In politics, '07 could be fast, furious, transformational, Al Gore
In politics, '07 could be fast, furious, transformationalBy CHUCK RAASCH GNS Political Writer
WASHINGTON - Forces are in place that could make 2007 the most active non-election year in recent American politics.
The course of the next 12 months could determine the long-term direction of the war in Iraq, show whether Democrats and Republicans can share the responsibility of governing, and nourish the continuing revolution in political communication that is changing the face of American politics.
The demand for authenticity among politicians is growing precisely when those politicians can be caught in unguarded, unscripted moments by anyone with a video camera. Sen. George Allen, R-Va., who began 2006 as a bona fide 2008 presidential aspirant but ended it as a defeated senator, will certainly attest to the power of YouTube.
It's almost certain that more Allen-esque "macaca moments" will test future candidates, especially the assembling 2008 presidential field. It's a field that includes heavyweights John McCain, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rudy Giuliani and, potentially, Al Gore, as well as the political-celebrity supernova, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.The next two years are shaping up as "the most interesting thing I've seen in politics - ever," said Democratic adviser/commentator James Carville. "Not just my lifetime, but ever."
Six questions for 2007 will affect the 2008 elections, and beyond:
Will the United States remain in Iraq, and if so, at what level? As the new Democratic Congress prepares to take office in January, a showdown looms between President Bush, who may push for an increase in U.S. troops as one last attempt to stabilize Iraq, and Democrats (and some Republicans) who believe a withdrawal should begin as soon as possible.
If the war continues to go badly, will voters view it as Bush's war or a Republican war? This is a significant distinction because Bush will never again face election but Republicans who backed him on the war will. Democrats seized control of the House and Senate in 2006 largely because of anger over corruption in Congress and worry about the war in Iraq.Democratic adviser Donna Brazile said that in the 2006 elections, Iraq "damaged President Bush as a leader and undercut the Republican Party. ... Voters no longer listened to him."
Can Democrats, in narrow control of Congress, make good on a promise to reduce the partisanship that has wracked Congress in recent years? Don't bet on it.First, the two political parties are as regionally and ideologically split as ever, with Republicans losing 10 Northeastern moderates in the House, a further erosion of their once-staunch base in the region. This makes the GOP in Congress more dominated by Southern conservatives, and the Democrats more identified with liberal enclaves in the Northeast and the Pacific Rim.
Meanwhile, Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi provides an ample target for Republicans yearning to paint her as an out-of-the-mainstream liberal. And Republicans who want to regain power in '08 now have a Democratic Congress to blame, averting the possibility that GOP candidates in '08 would have had to hold their own president's feet to the fire if things continued to be dicey in Iraq.
"Why run against Bush?" said Jan van Lohuizen, an adviser to Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is likely to seek the GOP presidential nomination. "You can run against Congress."
The key to this question may come in the Democrats' ability to not get mired in a blame game or go overboard on investigations of the Bush administration's prosecution of the war.
"People know what the problems are in the country," said Doug Sosnick, a former White House political director under Bill Clinton who now is advising Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd as he explores a presidential run. "They want to know what you are going to do to fix them."
Can political celebrity translate into presidential support? That question confronts Obama as he ponders a presidential campaign after only two years in the Senate.
How will technology, especially the instant-exposure world of YouTube and other Web sites, continue to reshape the way politicians go about their business? Josh Earnest, communications director for Democratic presidential candidate Tom Vilsack, said "there is an expectation on behalf of many voters out there to have access to a candidate, and technology makes that easier." Vilsack, Iowa's governor, is among the first of the '08 presidential crop to run a campaign video blog, produced in conjunction with blip.tv. Others are sure to follow, but that portion of the message that candidates can control will continue to shrink as "citizen journalists" continue to flood the Web with their thoughts and images.Republican pollster Frank Luntz said the greatest fear among politicians is to be the next Allen - to get caught in a moment that makes them seem inauthentic or contrary to the image they have cultivated over a career.
"All that stuff happened with YouTube at the very moment Americans demanded (politicians) to be more candid with them," Luntz said. "It is the very moment of 'everything you say can and will be used against you.' So you have this awful dynamic of people demanding politicians come clean at the same moment that people in my business are telling (politicians) to be more scripted than ever."
Can the Democrats solidify inroads they made in Republican strongholds in '06, including the Mountain West and among rural voters? Some think that will require a change of attitude and a conscious effort by the '08 Democratic presidential nominee to avoid another "flyover country" election strategy.Jennifer Palmieri, a confidant of '08 Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, said that Democrats have long been charged with "looking down their noses" at rural voters, and "unfortunately that's true. ... This ('08) nominee can't do that."
The net result: Expect politicians to be showing up at heretofore out-of-the-way locations in 2007.
