Articles ran rampant during the 2004 election season, especially as the Democrats zeroed in on their candidate (which happened very fast). It was all about “who could beat Bush?” There were two huge challenges that beset the Democrats. First, they didn’t have much of a selection. It’s just the kind of thing that happens. Some years your candidates are stronger than the other side, sometimes the other side is stronger. Democrats underestimated President Bush and overestimated Senator Kerry. It was probably their best choice, but it was just not enough. How many times did we hear that Democrats were not excited about their candidate? I would venture to guess that the vast majority of elections go to the party that is more excited about their candidate. If your “guy” is boring, you’re going to lose. If he’s boring and trying to fake being excited, you’re still going to lose.
The second issue is something that is really going to come into play in the next election. There is a candidate on the Democrats’ side that excites them. Hillary Clinton. She’s far from boring. The challenge will be for the Republicans to be excited about their candidate. Most of the names being floated are simply not exciting. Except Condoleezza Rice. She excites Republicans. She’s the Republican version of Hillary Clinton. She’s strong, smart, female, and has a political resume that has not only seen her in the Oval Office, but could put her behind the desk.
Therefore, the issue is going to be broad appeal. We have seen Senator Clinton making great strides to try to appeal nationwide. She’s moved far center of her typical position, presumably to set herself up to represent the whole nation rather than just her party. The question is, will it work? Both candidates, especially if it comes down to these two, are going to have to answer that one.
The second issue boils down to this: will your candidate actually inspire the other side to come out in opposition? Certainly there was a lot of that in the 2004 election. So you’ve got the positive, neutral, and negative takes on the two issues: Excitement for your candidate and determination to defeat the opposition.
My opinion (since this is my blog) is that in a Clinton/Rice race, Democrats will be excited about their candidate, but not enough of them determined to defeat Rice (in fact they will have to worry about her broad appeal taking away one of their big voting blocks), but Republicans will be both excited about their candidate and determined to defeat Clinton. Not a HUGE win, but at least four more years in the White House. I think many Democrats have figured this out. While according to the latest USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll, Rice has a 59% favorable rating nationwide, and Clinton only polled 40% among Democrats for the candidacy in ’08. There’s a LONG way to go, but I believe it’s something to watch.
For the Democrats it’s no longer just about getting your people to the poll. Not only in this same poll do 56% of the people in this nation (all parties) approve of the Republican party, but only 46% approve of the Democrats (47% disapprove), but there are more registered Republicans than Democrats now. They also have to find a way to keep the Republicans from going to the polls.
Good luck…
