Gordon L. Weil
Get ready for snow.
Before long, the 2024 election campaign will be covered in a thick blanket of speculation. It will be about as difficult to see through as the blizzard of punditry that blows it in. Of course, political speculation is likely no better than most 10-day forecasts of the actual weather. Before I take cover, here are my thoughts about the presidential race.
The big news is that polls show that Trump, the former president, today defeats Biden, the president who beat him, in swing states. A former president who loses and then wins a second term is unusual. Only Grover Cleveland did it, back in the 1880s.
The polls have settled nothing. At least four scenarios are possible for the presidential election, excluding any others in which a third party would be a factor.
The first is the currently anticipated Biden-Trump contest. This one could produce as a winner the person disliked less than the other.
On the issues, Biden has some strong points like abortion and democracy, but some weaknesses like immigration and inflation. Both matter less than his age. He is too old to be president for another five years. The signs of his aging are evident, though they are ignored by his circle and advocates, impressed with his policies.
Biden suffers from his lack of an essential element of leadership. Though he reaches out to many constituencies, he does not inspire voters. Voters need charismatic leaders, and Biden is too laid back or tired.
Trump is in serious legal trouble, and likely to be convicted of more than one criminal violation. His loyal cult sticks with him, but would voters elect a convicted criminal? Will traditional Republicans surrender their party to Trumpers who place their quest for power above the national interest?
Besides, what are Trump’s current policies beyond an inflated opinion of himself? In recent statements, he seems to have a declining understanding of both domestic and international issues.
The Biden-Trump contest would boil down to a choice between the lesser of two evils, as it may have been in 2020.
One alternative would be Biden versus another Republican like Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor, or Ron Desantis, the Florida governor. They benefit from surviving in the GOP field. Early primaries may make one of them a viable alternative to Trump. If the court cases undermine him, a possible replacement would be ready.
That likely creates a major problem for Biden. Running against, say, Haley could change the lesser-of-two-evils calculation. If Biden faces the potential problem of running against a younger, cogent candidate, he might now have to either reconsider running or make a bold move to shake up the contest.
Though highly risky politically, that move would be throwing open to the Democratic Convention the choice of the vice presidential candidate. In effect, the winner would be the face of the Democrats against the non-Trump GOP candidate. The party, not Biden alone, would pick his potential successor. Biden would remain on the ticket, but there would be a lively Democratic nomination process.
Yet another possible scenario would be Trump versus another Democrat. That plot could develop if Trump overcomes his legal handicaps and Biden does not overcome the advancing effects of age and leaves the race.
In this case, the Democrats would probably not simply pass the first spot to Vice President Harris unless the need arose only after the Convention. The Democrats could select Harris or another candidate who was younger and more in tune with the majority of voters than Trump.
The fourth alternative case might be the most appealing. It would pit a Democrat, not Biden, against a Republican, not Trump. Each party would go through an open and competitive process to select its nominee.
The campaign could be mostly about the future and less about past presidencies. In a completely divided country, with many voters who claim to be moderates but really aren’t, the electorate could be given a choice between two fresh approaches to governing in an age of environmental crisis and economic change.
Maybe the candidates would be forced to debate their policies on immigration, law and the courts, women’s equality and the future of Social Security and Medicare. While ideology is a driving force for some voters, so-called moderates, the key swing voters, could decide who is more likely to offer practical solutions free from the controversial policies of a previous president.
Admittedly, the alternative cases may be unrealistic simply because of the momentum generated by two presidents and media expectations. Yet merely accepting a race between two candidates who should have retired could be costly for the country.
These four cases show that today’s self-confident speculating by political analysts might amount to little more than a snow job. Mine, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment