Why '08 is a GOP Victory

I know many folks on the electoral front lines who are dispirited about Republican chances in the 2008 election cycle. Whenever we discuss their ennui, I always share my high spirits, optimism and expectation toward 2008. After one such conversation, a wise friend challenged me to give her 5 bulleted talking points as to why I think a Republican probably will win the Presidency of the United States in 2008. Here are those talking points:

1. The Democratic Line-up: The GOP's greatest strength in the general election will be the Democratic opposition. No matter who the Dem's select, they will be no match in terms of experience for the Republican selection. Further, some Dem's carry even more baggage than others. I look forward to seeing the GOP draw those comparisons.

2. The Republican Line-up: By any standard, the Republican field is impressive. Especially when compared to the utter lack of experience of the Democratic field. The Republicans all have high Executive or Legislative experience and none of them carry any baggage from the current Administration. They are in a great position to constantly contrast themselves with the Democrats on important issues.

3. Mobilizing a Wider Base: In a tight election cycle, there are two keys to winning: 1) Draw in moderate centrist voters and 2) mobilize the base. Two of the GOP front runners (Mitt Romney and Giuliani) and very well positioned to draw in moderates. Fred Thompson is riding a wave of Base excitement and has high name recognition among moderates. When compared to the likely Dem nominee (Hillary), all 3 should be able to excite the base and capitalize on the moderates' displeasure with the Dem.

4. It's the Economy: By all measures, this economy is fantastic. It is hitting some hiccups now, but some action from the current Administration and the Fed will likely keep it on the growth track. Even moderate growth over the next 12 months will result in a reduced deficit, high wages, an enlarged GDP, record highs in stocks, historic lows in unemployment and interest rates and a stabilized housing sector. Any decent candidate should do well with this message.

5. The War on Terrorism: It's hard to say which direction this war will go, but Iraq is clearly on the right military track and we know the Surge will be drawing down next Spring. Thus, the GOP candidate can probably point to some positive signs in Iraq, praise the draw down in troops and constantly focus on the real threats of China, Russia, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Pakistan, etc. If the electorate sees some success in Iraq and understands the threat from other quarters, the GOP should do well.

Now, in a bit more detail:

1. The Democratic Line-up:

Possibly the greatest strength for the GOP this election cycle is the Democratic field of candidates and their complete dearth of true experience (Executive, International or even Legislative):

1. There is no serious candidate with any real depth of experience in Government or in running a large, competitive organization. This will be an easy contrast to make in the general election. Hillary can reference her years in the White House, but not without making the Clinton years fair game for the campaign. This was the saving grace for the GOP in John Kerry's "Reporting for Duty" speech at the Democratic National Convention; once he introduced it into the campaign, his military service and political activities just afterward became the championed target of conservative activists.

2. Hillary is far and away the most likely contender for the position of lead Donkey. Her negatives are among the highest of any candidate to enter the Presidential race (not necessarily the absolute highest). Most candidates with Negatives in the upper 40's have "earned" them through making the tough decisions inherent in leadership. Hillary, by contrast, has earned them by being Hillary. Remember, she's not a new face to most Americans. She's been a household name and media personality for 16 years. If 49% of likely voters dislike her, having known her for 16 years, it's difficult to move those numbers. Possible, but extremely difficult.

3. And what if Obama is selected as the Dem nominee? Well, first, that would be Barack HUSSEIN Obama. The man who has held a serious, elected Federal office for all of 2 years. The man who has attended an Islamic school, bears an Islamic name and who has stated he would love to meet - without condition - the worse human rights abusers on the planet. While he could run a perfect campaign from this point forward, surprisingly sweep the Dem nomination and run tightly with the GOP - if he does all of this, his seriously erratic statements regarding national security (civil liberties in Iraq aren't worth defending, willingness to unconditionally meet with tyrants, desire to bomb an nuclear-armed ally, etc) will make for excruciating footage in the general election.

2. The Republican Line-up:

Any comparison of the GOP candidates, whomever wins the nomination nod, is a favorable one to the Dems. They are all polling highly, have impressive experience and don't fit the mold of the current Administration.:

1. All Republican candidates can boast of leadership experience which runs rings any of the leading Dems about 10 times. The least experienced lead GOP contender has 10 years in the summit and makes the Dem's look like kids. In an age of Terrorism, the distinction between maturity and juvenility should make for easy positioning. Further, none of the current front runners is a shill for the current Administration. This allows all of the front runners to distance themselves from all the perceived weaknesses of the current Administration while embracing the popular attributes.

