Sunday, November 02, 2008

Final Thoughts

Nearly twenty years ago in the early years of the first Bush administration, I was conversing with a friend who was somewhat older than me, also an evangelical Christian, but something of an old-style liberal originally from Minnesota. He expressed skepticism both about the enduring value of the Reagan years ("did he mortgage your future?" I remember him asking me) and what his successor would amount to.

Nonetheless, he had voted for Bush (senior), noting that in 1988 it had come down to a single issue for him -- abortion.

We haven't heard much (in my view, not enough) about the differences between the candidates on life issues, having been overshadowed in large part by economic-related banter and secondarily (again, a distant second place) by national security. Fair enough -- priorities have changed.

Politics and history move in cycles. Candidates and parties move in and out of power. Eight years of a Republican administration, most of which were accompanied by a Republican congress, combined with the challenges we face today and in the immediate future, and it's easy to understand the desire many have for that ill-defined "change."

But with those challenges in mind, and given the choice between someone with experience building consensus and confronting problems and someone who hasn’t done anything, between a legacy of national service and a resume that would struggle to fill a quarter-page ad, I have a hard time seeing why people would consider the latter.

As an amateur presidential historian, I recognize the importance of intangibles, but substance is needed to back it up. The Bushes had plenty of substance, but communication problems; Clinton was the opposite. Carter had neither. The great ones -- including that guy who allegedly "mortgaged my future" twenty-plus years ago -- had both.

Regardless of the outcome, the Republicans nominated the candidate who probably stood the best chance of winning, and a running mate who energized a previously lukewarm base. Perhaps if John McCain was 52 instead of 72 the dynamics might have been different, but age hasn't been anything more than a subliminal issue in this campaign, so that's hard to gauge.

Anyway, we'll see you on Tuesday. Keep your eyes on Pennsylvania. Hopefully they'll wait and call it after the polls actually close.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

AMEN!

Roman