrong on the military arrogance bit.

I am no fan of the military in general, much less of the military in a political position. I certainly do not believe that generals rank higher than elected officials in general. I generally (no pun intended) hold teachers, journalists, and pretty much anyone else who makes a living that doesn't involve killing people in higher regard than generals.

I like Wes Clark for president despite that, and it's a conclusion I've come to through a good deal of flame wars here, back when I was less enthusiastic about a Clark candidacy.

Also, as Supreme Allied Commander, Clark was arguably responsible for more people than a governor of Arkansas would be, elected or not.

I was suspicious that he was a stealth candidate in the primaries, but I've been won over since the campaign ended, as Wes has continued to speak out in favor of Dem policies, and is actually genuine in a way that no other Dem presidential candidate has been in my lifetime. I also like that he has voiced support for progressive economic policies, which even most elected Dems won't do.

I think he would be good for the job, given the right team to work with, and would certainly be a best case scenario for cleaning up the mess left behind by this administration.

[Skwmom]

29. This country is in desperate need of a LEADER, not another

politician. President Clark would never put his own political career and desire for power and glory over doing what is right for this country. How many Republicans OR even Democrats would do the same?

WHAT OTHERS SAY ABOUT CLARK....

Major Clark is the most capable White House Fellow I have known….He brought to his work a brilliant mind and rare common sense. He has initiative, style, imagination, moral courage, and integrity each in extraordinary degree...He has a rare sensitivity to others and A REMARKABLE ABILITY TO MOTIVATE AND LEAD THEM......" James T. Lynn, Director, Office of Mgmt & Budget, 1976

Even though he was the commanding general, you were never made to feel less than regardless of your rank, your gender, or your race. Gen Clark was very supportive of women. He did not place barriers. ..He got on the phone with Washington and said why don’t I have minority officers in my division? Why are they not being given the opportunity? Maj. Patricia Williams (Ret.) U.S. Army

-He is a - son of the South capable of making a dangerous world a safer place for everybody. I asked a whole lot of my friends … who served over Gen Clark and under Gen Clark, and every last one of them said to me that this is a good man, and if he were leading our nation they would be proud. Amb. Andrew Young, Co-Chair of Clark for Pres. Nat’l Steering Com.

I've never endorsed a presidential candidate before. But when I talk to General Clark, and when I listen to him, I can see him as a PRESIDENT FOR ALL AMERICANS. Dr. Mary Frances Berry, head of the federal Commission on Civil Rights and member of Clark’s Nat’l Steering Cmmte.

Wes Clark has the character and depth to be another Marshal or Eisenhower in time of war. Brigadier Gen William W. Crouch

Wes Clark is nobody’s yes man, his ability to cut through b.s. that somebody is giving him - I don’t know any communicator better than he is… He will have the WELFARE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE writ large always in his heart and in his mind. Col. William J. Taylor Jr. (Ret) U.S. Army West Point Faculty

My Enron experience has brought home to me just how important the tone at the top is. -Clark has - integrity, he's not going to mislead the American people.. Sherron Watkins, Enron whistle-blower

He’s a soldier but a statesman as well. He’s not just a person with a narrow military knowledge. He has a great grasp of some of the complex issues surrounding education and economic issues. Adm Charles Larsen (Ret.)

- Wes was - devoted to the development of young people, especially the school system. Lt. Gen Daniel W. Chrisman (Ret.) U.S. Army

I think the thing that makes Wes different from others is that he has been motivated not for personal gain - he’s been motivated because he feels generally for this country and always has. I think Wes Clark is an American hero. I know that’s a trite term and perhaps overused term but it’s a realistic term when you describe him. Capt. Gaines Dyer (Ret.)

“I think he is a national treasure” and “one of the top five most talented people I've met in my life." Gen. Barry McCaffrey

The Biggest Reason I Support General Clark: I think it is his innate sense of decency. You can see the humanity in his eyes. They say a good man is hard to find. Well, kids we found one...He loves his wife, and helped her raise a fine son… He loves kids (says he wants LOTS of grandkids, and is excited and animated when they are around.) He believes in peace over war, even though he's a mighty warrior. And he believes in God, and spirituality. He believes we are all equal… He cares about the environment, and the kind of world we hand to our kids, and he cares about the size of the deficit we hand them, too. I could go on, but as you can see -- he's a good and decent man. He cares about the country. He loves the flag he served under and fought for. He will be an Extraordinary American President. A Clark Supporter

[skipos]

34. Many people would prefer to have a non-politician

Like 20% of the people who voted for Perot in 1992. I can't tell you how many people I know who still think there isn't much of a difference between Dem and Rep politicians. So many people still don't vote because they think "what's the difference" (stupid, in my opinion). I still think a non-politician would be refreshing to a great number of people. Much greater than the amount of people who would whine about wanting someone with experience, like um, Bush.

[nvliberal]

13. Forget about Wes.

He's not running.

[mattclearing]

19. Sure about that?

He sure seems to be keeping himself out in the public eye a lot lately.

[Donna Zen]

23. You may indeed be right

I'm just telling you who can win; who fits the criteria of Will's pondering. And as an added bonus, you get a liberal that the "gatekeepers" of the MSM continually brand a moderate.

Suit yourself.

[Martin Eden]

16. And be specific about HOW to restore the pride

Which shouldn't be at all difficult to do.

Bush and the "government is the problem" right wing ideologues have installed incompetent cronies (like Brown at FEMA) and corporate cronies throughout government. Lobbyists for polluting industries rule the EPA. The Bushies disparage the role of government, and consequently the functions of government have either been neglected or reversed by putting the foxes in charge of the chicken coup.

