lily
01-06-2007, 05:15 AM
An intersting op-ed piece (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16453409/site/newsweek/?rf=nwnewsletter)
Evolving Presidential Preferences
After talking to politicians, strategists and voters, our columnist has a
pretty good idea of what type of person America wants for its next
president.
WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Howard Fineman
Newsweek
Updated: 11:32 a.m. ET Jan 3, 2007
Jan. 3, 2007 - Now that the 38th president has been laid to rest, the
capital can take up the main business of 2007: trying to figure out who will
be the 44th. What type of leader does the country want? Here is my sense of
it, based on talking to politicians, strategists and voters here and around
the nation.
NO IDEOLOGUES, PLEASE
There was a time when President George W. Bush’s ideological certitude was
politically appealing and perhaps functionally necessary. That time has long
since passed. The country is tired, even fearful, of leaders with fervent
beliefs that seem impervious to new (or even old) facts. Voters see the war
in Iraq as an “idea,” not a solution—and Americans do not like ideas that do
not work. Voters likely will view Bush’s “surge” of troops into Iraq as new
evidence of failure, and the dangers of a leader who depends on preconceived
ideas.
SERIOUS STUDENT
Presidential elections are a never-ending series of mid-course corrections.
Voters look to compensate for the leadership weaknesses of the incumbent. An
example comes from the life and career of Gerald Ford. In 1976, voters
wanted a pure antidote to Richard Nixon’s paranoid megalomania. Once Ford
pardoned Nixon, he could not be that candidate. Instead, Americans chose
Jimmy Carter, a peanut farmer who had never worked in Washington, and who
promised never to lie to the American people. The counterpoint thinking
continues. Voters in 2008 are going to want someone who prides himself (or
herself) on spending time in the library—who has a hands-on curiosity about
the details.
WASHINGTON EXPERIENCE NOT NECESSARY
Voters these days not only do not value Washington experience—or any
office-holding experience—it can make them suspicious. That is what
strategists and polltakers for Sen. Evan Bayh found when they studied
whether he should run for president. They found that his remarkably deep
résumé—the son of a senator, he was the “boy governor” of Indiana before
going to the Senate—was a handicap. Americans always are dubious about the
capital, but that sentiment seems particularly strong. Bayh decided not to
run. "'Washington' doesn’t make the case," said Dan Pfeiffer, who worked for
Bayh.
NO MORE BOOMER OBSESSIONS
Not all elections are about change, but 2008 will be. Americans are
moderately upbeat about the country’s prospects, but deeply worried about
the world—and they have come to realize that they can’t separate one from
the other. One thing for sure, says Pfeiffer, voters are tired of arguing
about the culture of the 1960s and other boomer issues. “There is a sense
that the 2004 election was too much about who did or did not do what in
Vietnam,” said Pfeiffer, referring to the Bush campaign against Sen. John
Kerry. In 2000, Bush won in part by selling himself as a “grown-up” boomer
answer to Bill Clinton. “Voters are tired of that era and its concerns,”
Pfeiffer said. “They want to move on.”
KNOW THE MIDDLE CLASS
Bushes have a congenital family problem with this, and it leaves an opening
for someone—of either party—who can prove that he or she really understands
the strains of middle-class life. It’s not just about money, but about
cultural assaults and the lack of time for family in an era when both
parents or partners need to work. In his forthcoming book, "Positively
American," Sen. Charles Schumer of New York imagines the hard life of a
fictitious middle-class family—and offers a series of governmental proposals
to address them. A shrewd student of the American mood, Schumer is aiming in
the right direction. The next president will need to show that he or she
understands that family.
Evolving Presidential Preferences
After talking to politicians, strategists and voters, our columnist has a
pretty good idea of what type of person America wants for its next
president.
WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Howard Fineman
Newsweek
Updated: 11:32 a.m. ET Jan 3, 2007
Jan. 3, 2007 - Now that the 38th president has been laid to rest, the
capital can take up the main business of 2007: trying to figure out who will
be the 44th. What type of leader does the country want? Here is my sense of
it, based on talking to politicians, strategists and voters here and around
the nation.
NO IDEOLOGUES, PLEASE
There was a time when President George W. Bush’s ideological certitude was
politically appealing and perhaps functionally necessary. That time has long
since passed. The country is tired, even fearful, of leaders with fervent
beliefs that seem impervious to new (or even old) facts. Voters see the war
in Iraq as an “idea,” not a solution—and Americans do not like ideas that do
not work. Voters likely will view Bush’s “surge” of troops into Iraq as new
evidence of failure, and the dangers of a leader who depends on preconceived
ideas.
SERIOUS STUDENT
Presidential elections are a never-ending series of mid-course corrections.
Voters look to compensate for the leadership weaknesses of the incumbent. An
example comes from the life and career of Gerald Ford. In 1976, voters
wanted a pure antidote to Richard Nixon’s paranoid megalomania. Once Ford
pardoned Nixon, he could not be that candidate. Instead, Americans chose
Jimmy Carter, a peanut farmer who had never worked in Washington, and who
promised never to lie to the American people. The counterpoint thinking
continues. Voters in 2008 are going to want someone who prides himself (or
herself) on spending time in the library—who has a hands-on curiosity about
the details.
WASHINGTON EXPERIENCE NOT NECESSARY
Voters these days not only do not value Washington experience—or any
office-holding experience—it can make them suspicious. That is what
strategists and polltakers for Sen. Evan Bayh found when they studied
whether he should run for president. They found that his remarkably deep
résumé—the son of a senator, he was the “boy governor” of Indiana before
going to the Senate—was a handicap. Americans always are dubious about the
capital, but that sentiment seems particularly strong. Bayh decided not to
run. "'Washington' doesn’t make the case," said Dan Pfeiffer, who worked for
Bayh.
NO MORE BOOMER OBSESSIONS
Not all elections are about change, but 2008 will be. Americans are
moderately upbeat about the country’s prospects, but deeply worried about
the world—and they have come to realize that they can’t separate one from
the other. One thing for sure, says Pfeiffer, voters are tired of arguing
about the culture of the 1960s and other boomer issues. “There is a sense
that the 2004 election was too much about who did or did not do what in
Vietnam,” said Pfeiffer, referring to the Bush campaign against Sen. John
Kerry. In 2000, Bush won in part by selling himself as a “grown-up” boomer
answer to Bill Clinton. “Voters are tired of that era and its concerns,”
Pfeiffer said. “They want to move on.”
KNOW THE MIDDLE CLASS
Bushes have a congenital family problem with this, and it leaves an opening
for someone—of either party—who can prove that he or she really understands
the strains of middle-class life. It’s not just about money, but about
cultural assaults and the lack of time for family in an era when both
parents or partners need to work. In his forthcoming book, "Positively
American," Sen. Charles Schumer of New York imagines the hard life of a
fictitious middle-class family—and offers a series of governmental proposals
to address them. A shrewd student of the American mood, Schumer is aiming in
the right direction. The next president will need to show that he or she
understands that family.