Contact Chuck Raasch, GNS political writer, at craasch@gns.gannett.com
http://www.centralohio.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/B9/20070102/NEWS01/701020303/1002
WASHINGTON - Forces are in place that could make 2007 the most active non-election year in recent American politics.
The course of the next 12 months could determine the long-term direction of the war in Iraq, show whether Democrats and Republicans can share the responsibility of governing, and nourish the continuing revolution in political communication that is changing the face of American politics.
The demand for authenticity among politicians is growing precisely when those politicians can be caught in unguarded, unscripted moments by anyone with a video camera. Sen. George Allen, R-Va., who began 2006 as a bona fide 2008 presidential aspirant but ended it as a defeated senator, will certainly attest to the power of YouTube.
It's almost certain that more Allen-esque "macaca moments" will test future candidates, especially the assembling 2008 presidential field. It's a field that includes heavyweights John McCain, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rudy Giuliani and, potentially, Al Gore, as well as the political-celebrity supernova, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.The next two years are shaping up as "the most interesting thing I've seen in politics - ever," said Democratic adviser/commentator James Carville. "Not just my lifetime, but ever."
Six questions for 2007 will affect the 2008 elections, and beyond:
Will the United States remain in Iraq, and if so, at what level? As the new Democratic Congress prepares to take office in January, a showdown looms between President Bush, who may push for an increase in U.S. troops as one last attempt to stabilize Iraq, and Democrats (and some Republicans) who believe a withdrawal should begin as soon as possible.
If the war continues to go badly, will voters view it as Bush's war or a Republican war? This is a significant distinction because Bush will never again face election but Republicans who backed him on the war will. Democrats seized control of the House and Senate in 2006 largely because of anger over corruption in Congress and worry about the war in Iraq.Democratic adviser Donna Brazile said that in the 2006 elections, Iraq "damaged President Bush as a leader and undercut the Republican Party. ... Voters no longer listened to him."
Can Democrats, in narrow control of Congress, make good on a promise to reduce the partisanship that has wracked Congress in recent years? Don't bet on it.First, the two political parties are as regionally and ideologically split as ever, with Republicans losing 10 Northeastern moderates in the House, a further erosion of their once-staunch base in the region. This makes the GOP in Congress more dominated by Southern conservatives, and the Democrats more identified with liberal enclaves in the Northeast and the Pacific Rim.
Meanwhile, Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi provides an ample target for Republicans yearning to paint her as an out-of-the-mainstream liberal. And Republicans who want to regain power in '08 now have a Democratic Congress to blame, averting the possibility that GOP candidates in '08 would have had to hold their own president's feet to the fire if things continued to be dicey in Iraq.
"Why run against Bush?" said Jan van Lohuizen, an adviser to Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is likely to seek the GOP presidential nomination. "You can run against Congress."
The key to this question may come in the Democrats' ability to not get mired in a blame game or go overboard on investigations of the Bush administration's prosecution of the war.
"People know what the problems are in the country," said Doug Sosnick, a former White House political director under Bill Clinton who now is advising Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd as he explores a presidential run. "They want to know what you are going to do to fix them."
Can political celebrity translate into presidential support? That question confronts Obama as he ponders a presidential campaign after only two years in the Senate.
How will technology, especially the instant-exposure world of YouTube and other Web sites, continue to reshape the way politicians go about their business? Josh Earnest, communications director for Democratic presidential candidate Tom Vilsack, said "there is an expectation on behalf of many voters out there to have access to a candidate, and technology makes that easier." Vilsack, Iowa's governor, is among the first of the '08 presidential crop to run a campaign video blog, produced in conjunction with blip.tv. Others are sure to follow, but that portion of the message that candidates can control will continue to shrink as "citizen journalists" continue to flood the Web with their thoughts and images.Republican pollster Frank Luntz said the greatest fear among politicians is to be the next Allen - to get caught in a moment that makes them seem inauthentic or contrary to the image they have cultivated over a career.
"All that stuff happened with YouTube at the very moment Americans demanded (politicians) to be more candid with them," Luntz said. "It is the very moment of 'everything you say can and will be used against you.' So you have this awful dynamic of people demanding politicians come clean at the same moment that people in my business are telling (politicians) to be more scripted than ever."
Can the Democrats solidify inroads they made in Republican strongholds in '06, including the Mountain West and among rural voters? Some think that will require a change of attitude and a conscious effort by the '08 Democratic presidential nominee to avoid another "flyover country" election strategy.Jennifer Palmieri, a confidant of '08 Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, said that Democrats have long been charged with "looking down their noses" at rural voters, and "unfortunately that's true. ... This ('08) nominee can't do that."
The net result: Expect politicians to be showing up at heretofore out-of-the-way locations in 2007.
Contact Chuck Raasch, GNS political writer, at craasch@gns.gannett.com
http://www.centralohio.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/B9/20070102/NEWS01/701020303/1002
posted by presgore19 at 8:59 AM
<< Home