« Uh OhReligious Hatred Roundup »

Post-War Election

According to NYT’s David Brooks, who notes in passing that the war isn’t, in fact, over yet: 

The 2008 presidential election has fundamentally shifted, but it hasn’t been because of events in Iowa and New Hampshire. It’s because of events everywhere else.

In Washington, the National Intelligence Estimate was released, suggesting the next president will not face an imminent nuclear showdown with Iran. In Iraq, the surge and tribal revolts produce increasing stability. In Pakistan, the streets have not exploded. In the Middle East, the Arabs and Palestinians stumble toward some sort of peace process. In Venezuela, a referendum set President Hugo Chávez back on his heels.

The world still has its problems, but it no longer seems to be building toward some larger crisis. The atmosphere of fear and conflict has at least temporarily abated. With the change in conditions, the election of 2008 is beginning to feel like a postwar election. American voters are coming out of the shells constructed after Sept. 11th and are looking for a new normalcy. They’re looking for something entirely different.

The shift in public sentiment has been evident in the polls. Before the 2004 election, half of all voters listed terrorism as their top concern. But, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, roughly a third do today. As Peter Beinart, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, has noted, the number of New Hampshirites who cite Iraq as their top concern has dropped 14 points among Republicans and 16 points among Democrats.

The shift has also been evident in the candidates’ town meetings. The number of audience questions about Iraq has dropped precipitously. Republicans don’t want to talk about Iraq because they’re humiliated by the conduct of the war, and Democrats don’t want to talk about it because they were wrong about the surge. Instead, other issues have leapt to the front of public consciousness: Mormonism, mortgages and the cosmic importance of Oprah Winfrey.

…

It’s clear that voters are not only exhausted by the war, they are exhausted by the war over the war. On the Democratic side, Obama captured the mood exactly with his Jefferson-Jackson Day speech of a few weeks ago. In that speech, he asked voters to reject fear, partisanship and textbook politics. He asked them to vote instead on the basis of their aspirations for a new era of national unity. As a result, Obama has pulled ahead in Iowa and approached parity in New Hampshire.

… 

My guess is that this race has a few more twists and turns. Something terrible could happen in the world, in which case the wartime mentality would be back in spades. Obama and Huckabee could beat Clinton and Romney, respectively, in the early states, only to fall victim to their own weaknesses later on. You laugh, but this thing could still spin into the lap of Fred Thompson or John McCain, Chris Dodd or Joe Biden.

The main point is this: money and organization matter less right now than getting in tune with the zeitgeist shift. In 1945, Prime Minister Winston Churchill had formidable advantages over Clement Attlee. But when a public turns from a war mentality to a peace mentality, it turns with a vengeance — even though in this case no armistice has been declared.

Brooks neglects to point out that nothing in fact has been resolved either in Iran or Iraq, and what we are looking at is not a peacetime election at all but possibly the illusion of one.  Americans, like Iraqis, just have a little breathing space in which to resolve their political impasse.  If what he’s saying is true, “whose candidacy best matches the zeitgeist” is more properly “whose candidacy best panders to wishful thinking and ignores the most pressing issues of the day?” The “few more twists and turns” in the race include the fact that a year is a very long time for unresolved problems in Iran and Iraq, as well as for Pakistan, the Israeli-Palestinian issue and Venezuela. Decisions are going to have to be made, action taken and ultimately, situations inherited.

Topics: GWOT, pols

  Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:01 am on Tuesday, December 11, 2007

9 Responses to “Post-War Election”

1. The Thunder Run Says:
   December 11th, 2007 at 11:37 am

   Web Reconnaissance for 12/11/2007

   A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.

2. RebeccaH Says:
   December 11th, 2007 at 1:20 pm

   Instead, other issues have leapt to the front of public consciousness: Mormonism, mortgages and the cosmic importance of Oprah Winfrey.

   This is just another New York elitist swipe at the American public. What else do we great unwashed have to talk about over our six-packs and our bags of chips?

   I, for one, will never feel as safe post-9/11 as I did before, not as long as I live. I don’t for a minute think that things have settled down in the Middle East to where we can just “talk things out”. And neither do most people, I suspect.

3. saltydog Says:
   December 11th, 2007 at 3:56 pm

   “In the Middle East, the Arabs and Palestinians stumble toward some sort of peace process.” (Aside from splitting the Arabs and the Palestinians into separate peoples) when we haven’t been stumbling toward some sort of peace process since 1949?

   “American voters are coming out of the shells constructed after Sept. 11th and are looking for a new normalcy. They’re looking for something entirely different.

   And as every adult knows, wishing will make it so. So all you nervous chicks peck your way out of the shells now protecting you from the world’s bogey men, and create a completely different normalcy.

   Verdict: A mediocre mind afflicted with an dangerous case of acute myopia.

4. saltydog Says:
   December 11th, 2007 at 3:59 pm

   Oh geez. It’s “when haven’t we, “when we haven’t.”

   I could use Preview, here, you know.

5. saltydog Says:
   December 11th, 2007 at 4:00 pm

   Damn.

6. RebeccaH Says:
   December 11th, 2007 at 5:07 pm

   We got it, Salty, and you’re right. The “Palestinian” “peace process” has been going on for decades, and doesn’t show any signs of ever changing course, because one side (why bother to name it) has been proven incapable of civilized behavior.

7. Former PM Benazir Bhutto Assassinated in Pakistan « AmeriCAN-DO Attitude Says:
   December 27th, 2007 at 1:44 pm

   [...] or figment of anyone’s imagination, and should still be very much part of our own election, wishful thinking [...]

8. Jules Crittenden » Reasoned Argument Needed Says:
   February 1st, 2008 at 9:17 am

   [...] I thought we were all done with the Iraq war as a campaign issue. Now it’s popped up on the Republican side as well … who’s [...]

9. Jules Crittenden » Neo-Taliban Says:
   February 5th, 2008 at 9:40 pm

   [...] Apparently that war isn’t over yet. Could be an issue. [...]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.