Political punditry has become an incredibly huge business and pastime in the United States these days. Consider:
Newscasts operating 24-hours-a-day have talking heads seemingly asserting 24-hours a day...Always-confident newspaper columnists get huge readerships analyzing and predicting...Left and right talk radio shows, guests and listeners/viewers scream and rant as they react to events and predict what will come next...And have you EVER read a blogger who is not certain that he/she/it is correct (and that the dumb, ol’ mainstream media and bloggers on the other side of the political street have it all wrong)?
But if you look at history you have to seriously ask: if you go back a year or more later and see what was spoken or written, did many of these predictions truly nail it?
The bottom line is that much of what happens in politics in terms of how parties maneuver, how they respond, how they go on the offense and play defense and how the public perceives candidates often depends on the unforeseen and unexpected rather than anticipated events. And that’s what’s now unfolding in the Middle East: a growing crisis sure to have enormous impact on future generations -- and one that will change previous political calculations before it’s significantly defused.
Last week, in his indispensable Crystal Ball analysis, University of Virginia Political Scientist Larry Sabato put the Middle East crisis under his political microscope and noted how it CAN influence mid-term elections. Among other things, Sabato (who has a GOOD batting average on prognostications) notes that the Middle East crisis sucks up all the media air and makes it hard for political challengers to get media coverage. He also notes that it displaces the Iraq War as the lead story, which is good news for GOPers.
On the other hand, he notes that there are several factors which don’t make a GOP benefit a “given” in this case. Sabato concludes:
“The final electoral truth is that the Mideast war would somehow have to help President Bush and the Republican Congress to climb out of the polling cellar in the time remaining before Americans stream to the polls. While there may appear opportunities ripe for exploitation by the GOP, so far nothing of the sort has happened as the fighting rages on.
This unexpected and nasty little war is an unwelcome reminder of just how quickly the political sands can shift, and it is further warning--if any were needed--that predictions about an election months away are often as unreliable and unsteady as those sands.”
History and political history are filled with landscape changing events such as: the Cuban missile crisis and how it solidified JFK’s image; the assassination of JFK; domestic politics master Lyndon Johnson becoming President, passing a huge social agenda, then getting bogged down in the Vietnam war; the ascension of Pope John Paul II and his role in changing Eastern Europe and bringing about the fall of Communism; the seizing of American hostages in Tehran and how it put the final nail in the sagging Carter Presidency; how 9/11 transformed George Bush from a seemingly weak, unsure President taking office in a disputed election into a President with a strong image; Hurricane Katrina and how government response to Hurricane Katrina wiped out much of the positive imagery enveloping George Bush.
There are many others. The world is still in the embryonic stages of this new crisis, but here are a few factors to pencil in if you’re trying to figure out the political impact:
What was the administration’s policy towards the Middle East in the days leading up to the latest crisis? Josh Marshall this week linked to a troubling passage that suggested George Bush had virtually written the region off early on in his term. So what has been the policy for the past 6 years? Has there been consistent attention paid to the region? If so, how? What was done and what could have perhaps been done differently -- or better?
The Brewing Iranian Crisis: The Bush administration is starting with very little credibility left as it begins to warn of a growing Iranian threat. Some on the left automatically don’t believe it and warn that the neocons are just itching to go to war again and putting propaganda out to set the stage for it. Some on the right automatically support whatever the administration asserts. But if you read news reports, it’s clear that there IS a growing threat. It has also been a journalistic and academic “given” for years that Hezbollah is linked with Tehran. Iran is pushing the envelope. So how much further on several fronts (its support for Hezbollah; its provocative comments about Israel; its nuclear program) will it push it? And what if it pushes the envelope most strongly close to the elections. What will Washington do -- and will its policies be accepted by many Americans or dismissed as political posturing? And how will whatever Washington decides to do influence voters?
Israel and the Jews: How will attitudes towards Israel in particular and Jews in general impact American elections? There is a danger in the tenor of comments coming from some on the left these days that could easily be taken as anti-Semitic. Now, that kind of statement always provokes: “So if you criticize Israel you’re automatically labeled anti-Semitic!” Not necessarily. People can criticize Israel’s policy, the loss of innocent life, and debate who “started it” -- but there is a line that can be crossed. And some on the left come close to crossing it as they make blanket generalizations about Jews. Not all “f--- the Jews“ comments come from people arrested on DUIs in Malibu these days. So how will this play at the voting booth? Will there be backlash to the backlash or by election time will Americans be more critical of Israel and America’s large financial and political commitment to it?
The fact is that there are any number of subsidiary crises that could pop up between now and Election Day involving Israel, the Middle East, Iran -- or other parts of the world where trouble is brewing. And they will likely shape the piece of clay that creates the sculpture that we call “election results.”
