Eve of NH: Reagan forsaken?

Rumors of Mrs. Clinton’s demise are greatly exaggerated. True, she is reeling after a weak showing in Iowa, but the first subsequent poll (USA Today/Gallup) still showed her tied nationally with Barack Obama, and prior to Iowa she held a consistent double-digit lead in national polls for months. Indeed, to this point nobody else has led nationally in the Democratic race. And though Obama looks likely to win New Hampshire and South Carolina in the coming days on the strength of far greater likeability than Mrs. Clinton – particularly among men – contests in big states like Florida, New York, and California where Clinton is strong still remain.

[Note: See also the NH forecast by John Andrews and Joshua Sharf on the Gang of Four blog.]

Moreover, the larger Clinton machine and network, one of the most powerful in recent political memory, remains formidable in Democratic circles. Obama has a shot, to be sure, but media hype about the race being Obama’s to lose is just hype.

On the GOP side, mediocrity is breeding ambivalence. A field of philosophically lackluster candidates has made for the most evenly-matched race in recent memory, with leading conservatives everywhere lamenting that these are the best a wandering Republican Party can produce. There is no Reagan in sight. Rudy Guiliani has led in national polls for months but began sliding toward the end of November as Mike Huckabee skyrocketed.

Huckabee’s meteoric rise, which over-exposed Republican pundit and focus group organizer Frank Luntz has called “unprecedented in modern political history,” began around Nov. 25, the very day Huckabee began airing his famous “Christian leader” ad.

Interpretation: evangelical social conservatives are still numerous in the South (South Carolina) and Midwest (Iowa) and, prior to Huckabee’s series of bold statements regarding his faith and social conservatism, had not seen anyone or anything in the race that made it interesting to them. Huckabee followed up the “Christian leader” ad with his famous Christmas ad which, as such things do, terrified secular media pundits with visions of hovering crosses (actually just lighted bookshelves) and tyrannical Christian theocracy.

Huckabee’s faith is obviously genuine, his knowledge of the Bible obviously thorough (he is halfway to a Master of Divinity degree from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas), and his answers to media questions regarding evolution and religion unwavering. Here, for instance, on evolution. Or here on whether he believes the Bible.

If you don’t understand how energizing this is to evangelicals, the largest single bloc of Republican voters, you don’t understand evangelical Christianity. Huckabee is also a solid conservative on abortion and homosexual marriage, furthering buttressing his appeal to evangelicals. He combines this kind of backbone on his faith with a quick wit and guy-next-door likeability that is disarming even to those who distrust his Christianity.

His response to those who saw a “floating cross” in his Christmas ad: “I will confess this: if you play the spot backwards it says, ‘Paul is dead. Paul is dead.’” And here is his appearance on the Jay Leno show on the eve of the Iowa caucus (watch both parts – he plays bass guitar with Leno’s band in the second). Finally there was his debate crowd-pleaser back in May: “Congress spends money like John Edwards at a beauty shop."

Huckabee is the only candidate in the race with a Reagan-style wit and charm, to say nothing of an unashamed belief in the historic Christian religion. There is only one problem. On foreign policy and military matters, taxes and fiscal matters, the welfare state, law and order, and immigration, Huckabee’s record is either confused or outright liberal. He represents the rebirth of pre-Reagan evangelical politics – William Jennings Bryan reincarnated. Bryan opposed evolution, supported Prohibition, and preached evangelical salvation, but supported the nationalization of railroads, the disbanding of trusts, and many other important free-market economic priorities of industry captains. He and Huckabee represent more a brand of Christian populism than a coherent conservatism.

Thus, the larger Republican base remains unenergized by Huckabee, and many military, foreign policy, fiscal, law enforcement, and immigration conservatives actively oppose him. These people are either settling for McCain or Guiliani – the two most liberal candidates in the race – if they are weak on social issues, or, with national conservative organ National Review, agreeing Mitt Romney is the conservative candidate of choice in a weak field. Romney’s conversion to social conservatism is too recent for the comfort of many (myself included), making his seemingly courageous adherence to his Mormon faith, which clearly teaches social conservatism, ring a bit hollow. But he does appear the best of the field.

As of now, McCain looks as though he has sealed up New Hampshire. Romney’s father was governor of Michigan once upon a time, making Romney strong there, but Huckabee is running a close second and has South Carolina in the bag. It is thus very possible that, by the time Super Tuesday rolls around, when Guiliani still looks to win big states like California, New York, and Pennsylvania, there could be three different early GOP winners, and thus no clear frontrunner. This is Guiliani’s dream scenario.

Sigh. For now, Reagan’s revolution does appear to be at an end.