2. If Giuliani wins the nomination, he can cash in national name recognition, storied success in leading one of the World's leading cities (a city larger than many countries), respected performance in a time of national crisis, and historic experience prosecuting terrorists. Now, let's compare that with the Dem's above. To top it off, he has the moderate social values to win the middle and some Dems (ala Reagan Democrats) and the national security chops to probably maintain the base in an age of conflict.

3. If Romney wins the nomination, he can cash in on being the newest "Come back kid", storied success in business and international Olympics and arguably impressive performance in Governing a tough, liberal state. His "flips" on social policy should enable him to snag some Dems. If Hillary is the opposing candidate, his solidly conservative policy pronouncements are likely to enable him to count on an active base, if not for excitement, then due to her negatives.

4. Fred Thompson, if he were to win the GOP nomination, can cash in his household face and experience delivering before a camera, 10 years of senate experience, an impressive performance moving Chief Justice John Roberts through a stubbornly opposed Congress and a ground swell of base support. If communicated correctly, Thompson's commitment to Federalism, keeping government out of legislating coercive morality, may just keep the moderates at home on election day - if not turning up to vote for him.

3. Mobilizing a Wider Base:

In a close election, there are two factors to victory, drawing in moderates and mobilizing the base. And the base can always be mobilized in greater numbers than the moderates can be drawn in.

1. In a contest against Hillary, her negatives (49%) are higher than the percentage of self-identified Republicans (31.9%). In such a contest, she may actually manage help the GOP contender do both, rally the base and draw in moderates.

2. With a highly mobilized base, as Hillary's entrenched negatives may yield, GOP candidates would reap unusually high support down the ticket - in Senate and House races and in volatile State races.

4. It’s the Economy:

It's hard to lose an election with a strong economy. Al Gore proved it could happen, but in this election cycle, the GOP has some powerful messages to clearly parlay.

1. When Bush's tax cuts were first passed through Congress, powerful Dems insisted they be limited to 2010, after which they expire. Bush and his advisers agreed to this because the expiration of the tax cuts would allow for an incredibly clear and easy political battle 2008. Normally, conservatives run against the unclear (and thus somewhat uncertain) specter of a numberless possible tax hike by the Dem's. In 2008, the GOP nominee will be able to clearly communicate the EXACT amount of the tax increase in 2011 and EXACTLY what that will mean to families. This is the clearest economic message I've ever seen in an election cycle.

2. The stock market has hit new record highs, home ownership is at all time highs, salaries are increasing, unemployment is at historical lows, interest rates are at historical lows, job creation is very high and GDP growth is impressive, the Federal deficit is being cut quicker than originally forecasted. No one knows how the economy will fair 12 months from now, but it is likely the Fed will cut rates even lower, the housing market will at least stabilize (if not rise), the stock market is showing really strong core strength and is likely to continue to rise, jobs will continue to increase, salaries will probably continue to increase, inflation will probably stay low. If all projections hold,

5. The War on Terrorism:

No one knows how the long, global War on Terrorism will trend in the next year. But there is much to commend the GOP in this conflict:

1. There is virtually no one who doesn't agree that the military progress in Iraq is trending favorably for stability and US interests. The surge will end, by necessity, in the Spring. So during the heat of the general election, troop levels will be reducing, violence in general may be down and political progress may be moving forward. Suddenly, the Iraq anchor may actually be a selling point. Not definitely, but very possibly.

2. No matter what happens in Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea, China, Russia, Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan and possibly even Venezuela may be hot security topics. Who among the Democrats is a serious contender on national security issues? Of them all, Hillary is the only candidate who even sounds serious in terms of national security. In light of all the negatives she brings to the race, most observers see this topic as a GOP advantage - especially, again, if Iraq continues to stabilize.

A Brief Note of Some Humility:

All of these prognostications are just that - they are educated guesses based upon current events and trends. In politics, one (1) week can feel like a eternity of news, breaking scandals and international events. In addition, each of these points is built from a substrate of assumptions regarding who is selected from each campaign. For example, if the GOP nominee is Mitt Romney, a small-state Governor with no military experience, I may assume the "War on Terrorism" to be less of an asset than if the nominee is Giuliani. These projections also don't take into account the "Newt" factor in the GOP race - which could be a seismic change in the current field.

Why Won't a Republican Win:

Just as I outline above the reasons I foresee a serious advantage for the GOP in the Presidential cycle, there are other developments which could spell the ruin of the GOP:

1. Immigration Reform
2. Ethic Scandals
3. Housing and Stock Turmoil
4. Collapse of Stability in Iraq
5. Oil Inflation which Cripples the Economy

On Principle,

CBass