The Murmur of Crow: Field of Dreams
Posted by Brandon Crow on 01.10.2007
It's a new year and a new start. Let's look forward... who will be the next president? Because this one sure ain't workin'.
Good morning to you all! This is Crow, yes…the very absent Crow, coming live from sunny, southern CA where it's 80 degrees on a January day. It's been a month since my last column and I apologize dutifully to my crowcaine addicts who have had to go through "the shakes." Papa Bird won't leave you hanging like that again. Promise.
This past month has been a rough one for the old Crow. I went through the end of semester crunch with grading final essays, determining and submitting final grades, and then, wouldn't you know it, just as the semester winds down and the holiday break approaches, I got smacked around by the nasty, nasty flu going around.
I'll tell you, in order for it to have laid out the Crow for three weeks, it must have been a nuclear strain…probably some muted version of the…ahem, avian flu…
Ok, so now that the physical illness is over, let's look at the mental illness of Crow. In case you all missed it, Ray Church put together one hell of a column over the break. His end of the year "Shut the Hell Up Awards" was beautifully compiled and it is a solid read. Be sure to check out both part one and part two of the hard hitting review.
So where does the "mental illness of Crow" fit in? Well, yours truly has earned the highest distinction 411 Politics hands out—I am officially the politics zone's "Village Idiot" for 2006 for having predicted a Democratic loss for the November elections. Good fun, good fun.
Moving on…
…besides helping me recover, the month long break away from writing also helped by disengaging me from the minutia of politics. I watched very little TV, read a few Sunday papers and sort of ignored my internet connection. It helped me unwind and depart from politics a bit.
It's been good because I realized I had gotten too bogged down in the every day, the small nastiness of all things politics. The break aided with clearing my head and vision for a bit.
For this week's column, I'd like to look ahead instead of look back. Truthfully, it's probably better and more healthy (physically, mentally and psychologically) for all of us to look ahead politically instead of looking back, or even worse, looking at the here and now.
I've finally arrived at the conclusion that nothing will change for the rest of Bush's term. The man may pitch a good line about "listening" and "working together," but when it comes down to it, he truly, honest-to-god believes he is the only one with all the correct answers. So whatever shit we're in now, we'll be in, only deeper when the next president takes office.
And that's where I'd like to take this week's column: the next president.
As of now, it is a wide-open field. Long-standing "front-runners" are being challenged and no one seems to have any distinct advantage other than perhaps financial backing and perhaps name recognition. And although the money is a big part of the presidential game nowadays, it's not a panacea. And name recognition goes out the window very quickly once the field of candidates narrows.
I think most Americans are looking for intelligence and ability, rather than the traditional shallow requirements of "looks, personality and does he fit my moral standards." We've seen that those thin engrossments wash away very quickly.
On the Republican end, not much dust has shifted as of yet. John McCain was the front-runner and he continues to be. But as the year slogs on, I believe things will become much more volatile and interesting. McCain has about an equally good shot of becoming president as he does of being toppled early as the front-runner. It really depends on how the electorate feels about Iraq.
Let's focus on the Democratic end as that's where most activity has happened over the past month. The list of candidates officially in the race as of this writing:
Tom Vilsack- governor of Iowa, the first electoral, caucus state. He's had a decently successful run as governor and having home court advantage early should bolster his opportunities. One thing's for sure—win or lose Iowa, it won't affect Vilsack too much. If he wins, people will say he should have won; if he loses, it'll be a bit of a set back, but if he comes in second, it's a wash. Despite what many people think, Vilsack actually has a good shot at getting very far. I don't know if he'll win nomination, but he can truly help shape and direct the party.
His website touts his accomplishments: "Under Governor Vilsack's leadership, the state has a record number of employed Iowans, has made significant investments in Iowa's education system, has increased the number of Iowans with health care coverage, and is now a world leader in renewable energy. The governor has achieved these results while eliminating three state departments, reducing the total number of state employees, and providing targeted tax relief to working families without raising overall taxes."
Now that's mighty impressive. He sounds like the perfect centrist Democrat with Republican tendencies. He could be just what the country is searching for after the one-sided, one-dimensional myopia of George W. Bush.
Dennis Kucinich- the Ohio Representative is a firebrand and will surely add to the debates and overall message shaping on the Democratic end. But Kucinich has about as much chance of winning the nomination as Britney Spears has of putting on a pair of underwear again. He has good ideas—check that—he has good ideals. But unfortunately for him, his ideals won't carry him far. He will be in the House for the duration of his career. Even Kucinich and "his people" seem to acknowledge he has no chance. Take a look at this line from his official site: "In our hearts we know that the conditions that exist today can be changed. This campaign gives you a chance to put your resources where your heart is." Yes, as opposed to putting your money where the winner is.