Two-thirds of Iowans nixed Huck

(Lyon, France, Jan. 4) Hold everything. What’s all this I hear and read about Mike Huckabee’s brand of economic populism coming out on top in last night’s Iowa caucuses, as I raid the Internet for political news? Huckabee is said to have “won” with 34% of the vote. Well done, and I would hate to sound like a party pooper, but let me ask this: What about the 66% of GOP caucus-goers who did not vote for what David J. Sanders aptly describes on today’s OpinionJournal web page as Huckabee’s religious-left, big-government agenda based on “increasing the government’s role in the fight against global warming, poverty and economic inequality”?

Call me naïve or insufficiently versed in the intricacies of Republican primary politics, but looking at last night’s results, I would make one further comment:

However flawed the GOP's two most prominent spokesmen (Romney and Thompson) might be this year in terms of authenticity and “fire in the belly”, three-legged-stool conservatism combining defense hawks, free-market proponents, and moral traditionalists is still very much up and running -- having collectively prevailed in Iowa with at least 38% of the ballots cast (or 51% if you count McCain's near-tie with Thompson).

Huckabee campaign advisor Ed Rollins and David Brooks of the New York Times might be self-servingly shouting it from the rooftops -- but the demise of the Reagan coalition has thankfully not occurred yet, if ever in the foreseeable future.

Message matters more than money indeed, but only modern conservatism, not apocryphal economic conservative tongue-speaking, can still deliver it. How much longer will we have to wait for an authentically fire-eating conservative to step up and take the good news to Iowa, New Hampshire and elsewhere in these indispensable United States? Eight years?

Note: “Paoli” is the pen name, er, nom de plume, of our French correspondent. Monsieur is a close student of European politics, a onetime exchange student in Colorado and a well-wisher to us Americans. He informs us the original Pasquale Paoli, 1725-1807, was the George Washington of Corsica.

Moloney’s World: Worst Form of Government?

Stowe VT, Dec. 31 - Somewhere near here, tramping through the snows of New Hampshire and probably wearing a wool cap with ear flaps to impress the natives, is the next President of the United States – ardently seeking to persuade taciturn Granite Staters that he (or I Hillary) is their best bet for leader of the Free World. While it’s fair to say that ordinary citizens in Iowa and New Hampshire seem to enjoy their quadrennial star turn, I think the rest of the country would be perfectly happy if this political version of "Survivor" didn’t begin until say, next August. Having lived in England for a number of years, I have fond memories of the expeditious character of national elections in what we used to call the “Mother Country” where they allow just six weeks of campaigning before you see a new Prime Minister lugging furniture into Number 10 Downing Street.

However, if you want the very latest in efficient electioneering, look to that new star in the east Vladimir Putin. In Vlad’s Russia they won’t even call an election until they’ve sorted out in advance who’s going to win, namely you know who. Putin’s new electoral techniques were a rousing success in the recent parliamentary elections, where his United Russia party won over two thirds of the seats. This result was much aided by locking up opposition leaders, canceling their rallies, and limiting their television time to after midnight and only available to cable subscribers (if there are any) in Eastern Siberia. The whole thing stunk so badly that even Jimmy Carter refused to be an election observer.

Stealing elections isn’t as easy as it looks. Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez thought he’d followed the Putin playbook perfectly in his recent election to make himself President for Life. His thugs beat up opposition leaders, shut down rival newspapers, and seized the only free television station, but then Hugo made the rookie’s mistake of failing to decisively stuff the ballot boxes. When he lost one can imagine a phone call from his mentor Fidel Castro reminding him of the wit and wisdom of the Queen of Hearts: “Results first, lections later – maybe”.

Of course, Americans shouldn’t be too smug about all this, since we’ve had a few funny elections of our own.

Chicago was long famous for having “problems with voting machines” around midnight so that they could find out how many votes they’d have to manufacture to overcome downstate Republicans. John Kennedy, who probably owed his election to such Chicago shenanigans, at least had a sense of humor about it. On visiting the Windy City shortly after becoming President, he lamented the closeness of the election saying “my dad told me he wasn’t buying any more votes than absolutely necessary”.

In fairness, Chicago has no monopoly on slow counts, mysteriously appearing (and disappearing) ballot boxes, delayed poll closings, intervening judges, and who will ever forget “hanging chads”.

So, what lessons can we draw from this random tour of the world’s electoral horizons?

As regards our own elections, it’s been great to see that the pundits and the talking heads in the end didn’t know any more than the rest of us.

They told us that Huckabee had no chance, McCain was finished, Hillary was inevitable, and Obama was just a flash in the pan. Now in the next six weeks, We the People will tell the experts what’s really going to happen.

As regards the rest of the world, beyond what we used to call Western Civilization, much work is needed before elections and democracy can flower into their true splendor.

