- The Washington Times - Friday, February 1, 2008

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

We’re at that lull in the presidential primary season when pundits try to make the most of the least election returns. Iowa and New Hampshire are in, plus Barack Obama’s landslide in South Carolina and now Florida’s votes. Trying to judge the electorate’s mood this early in the primary season and ordeal is like trying to get salt out of a clogged shaker and then reading the candidates’ fortunes from just the few grains that spill out.

But when the top comes off the shaker next week, and the results of Super-Duper Tuesday start pouring in, election returns will be everywhere. How like the Age of the Internet: Flooded by data, we’ll lack only the judgment to know what it all means. Hey, what a country — the despair of pollsters and delight of those of us who love a surprise.

Joaquin Andujar may have had his erratic moments as both pitcher and outfielder for the St. Louis Cards, but what he once said about the once-national pastime goes double for America itself: “You can sum up baseball in one word: You never know.” Mr. Andujar’s word count may have been a little off, but his analysis was right on.

Americans are in one of our uncharacteristic periods of drift — or what feels like it. The presidential race hasn’t fully jelled, and every lover of suspense and newspaperman enamored of good copy can hope it won’t for a while — not even after all those primaries on Mardi Gras, which this year is literally Fat Tuesday for the country’s politicians. Twenty-two states will be holding presidential primaries that perhaps fateful day.

Just maybe Hillary Clinton can hold on to her presumed lead long enough to cinch the nomination Tuesday. If hubby will just stay out of more trouble. In the meantime, the nation pauses and waits. The lull is almost palpable. The air is still — the way it is on the Gulf Coast while folks await a hurricane.

But what appears drift may be only flux as Americans sort things out before moving ahead, as usual, in all directions — economically, socially, militarily, politically and of course technologically, this being the land of the free, home of the brave, and natural habitat of tinkerers. The only thing about the future one can be sure of is that it’ll be interesting.

Who would have thought a year ago, or even six months ago, that Barack Obama would be coming on like this year’s John F. Kennedy, complete with Caroline and Teddy’s endorsement? Or that John McCain would start looking like a prophet instead of the last man standing in support of this war in Iraq? The candidate who was in favor of the Surge before it had a name now has made the war the centerpiece of his advancing campaign — instead of the issue no Republican once dared mention.

And who would have thought Bill Clinton’s unmatchable political instincts would have so deserted him? It was embarrassing. Here he was making precisely the wrong analogy when he tried to pigeonhole his spouse’s opponent as another Jesse Jackson — i.e., just another black candidate.

Anyone with the slightest political intuition would know Barack Obama’s campaign this year bears no real or even much of an imaginary resemblance to Jesse Jackson’s in the 1980s. Mr. Obama’s whole appeal is different, just as his background, approach, and simple but eloquent style are different. A politician as astute as Bill Clinton must have known that, but what th’ heck, he saw his opening, even if it was below the belt, and he took it.

Naturally the tactic blew up in his (and Miss Hillary’s) face. If this doesn’t teach William J. Clinton to stay out of politics this tricky year, nothing will. And of course nothing will. Unless he’s talking politics (endlessly) the man would just dry up. Like a little puddle in a dry Arkansas August.

How can you tell the difference between the usual empty assertions in a presidential campaign and those of any substance? Simple. Just imagine what the presidential candidate attacking some rival would say if that rival prevailed and asked the candidate to run on his or her ticket.

Suppose Mitt Romney turns out to be John McCain’s running mate in the end. What would happen to all Mitt’s attempts to paint his opponent as only a Democrat in Republican clothing? He would doubtless ask us to overlook his earlier, incautious statements as merely “campaign rhetoric.” That’s the term Wendell Willkie used when, after his defeat by Franklin Roosevelt in 1940, he teamed up with Roosevelt to prepare the country for war. Unity has a way of returning even after the most hard-fought campaigns.

If she wins the Democratic presidential nomination, of course Hillary Clinton will be able to unite the party — as no one else could. Naturally, I’m talking about the Republican Party.

Every four years, the country throws a continental conniption fit before the gracious concession speeches are made and the next president is given a fresh start and maybe a brief honeymoon with public opinion. It can prove therapeutic in the end, like making up after a lover’s quarrel.

There are exceptions to this wholesome rule, when the whole future of the country does indeed turn out to be at stake, as in 1860, and disaster follows. But in general, partisan and even intraparty passions dissipate and the country moves on, does what it has to do, and, despite sporadic tragedies, defeats, betrayals and disappointments, continues its climb.

There are good reasons that it sometimes seems the whole world wants to move here. Among them are the remarkable continuity of our history and stability of our system, even if those blessings may be obscured for a season by all the rhetorical fireworks of a presidential campaign year.

So enjoy this brief lull while it lasts, which won’t be long. As always, surprises await.

Paul Greenberg is a nationally syndicated columnist.

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide