Politics 101, Part 3

It's the debates, stupid. You may realize the above statement as a play on the very famous James Carville line from the Clinton campaigns- "It's the economy, stupid" (which has also been credited to Mrs. Clinton, as well). It's the economy stupid has taken over most political campaigns since 1992 as the the relative health of the US economy is generally seen as the point where most interest of the electorate resides. Presidential administrations rise and fall with the economy. But as with just about every other aspect of political life, all has changed since September 11, 2001. "The Economy" is no longer the single biggest component of campaigns. "The Economy" must now be viewed through the prism of the international war on terror. Domestic expenditures, tax policy, even market restructuring and growth, all are effected, and controlled in some cases, by terrorism. Whether you believe or not, that the Bush agenda had, long before 9/11, squandered the health of the economy with three successive tax cuts, you cannot deny the implications that 9/11 had, and has continued to have. Neither Iraq policy, as divisive as it has been, nor the occupation and reconstruction effort, as poorly managed as it has been, has brought the Bush administration down. In contrast Bush holds small but stable leads in almost every poll while those very polls tell us the electorate doesn't necessarily think the country in on the right path, or that Bush necessarily deserves re-election. Why the disconnect? First, the Kerry campaign is in free-fall. It has been unable to beat back the negative air campaign waged by Bush-Cheney and their surrogates. While Kerry leaning surrogates have spent the past year tearing Bush apart, the Kerry attacks are more recent- therefore more fresh in the minds of the voters (at least the few independent voters left undecided). Second, the electorate is smarter (as it usually is) than politicians give them credit. They realize the complexities in foreign policy and the relationship it has on domestic policy. In the age of global commerce AND global terror, foreign and domestic policy are now forever bound together. Americans get it, though they may not like it and wish it were otherwise. So is it over? As I've said repeatedly, the closeness of the election and the polarization of the public over the direction of policy make it too close to call. But time for Kerry is clearing running out. He has one opportunity (or rather three) to make his final case to the people who are on the fence but leaning to Bush. It's the debates, stupid. Kerry must do the following in the three debates with George Bush: Convince the public they are safe with him as commander-in-chief Prove he has the ability to make a decision and stand by it Expose the Bush policy in Iraq as an abject failure Explain his vision and the need for change The bad news for Kerry is that it isn't an easy checklist. The Bush campaign has been most successful at portraying Kerry as feckless or worse, dangerous, as a president. Add to this that Americans don't want to believe that Iraq is a failure because it threatens not only stability in the Middle East, but the chances for real peace throughout the world and the eventual eradication of al-Qaida. The good news for Kerry is that he still has the chance to make the arguement and this time will have Bush alone, without the elaborately produced spin of the Rove machine to bail out the president if he falters. Kerry must put Bush to the test. Kerry has had to spend the last several months defending himself, his decisions, his record. Now is the time for Kerry to push Bush to defend his, in a live and vulnerable setting with no aircraft carriers and flight suits to distract. The risk for Kerry is that Bush actually makes the case, but at that point the election is lost anyway, therefore the rewards outweigh the risks. Kerry must force the president to look the country in the eye, as it were, and defend not just the invasion of Iraq, but the occupation. Kerry must not get caught in the rhetorical trap that Bush's strategy team is setting (and has been). When Bush makes hay out of Kerry's support for the war in its initial stages, Kerry must answer back that he trusted the president, and the president failed that trust. When Bush attacks Kerry's 'flip-flops' on Iraq, Kerry must hit back and the many flip-flops of the Bush administration on everything from Homeland Security legislation to his call for a Constitutional amendment on gay marriage and everything in between. He needs to challenge Bush can lay claim to a healthy economy with so many job losses and the deficit higher than ever. It won't be easy, but it is likely his last chance.