U.S. elections, like America itself, are imperfect models – but warts and all, we remain the grand example of what people striving to be free want to become. Even election-rigging tyrants implicitly acknowledge this.

So, as we follow CSPAN-2 into people’s living rooms, church basements, and school cafeterias to hear candidates try to make a connection with ordinary people, we are pulled back to a simpler time in our history. Critics may call this an odd manner of filling the most important political post on the planet, but Churchill still has the last best word: Democracy remains the “worst form of government save all the others the world has tried”.

Dr. William Moloney, a featured columnist on BackboneAmerica.net, was Colorado Education Commissioner from 1997-2007 and has done graduate work in Russian and world history at Oxford and the University of London. He admits to being a veteran of all too many political campaigns.

Gunfight at the DU Corral

Yours truly, blazing from the right, will face syndicated columnist David Sirota, firing lefthanded, in a University of Denver classroom on three Wednesday evenings starting Jan. 23. It's a noncredit course for adults, part of the enrichment program of DU's University College. "Politics 2008: The Battles from the Statehouse to the White House" is the title. David and I will team-teach one session on the presidential race, another on contests for the US House and Senate, and a third on state legislative races, all featuring the predictable liberal-conservative disagreements between us, but kept civil by our shared love and respect for the American political process.

The prolific Sirota has already invited signups for the course via two local blogs, Square State and Colorado Pols, as a well this Editor & Publisher item two weeks ago under a New York dateline (woo woo). I am hustling to catch up with him in the self-promo department, using the mighty platform of my radio show and this website, as well as the PoliticsWest.com site where we blog together..

If you enjoy a hot crossfire of ideas -- cooled by facts -- why not join us for the political preview course four weeks hence? Fee is nominal and some spaces remain; the limit is 50. Click for details and registration.

Flash: Santa is a conservative

The worst Christmas song I've heard this year has to be Bruce Springsteen's tuneless rendition of "Santa Claus is Coming to Town." Yet by forcing me to think about the lyrics, the Boss delivered a flash of insight: conservatives do the jolly old elf a grave wrong in calling him the patron saint of something-for-nothing Democrats. We should claim Santa as our own. Listing who's been bad and good, naughty and nice? Warning us not to cry (play the victim) or pout (cast blame and act entitled)? There's little difference, when you think about it, between St. Nick and St. Newt. George Will himself could hardly be more stern and judgmental. Santa Claus rightly understood is a far cry from the unearned redistribution of John Edwards or the syrupy hope of Obama.

Even if recast from the unnerving red-clad (red, Republican, get it?) bearded geezer of yore to the more kid-friendly persona of Mr. Rogers, as David Grimes recommended in Sunday's Denver Post, Father Christmas remains a no-nonsense apostle of good conduct, rigorous standards, and time-honored traditions. The "Santa's Coming" song, even when butchered by Springsteen, is just the opposite of that favorite left-liberal anthem, "Anything Goes."

Jeffrey Bell, writing in the Weekly Standard, offers a great Christmas gift for all of us on the right with this masterful summary of what the left really wants -- a total repudiation of St. Nicolas and his strictness, a hot revolution that would melt the North Pole faster than you can say Al Gore:

"The goal of the left is the liberation of mankind from traditional institutions and codes of behavior, especially moral codes. It seeks a restoration (or achievement) of a state of nature, one of absolute individual liberty--universal happiness without the need for laws. The proposed political way stations chosen by the left in its drive toward this vision have [included]: abolition of private property (socialism); prohibition of Christianity and/or propagation by the political elite of a new civil religion to replace it; confiscatory taxation, especially at death; regulation of political speech to limit the ability of certain individuals or classes to affect politics; the takeover of education to instill new values and moral habits in the population; confiscation of privately held firearms; gradual phasing out of the nation-state; displacement of the traditional family in favor of child-rearing by an enlightened governmental elite; and the inversion of sexual morality to elevate recreational sex and reduce the prestige of procreative sex."

Some agenda, huh? It adds up to the exact opposite of "be good for goodness' sake." And notice, by the way, that this injunction from Santa Claus, courtesy of songwriter Haven Gillespie, doesn't merely appeal to utilitarian self-interest. Rather it invokes a moral absolute which, when obeyed, is its own reward. A pitch-perfect echo of Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" and "Theory of Moral Sentiments," in what you thought was just an empty Yuletide ditty. Mirabile dictu!

Lest we forget, however, the true reason for this season is neither St. Nick on the right nor Holiday Hillary on the left, but the baby born in Bethlehem. The Prince of Peace transcends liberal and conservative. He is a miracle even more mysterious than a large man ascending a small chimney. None of us is good enough to deserve His unspeakable gift, salvation and life eternal, yet none of us is so bad as to be disqualified from it. Here indeed is a present worth unwrapping. A merry and, yes, a holy Christmas to all.