One of the great errors in political reporting and analysis is the myopic focus on state elections in isolation, treating them as somehow removed from national and global events. In 2010, these events will play a great role in Texas election outcomes, just as they have in the past. The impact on candidate fortunes just can’t be known today.
It was, of all people, a British novelist, Ian M. Banks, who reminded me of this. The core of Banks’ new novel, Transition, is the era between the fall of Berlin Wall and the fall of the New York’s Twin Towers. Banks speaks of “the golden age which nobody noticed was happening at the time; I mean the long decade between the fall of the Wall and the fall of the Towers.”
If you wish to be pedantically exact about it, those retrospectively blessed dozen years lasted from the chilly, fevered Central European night of November 9, 1989 to that bright morning on the Eastern Seaboard of America of September 11, 2001. One event symbolized the lifted threat of a worldwide nuclear holocaust, something which had been hanging over humanity for nearly forty years, and so ended an age of idiocy. The other ushered in a new one.
By shear coincidence, I managed the Texas gubernatorial campaign that followed the fall of the Wall – Ann Richards in 1990 – and the campaign that followed the destruction of the Towers – Tony Sanchez in 2002. There’s just no disputing the fact that the hopeful, exhilarating months after the liberation of Eastern Europe played significantly into Richards’ victory. She was perfect for the moment.
And there’s no disputing that the rekindled fear and anxiety in the post-9/11 era removed any chance that Sanchez or any other Democrat could win in 2002. In the latter case, national Democrats were frozen in their tracks, playing dress-up doll with George W. Bush and a war hero’s uniform and failing to mount any significant opposition to Bush’s insane plans for Iraq. National and international news dominated. Texans, like voters everywhere, based their decisions on global, not stateside, events.
I’m not arguing that all election outcomes are pre-determined by events outside the control of campaigns. I am arguing that state campaigns can’t be isolated from national and international events as if they were taking place in laboratories or on desert islands.
Political consultants and their fans in the pundit class like to speak of the genius it takes to win elections. Someone wins every election, though, and that means a great flowering of genius follows each election day.
But campaigns have very few moving parts and very few possible moves. The game is checkers, not chess. Timing and luck are everything, which is why consultant “genius” has more to do with getting in or staying out of particular contests depending upon the chances of victory. Courage and moral strength are not required.
Campaigns are more like surfing than strategic war games. Campaign “War Rooms” would more appropriately be called “Surf Shops.” Keeping one’s balance on the waves is key.
What waves are approaching as 2010 nears? Conventional wisdom, an oxymoron if ever there was one, says the mid-term election of President Barack Obama’s tenure won’t be great for Democrats. Continued conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with a still-weak economy, open the door for Republicans. In addition, health care reform hasn’t passed.
But health care reform will pass, Americans generally support efforts to keep the nation safe, and precipitous actions of any sort on the foreign stage would serve to raise, not lower, the kind of fear and anxiety Republicans slobber themselves to exploit. And, an economic recovery appears to be gathering steam.
Furthermore, the most important political story of the day is not Obama’s popularity, but the GOP’s continued decline. By giving the party over to teabag-behatted nuts, party leaders have made sure their circus is not one average folk want to attend.
Little talked about is the decline in coverage of state politics and government. Most of the political news voters get involves national or local issues. That just makes the waves coming from afar all the bigger and more powerful. Anyone wishing to handicap the 2010 elections here oughta stop looking for signs of life in U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison’s campaign, or for what key Republicans and Democrats enter what races. Better to learn to surf. Quickly.
This is an astute analysis of political psychology. I hope that Democrats don’t just give up and assume that they don’t have a chance in Texas. To the contrary, I am convinced that we can make huge inroads in Texas because so many people are dissatisfied with what is happening internally. In particular, the State Board of Education, which has become the laughingstock of the state and the nation, is ripe for reform. I am the only woman running for SBOE District 5, and it’s high time to topple incumbent Ken Mercer, who brags about giving teachers who worked on curriculum review committees a “spanking.” This kind of disrespect is outrageous, and his lockstep adherence to an extremist political agenda is nothing short of an attack on public education. Visit voterebecca.com for more information on my campaign.
“the decline in coverage of state politics and government.”
I’m not convinced it’s declined; shifted away from traditional sources, certainly, but most of my RSS feeds are local in either a sense of local-to-Texas geography/politics or of local-to-my-professional interests.
Dog Canyon miraculously bridges the gap between traditional and what-ever-we’re-headed-toward, and I thank you for that.
If the Dems want to win in Texas, they’ve got to run somebody real. If Chris Bell is the best we’ve got, we’re doomed.
They’ve got to relate to liberals in Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio, but also be able to talk to folks in west Texas. Ann could pull this off. The Dems haven’t run anyone who could since then.
Here’s hoping…