|
|
Centrist Dem Prospects for 2004
by William Swann
[email protected]
6/25/2002
If you need proof of former-president Clinton's fundamental impact on the Democratic party, look no farther than the emerging list of hopefuls vying to take on President Bush in 2004.
Some of the presumed heavyweights are already putting organizational foundations in place. On that list are Sens. Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, and John Edwards.
There's also the obvious possibility that Al Gore will run again, and leading congressional Democrats Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt may run.
Added to that list are a few intriguing folks who lack national recognition, but are reported to be "interested" or "mulling a run" in the latest AP story.
Among those are Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, and Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes.
The residue of Clinton's success as a newfangled Democrat is shown most clearly in just how many top Democratic hopefuls count themselves as a New Democrat, or connect themselves in some way to leading centrist organizations such as the Democratic Leadership Council.
Most of this field tries to make that association.
What it actually means, in terms of their views, varies quite widely.
There are traditional liberals who adopt an unorthodox position on an issue or two -- usually including free trade. Thus, a solid liberal such as Tom Daschle can count himself among the New Democrats simply by accepting global trade and rejecting protectionism.
Some take it a bit more seriously, placing themselves on that so-very attractive "border" between true centrism and traditional liberalism. Sen. Edwards is an exceptionally talented emerging Democrat, and his views diverge in places from liberal orthodoxy.
Issues 2002 gives a breakdown of Edwards' positions on a variety of issues, and in their nifty little ideological diagram positions him right on the line separating moderates from liberals.
That sort of positioning provides the best basis for success in the primaries -- candidates who can adopt the successful Clinton mantle of moderation while simultaneously pleasing liberal activists with most of their views. It worked for Al Gore in 2000, and could easily work again.
One measure of the new weight of centrism, however, is the fact that some of these potential candidates go quite a bit farther than the "window dressing" type centrism we see from guys like Edwards, Daschle, and Gore.
Sen. Lieberman has a remarkably strong record of independent thought and action, though it was blunted somewhat by the necessity of adopting Gore's views in the 2000 campaign. Some question whether he went a step or two too far in embracing Gore's agenda, and whether the prospect of trying to win Democratic primaries in 2004 might blunt efforts to re-embrace the much more appealing maverick politics of the past.
Just as interesting, though less well-known, is Gov. Roy Barnes of Georgia. He's brought an intriguing combination of fiscal conservatism and moderate-to-liberal cultural policies to the Georgia statehouse. On taxes and education policy, he implemented tough and generally conservative policies. But he's generally pro-choice on abortion, and he bucked strong popular opinion in the ultimately successful effort to change the Georgia state flag.
This is a man willing to step on a few toes and defy traditional interests in the process of adopting a distinct and reasonably strong agenda. And he has a "down home" personality that might come across quite well on the national stage.
A.P. reporter Dick Pettys described Gov. Barnes as "a little bit like Tom Sawyer and a little bit like Clarence Darrow. But mostly, he's like the garrulous neighbor who swaps stories over the backyard fence -- only funnier."
The Watson Political Report recently suggested that Gov. Barnes "...might be the candidate Bush should fear most."
Centrists ought to be looking at these candidates closely now -- looking for the one with that "right" combination of bold plans and presidential stature.
We need to get in early, and strongly, if we expect distinct centrist candidates to have a chance of emerging in a field crowded with folks more pleasing to the Democratic base.
|