What Does the Mid-Term Election Mean?

It never fails. After every election the pundits sit around wringing their hands agonizing over the results and what it all means. In part, it is because they need something to talk about. In part, their livelihood depends on adding their input.

It also always happens that the winners try to read as much as possible into the election results. They want to convince themselves and the public at large that they have a mandate to push their agenda. The losers try to downplay the outcome and find as little reason to change direction as they can. Wherever possible the losers will blame other factors rather than admit a repudiation of their policies.

It falls to the electorate at large to separate the truth from the spin. Sadly, the electorate is generally so fed up with campaigning they don't want to think about it any more. They would much rather move on to their holiday shopping.

What do I think the Republican gains and Democrat loses in the most recent election means? Several things:

• Obviously, it will be harder for Democrats to push reform and investment in our nation's future. It will require substantially greater effort to find common ground with the Republicans for anything to be accomplished legislatively. Progress will have to take smaller steps.
• Since the number of political moderates in office is being reduced, compromise will be more difficult than before. Immigration policy reform is probably dead.
• The United States was not exempted from the current global phenomenon. The general result of this election was predictable even a year ago as one by one western democracies suffered loses for whichever group was in power. The global economic recession took a toll on the leadership in power in country after country no matter who was in charge when the downturn began.
• The predictability of this outcome vindicates the significant push the Obama administration made for major reform in the most difficult areas in the first few months of the term. The best (perhaps only) window of opportunity was in the first two years.

As a final comment on the predictability of the election outcome, I actually had the majority of this blog entry written in my head months ago. I even considered posting it well ahead of election day. But, I held out for the chance that I could be wrong.

That's Wade's two cents.

Wade Houston
November 7, 2010

Best Way for Hillary Clinton to Help Barack Obama

The last of the 2008 presidential primaries are behind us. It is clear that Barack Obama is going to be the Democrat nominee. All of his opponents have endorsed him. That includes his most enduring competitor, Hillary Clinton.

Senator Clinton has promised to do everything she can to support the election of Barack Obama. She is committed to seeing a Democrat elected to the White House. That invites the question, "How can Hillary Clinton's services be put to the best use?"

Certainly, Senator Clinton can go a long way to persuade those who supported her in the nomination process that their best next option is to support the election of Barack Obama. This is probably the single most important task for Hillary Clinton. Her consistent enthusiastic message has to be that Barack Obama must become the next President of the United States.

But, what about outside her base of support? Hillary Clinton comes with baggage. There are some people in this country who were determined to vote for anyone who was running against her. Of course, the majority of those aren't going to vote for Senator Obama, either, but some will. Obama needs to use Hillary Clinton's support to the best advantage without stirring up energy for the opposition. That is the challenge.

My recommendation would be that Senator Clinton hit the campaign trail stumping for other Democrats running for office. At every stop she can encourage people to support Barack Obama for President by voting for him and also sending to Washington people who will support his policies. This would need to be done carefully to see that she only appears with candidates in areas where her support is a net benefit, but it could help the Democrats enormously.

This approach is a win for Hillary Clinton as well. Much of politics is based on trading favors. By campaigning for other Democrats seeking office, Clinton builds political capital she can use to push policies in the Senate later.

That's Wade's two cents.

Wade Houston
July 2, 2008

The More The Merrier

After weeks of speculation, Newt Gingrich announced at the end of last week that he would not be putting his hat in the ring for the Republican nomination for President. Well, it was a crowded field anyway. Though I had no intention of voting for him, I was a little disappointed he would not be entering the race.

We have a large number of people seeking nomination for President. Six significant contenders for the nomination for the Democrats and about ten Republicans contenders on the other side. I love it! When we have more candidates, it is easier to get more issues discussed in a public forum. I think it increases the probability we will see meaningful dialog.

Before we know it, the earliest primaries and caucuses will be upon us. We can expect the numbers of candidates to plummet immediately after that. Some may endorse one of the other candidates. Some may hold out hoping to use their endorsement as some sort of bargaining chip. It largely depends on how important they feel that endorsement might be and what their ambitions are. Six months from now, it will largely be over.

That normally leaves a large span of time between the recognition of the inevitable nominees and the conventions. That is also normally a dead time in terms of public interest. It really should not be. There is no point when the people have more input in our government than in elections.

My preference would be to have the type of large fields of candidates that are only slowly sifted to finally arrive at the final nominees. That might engage the public in politics for a longer period. But all these states maneuvering to make their own selections earlier than ever works against that.

But for now, anyway, the election game is on. Enjoy it while you may.

That's my two cents.

Wade Houston
September 30, 2007

Get Ready For The Big Sale

Have you ever been to a store and found something advertised as 20% off only to realize the sale price is about the same as the product was a few months before? It's an old gimmick merchants have been using for years. They raise the price only to lower it later and promote it as a sale.

It looks very much like the Bush administration is trying to put that kind of spin on their proposed troop reduction by July of next year. The reduction will bring the U.S. forces in Iraq back down to the level they were before the surge. The surge was always intended to be temporary. It cannot be maintained without seriously over stressing the troops. So, Bush is trying to spin it like doing what they MUST do is some mark of progress. The question is, "Will the public buy what they are selling?"

Many of the Republicans in Congress are jumping on board with this promotion. I believe they are primarily playing to their own constituencies. They need to point to something to suggest the Iraqi situation is really not the quagmire it seems.

At the same time, many Democrats are calling for bigger troop reductions sooner. They are even talking of passing legislation to mandate such action. They have little concern for the consequences because they know there is no chance of having the votes needed to override a presidential veto. It's all a game to keep the American public focused on placing the blame for the war on the Republicans.

Both Republicans and Democrats are spinning like crazy. I see a lot of politics and very little statesmanship. But, the sale is on!

That's my two cents.

Wade Houston
September 13, 2007