These government agencies perform vital functions like preparing for natural disasters and protecting the health of our children from environmental contaminants -- and AMERICANS ARE DYING as a direct result of criminal negligence and conflicts of interest.

This is not a hard case to make, and the campaign to restore honesty, responsibility, and competence in government -- including a vow to restore the MADE IN AMERICA label by fixing trade agreements and rules that encourage corporations to outsource our jobs -- is a winning strategy that the Dems will be fools not to employ, IMHO.

Record budget deficits, which are almost entirely the product of Bush/Republican policies, are placing our economic security in the hands of Asian banks that hold our debt and have the power to cripple our currency. A Democratic candidate who makes the statement that Bush and the Republicans have given the Chinese communists a weapon of mass economic destruction over us would benefit greatly from the debate that follows any challege of that statement.

If the Democrats can't come up with a winning strategy in 2006 & 2008, then they are either grossly incompetent or allied with the cabal currently in power.

[WI_DEM]

20. Let's Focus on '06!! (sorry I couldn't resist)

that is what most people post when I write anything about '08, but I agree with that we need a can-do optimist in '08, if you want to say that is in the Reagan mode, then yes. He can also be in the Clinton mode but minus the baggage. And I'm not advocating Hillary, but someone who believes in people and has the ability to embrace us all as Bill was able to do.

[VelmaD]

24. Had that same thought...

when I read the rough draft of that essay.

Wouldn't it be nice if a Democrat could create that same kind of feeling...only this time have the result be electing someone who will actually help put the country on a path we can legitimately be proud of instead of smoke and mirrors and "greed is good".

If you find the Democrat who can pull it off...let me know. :)

[marions ghost]

27. Or maybe we could

work on losing some of that excessive pride...wean from the 'ideological prozac'... for a change. I don't think we need to restore the old sense of pride (yikes no Reagan tricks please god). It's too big a job right now to do that more than superficially anyway. If there is such a thing as a national psyche, We The People need to undergo a quiet balancing. In order to face and deal with the level of corruption in our country we are going to need some very clear-headed, brave, flexible leadership...leaders with the highest integrity. Those future leaders must prove to us that they can imagine AND CREATE a stronger future--a place where a posse of flag-waving criminals cannot hijack OUR government. Ever. Again.

Americans have suffered serial abuse at the hands of this government. Dispelling the feelings of despair and anger is not going to be done with "we can be great again" tactics to raise our deflated spirits --it's going to be done with a lot of hard, hard work to rebuild trust, both in our own country and around the world. Losing some of that arrogant pride would be a good thing. To try to trump it up to win elections (whether for the Dems or Reps) would be felt as disingenuous. Candidates who are speaking thoughtfully, directly, and solving problems will have the best chance IMO. We need candidates who think like doctors trying to save a patient for example. People (of both parties I suspect) who have been so consistently lied to, do not want to have to decide what's a lie and what's not anymore. They just want action.

[Skwmom]

30. Why does it have to be a "trick?"

I think a leader like Clark could rally this country and make people proud of our leadership and this country once again. Political trickery is killing this country.

[WilliamPitt]

31. I tjink you're being too literal with the word. n/t

[Skwmom]

32. Maybe

but you wrote "Given the malaise we are entering into, one that is sure to endure (and if you accept the above premise), a successful '08 candidate may well be one who pulls the trick Reagan did: make Americans feel good about being American again." How should I have interrupted this passage? You didn't write that the successful 08 candidate may well be the one who can effectively make Americans feel good about being American again. You refer to it as pulling the same trick Reagan did.

Do you consider it a "trick" because we can't possibly feel good about being American again? I don't believe that we are superior. However, I'd like to think with the right leadership America could still achieve some moments of greatness. I consider myself very pragmatic but I still like to retain some optimism.

[WilliamPitt]

33. "Trick"

A special skill; a knack: Is there a trick to getting this window to stay up?

A convention or specialized skill peculiar to a particular field of activity: learned the tricks of the winemaking trade.

To bring about the desired result.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=trick

[second edition]

36. In many ways I see Kerry as being similar to Reagan.

Reagan had a certain reassuring calm about himself that made you feel that everything was ok and under control. I see that in Kerry. Reagan can off gentlemanly and caring yet stern and determined. Again, I notice these qualities in Kerry. Reagan seemed to show respect for the Democrats even though he disagreed with their policies. At the end of the day, politics was put aside and friendships remained. Kerry has spoken about how disheartening the divisions in Washington are and how these divisions do a disservice to the American public. He has even recently worked on a couple of bi-partisan bills. John Kerry's love of this country and the Democratic party is obvious to all who followed his campaign. He still continues to speak out and work on legislation that benefits the poor and the working women and men of this country. And he hasn't forgotten our soldiers either, requesting that Congress provide their families with additional needed benefits and our soldiers with the armor they need to protect themselves.

Of course, John kerry isn't perfect. He isn't quite the actor or salesman that Reagan was. He can work on that though, as well as the best way to get his message out and understood. What John Kerry has and Reagan lacked was actual experience in war, knowledge of foreign policy and a sure footed grasp of many domestic issues, from the economy, to small business's health care.

Frankly, right now, I can't think of any of our other potential 2008 candidates up to the challenge, and having the knowledge and experience to get this country back on track after Bush is done with it. I just know Kerry would be hard at work and staying on top of the issues unlike both Reagan and Bush.