may also explain why Washington is so often out to lunch on the direction of American politics.
One Republican–we’ll call him “Candidate A”–has among the highest support levels for President George W. Bush’s conservative agenda in the Senate. He championed the president’s 2001 tax cut, which many Republicans believe is the litmus test of today’s GOP. After initially voting to give Bush the authority to go to war, he became an early and outspoken critic of the Iraq policy, a view now endorsed not just by the American public and Democrats but by Republicans as well.
Republican “Candidate B” has the inverse position. He opposed Bush’s big tax cuts, one of only two Republicans in the Senate to do so (the other being Lincoln Chafee). And on Iraq he is one of the main advocates of the “surge,” a plan to “win” the war with a modest influx of troops, though even many military experts say the idea won’t work.
You would think that Candidate A would be a strong favorite for the nomination and Candidate B destined for political oblivion. But no. Candidate A, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, is seen as damaged goods, with little chance to be nominated. Candidate B, Arizona Sen. John McCain, is now the front runner.
The explanation is the GOP tradition of primogeniture. Since the 1950s, Republicans, unlike Democrats, have given the nomination to their firstborn son–the guy whose “turn” it is. That’s McCain, whose seasoned and deep-pocketed team never stopped running after he lost in 2000. McCain’s plan is to kiss the con-servative base so ardently that it agrees to enter into a loveless marriage with him. Then he’ll tack back to the maverick center for the general election. It just might work.
Hagel, by contrast, seems lost. After John Kerry favorably mentioned Hagel’s skepticism about the Iraq war in one of his 2004 debates with Bush, he became persona non grata in his party. As recently as six months ago, any Republican lawmaker who didn’t back the president on the war was in deep trouble.
But that was then. Supporting Bush on Iraq today is a liability, not an asset; it reeks of 2004 thinking. Six months from now, any Republican who opposed the tax cuts but champions Bush’s disastrous Iraq policy is going to have some explaining to do in early debates. When Rush Limbaugh says after the midterms that he is sick and tired of “carrying water” for Bush, Chuck Hagel is not going to be run out of the party for refusing to carry water.
For ordinary Republicans, tax cuts are an article of faith. Backing a president in a failed war is not. And Hagel’s doubts about the war have more weight because of his heroic combat experience in Vietnam. In a GOP debate, McCain would not be able to use his military experience as a trump card on Hagel. But Hagel and the others would score heavily on McCain for opposing the tax cuts–even though McCain was brave and right to have done so.
The most stunning thing about the Republican campaign so far is the vacuum on the right. While McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney (a moderate Republican until five minutes ago) battle over the centrists in the party, the conservative base that actually determines the nomination remains forlorn. Giuliani supports gay rights and abortion, and a third of Republicans disqualify Romney solely because he’s a Mormon. This opening is why former Virginia governor James Gilmore is getting in the race and Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee–“Oprah”-ready after losing 110 pounds–can’t be ruled out.
But governors, who normally make the strongest presidential candidates, seem a little irrelevant this time around. They aren’t likely to sound as credible as senators on the nuances of Pakistani politics or the readiness of the Third Infantry Division. There’s more conventional wisdom that’s in danger of cracking, too. Pooh-bahs in both parties have convinced the candidates that they have to raise $100 million this year to be competitive. This is nonsense in the Internet age, peddled by consultants who need that booty for their own pockets. In congressional elections, money is a cause –it leads directly to success. In presidential politics, money is an effect –it follows quickly the momentum that’s generated in the rough and tumble of the “free media” campaign.
Chuck Hagel might not run. But if he does, Candidate A would be formidable. It’s the issues, stupid.
