Days of Whine and Poses
If you've taken a look at the national polls lately, you might decide an antidepressant is in order: Seventy percent of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction--the most pessimistic the public has been for the past 23 years. The president's popularity is at 29 percent, an all-time low; Congress's is even lower, on life support, at 23 percent. And last week's CBS News/New York Times poll didn't provide much of a vote of confidence for the next potential batch of national leaders, either: The highest favorable rating was at 34 percent, for Hillary Rodham Clinton--just 3 points ahead of President Bush. At least the president beat John Kerry--by a whopping 5 points.
Obviously, the Republicans win the Bad News contest. They run the White House and the Congress, and the public is mad as hell: By a margin of 50 to 37 percent, it now says that the Democrats share its values. The GOP, it believes, is more likely to be corrupt, and it's ready for some power sharing in Washington between the two parties. All of which presents a perfect storm for the Democrats desperately trying to nationalize the upcoming midterm elections into a sweep back into the majority.
But it's hard to call for a national election when there are no national leaders. To whom exactly should the country turn? To House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi? Her new national agenda calls for the launching of a series of subpoenas to investigate the administration. Haven't any lessons been learned from Newt Gingrich, the House speaker who became the former House speaker after his strategy of investigating the Clinton administration to death did little more than anger the public? Privately, some top congressional Democrats tell me that they cringed when Pelosi started talking about investigations: "Is that what we need to be talking about?" says one. "The answer is no."
New ideas, anyone? And what about those forward-thinking leaders on the Republican side, the same guys who proposed the pathetic $100 rebate to ease America's pain at the pump? Oh, that'll take care of America's "addiction to oil." OK, how about demonizing the oil companies? Why not? It's a lot easier than blaming ourselves for conspicuous consumption. Make the oil executives the bogeymen, charge them with amoral leadership--all this from a Congress that can't organize its own ethics committees while it keeps the Justice Department working overtime on political bribery investigations. Never mind. Let's just tell the voters what the polls tell us they want to hear. Leadership is so last century.
Success is all about strategy--and that's why leaders spend so much time squabbling about it. Perish the thought that they might be squabbling over policy; they're fighting over something far more important--how to divvy up the pie. Democratic House campaign chair Rahm Emanuel wants Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean to stop spending so much now so he can have some spare cash on hand for tough races close to the election. As for substance, shhhhhh. Leading Democrats, eager to retake control of the House--where they need to gain 15 seats--don't want to tell voters too much too soon, lest they (and the Republicans) start picking apart their ideas. After all, in 1994--when the GOP won the House--Gingrich's Contract With America was unveiled less than two months before the election. But, hey, why give voters something to really think about when you can pose at gas stations filling up your tank while blasting away at the GOP ties to oil special interests?
To be fair, Emanuel tells me that a Democratic House would immediately do things like call for an increase in the minimum wage and a change in the current prescription drug program for seniors. And there are real, new ideas percolating out there, in both parties--largely from outsiders. But for now--this close to the November elections--the focus is on the other guy. Why? Because the public clearly wants change, and it's much easier to deal in slogans. "In every survey, the people clearly see the Democratic Party as the party that will get this country moving," Emanuel says. "It's the party of different values and represents change."
But change to what? If it's leadership that the public wants, neither party is safe.
This story appears in the May 22, 2006 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.
advertisement