John Edwards- the man with the plan. Edwards tailored his campaign for '08 around a slightly varied theme from '04. Instead of "two Americas," Edwards now leads briefly with two Americas and then jumps to talks of forming "one America." His campaign announcement staged for the lower ninth ward of New Orleans was as calculated as it was symbolic. Edwards means to be the candidate of the people, especially the poorer people.
He's really entrenched his message on achieving equity in the richest nation on earth. Just look at this list of goals on his website: "strengthen our middle class and end poverty; guarantee universal health care for every American; lead the fight against global warming; get America and other countries off our addiction to oil."
Edwards, though a baby-faced pretty boy, has an amazingly good shot at winning the nomination. As a near no-name in '04, he won over millions of supporters with a message that resonates. Now, four years later, his message has become more massaged, and the truth of his message is much more evident. There really are two Americas—one for the rich and privileged, and one for everyone else. I think he'll go far with his heartfelt message in '08.
Will he go all the way to the nomination? Very likely. He's gaining my interest and support more and more each day. Will he go all the way to the White House? Quite possibly. He's a southern gent with good looks and strong ideas. He can easily be elected.
Joe Biden- believe it or not, his biggest strength is in fact his long stint in the Senate. Biden has been an important and key person in the Senate for a long time. He's going to be the incoming Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and a poll from the National Journal this past August ranked him as the "most trusted Democrat on foreign policy." He's actually ranked by respondents ahead of former president Bill Clinton. That speaks volumes.
Many respondents to this poll dubbed Biden as a man who "understands politics on a global field, is not an ideologue, and is one of the few Democrats who can articulate a contrasting position from the [Bush] administration. Experience counts in foreign policy, and he has more than W. and Condi combined." That is high praise.
If the country's electorate is tired of the "down home, simpleton talk with a Texas twang," and is in search of some serious credibility and intelligence, Biden could ride the wave all the way to nomination. If the electorate is still in the mindwarp era of "intelligence equals snootiness," then Biden has no shot. Regardless of how far he makes it, I think if a Democrat is elected president, Biden will definitely be offered a cabinet position.
And now, the two biggest names being tossed around, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama. Oddly, neither has actually committed to running.
Hillary Clinton- this is tricky. Hillary is a powerhouse that even Republicans fear. Many feel she can bulldoze her way to nomination. Once there, she may not be the ideal candidate, but she could definitely go far and give anyone a run for their money. Despite most pundits' yapping, I think Hillary could be elected. She'll have to fight an uphill battle, but she is smart, capable, and has the best strategic mind in the Democratic party by her side. She'll have millions of people chomping at the bit to vote against her, but she will also have "historic moment" on her side. I think she will get many women, even Republican women (those who are sane and not bible-thumped into being Betty Crocker) to vote for her.
Her main challenge will be living down her hubby's years in the White House and the wild belief that has been stoked in this country the past six years that women can't do a man's job and terrorism is obviously a man's man's job.
Barack Obama- the newly-minted Senator from Illinois gains popularity and the faith of the people by the day. His recent book tour has been conveniently scheduled to go through some of the big presidential primary states and he has been received with thunderous ovation. He may be young, but he has that quality which turns "young and inexperienced" instantly into "fresh and optimism for the future." No one since John Kennedy has caught fire so quickly and been catapulted into the presidential stratosphere.
Although Obama has not officially announced, I believe he will. He understands that he's the "IT" poster child right now, and four or eight years from now, there will be somebody else. If he doesn't take full advantage of his swarm now, he may never recapture it.
Obama represents the hope of a new generation. That, and he also has the "historic moment in history" card working for him. It will be interesting to see how racial tensions rear their ugly heads should he win nomination.
And finally, the name that no one really mentions…Al Gore. I'm going out on a limb and predicting that the former Vice President does not run. At this point, though he has a solid resume, the only thing that would set him aside from other candidates would be his constant hammering of global warming. Much of his other policies would have been co-opted by Edwards. Gore too though, like Biden, will likely get a cabinet position should a Democrat (other than Hillary) win the presidency. Whether or not he takes it, is up in the air.
So, Dan Martin, I think you can rest easy now and give glob-Al Gore warming a little break!
Personally, I think Edwards can go far if he plays his cards right. I'd love to see a ticket of Edwards/Obama. Two fresh faces with high potential-- sort of remnant of the Clinton/Gore run.
What do you think? Drop me a line and share with me who you'd like to see come out of the Democratic field and who your ideal ticket would be.
Until next time, in "The Village Idiot" we trust… ha, ha!
STAY CURRENT