This year’s presidential election should prove interesting. The country is almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, and analysts expect another close race.
Voters face their starkest choice in 20 years. As expected, President Bush has swung to the right since his Jan. 20, 2001 inauguration. From his solidly pro-industrial environmental record to the “gag” rule that withholds funds from international groups that even mention abortion, Bush has demonstrated his allegiance to the right wing of the Republican Party.
John Kerry, for his part, earned a ranking as the most liberal senator in 2003 from the National Journal, a conservative political magazine. He fits the image the Bush administration seeks to bestow upon him as a wealthy Massachusetts liberal.
The outcome of the Nov. 2 election will depend on a number of factors, most importantly the economic outlook and Iraq. The former looks good, the latter bad.
The economy may neither help nor hurt Bush in this election. While he will likely be the first president since Herbert Hoover to lose jobs during his term, other economic indicators look rosier. Consumer confidence rose sharply in April and the International Monetary Fund predicts growth in the United States will reach its fastest rate in 20 years.
Iraq presents a much greater problem: It’s falling apart. American soldiers have lost control of Fallujah and most of the important highways in the Sunni Triangle. Rarely a day goes by without news of a roadside bomb or a cunning ambush.
Bush hopes the much-vaunted June 30 turnover of sovereignty to an Iraqi government, whatever its form, will provide a way out. However, it’s a public relations move conducted for the benefit of the American electorate. The United States military will retain every meaningful source of power.
Voters increasingly realize that the cost of the occupation, in terms of both money and lives, is greater than what the Bush administration led them to believe. As much as Republicans will try to hide the truth from voters with photography bans and curiously timed requests for Congressional appropriations, Americans know Iraq is going down the toilet.
Hopefully, voters will concentrate on substantive issues and ignore the usual political mudslinging. What makes attacks on character and experience so annoying is that they’re so effective.
Bush has a powerful weapon in his charge that Kerry is a flip-flopper. What makes it so powerful is that it’s true. Kerry has never met a politically advantageous position he didn’t like.
He voted to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq, but refused to pay for the occupation afterward. He voted for the USA Patriot Act, but now criticizes it as an encroachment on civil liberties.
The list goes on, which brings me to Kerry’s first flip-flop: Vietnam. He served with honor and distinction in Southeast Asia, where he commanded a small boat and earned three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star for his courage.
Kerry then returned to the United States and worked actively with Vietnam Veterans Against the War. This particular flip-flop shouldn’t bother voters.
Kerry went to Vietnam to serve his country, and returned horrified by the atrocities committed by his fellow soldiers. He took the only honorable course of action at that point and spoke out against the war.
Conservatives gain nothing by alleging that Kerry’s first Purple Heart — which the military awards for wounds sustained in battle — was the result of a mere scratch. If Kerry got shot badly only twice instead of three times, does it really matter?
Such attacks also attract unwelcome attention to Bush’s record in the National Guard during Vietnam, when he joined a country club unit notable for its upper-crust members and skipped out on it.
Both men’s Vietnam experience is ultimately unimportant to how they would act in office and distracts from more important issues.
Kerry has pulled his punches in recent attacks on Bush. He told Hardball’s Chris Matthews recently that weapons of mass destruction could still be found in Iraq.
If Kerry wants to sit in the Oval Office, he needs to quit dancing around Bush and go for the knockout. It shouldn’t be hard to do.
Should Kerry do the unlikely and beat Bush in November, progressives will rejoice for a short time. But they should considered themselves warned that Kerry has too much Clintonian scheming in him and will sell progressives out when it becomes necessary. If Democrats wanted a progressive with a backbone, they should have nominated Howard Dean.
Ultimately, Kerry will need the stars to align perfectly to defeat Bush. In the advertising age, Bush’s $187.5 million re-election fund speaks loudly.