2020 Foresight

Happy Super Tuesday Eve!

When I first came to DC, my employer at the time had a list of "lessons learned" from Senator Phil Gramm's presidential campaign on the wall.  I wish I kept a copy of it.

So, here are some thoughts for 2020 presidential aspirants, based on the lessons learned, re-learned, and forgotten thus far in the 2016 election cycle.

1.  Define your opponents early and vigorously.  While the media historically serves a larger role here, I don't believe I have witnessed a presidential candidate as good as Donald Trump when it comes to establishing narrative frames for his opponents, with his re-positioning of Jeb! being Trump's crowning achievement in this regard (to date).  Governor Bush never recovered from the low energy tag and the characterization helped expedite the collapse of a candidacy that 1) never quite found its voice and 2) was fundamentally out of step with the resurgent populism that pervades the national mood.   Note:  Jeb should have recalled how effectively Rove et. al. were in defining Senator Kerry in 2004...when his own brother was up for re-election.  Remember swift-boating?  It went right to Kerry's perceived strength and deflated it.  Apparently Jeb forgot that lesson from 12 short years ago.

2. Exploit social media to its fullest  Again, Trump might be sui generis within the political realm given his decades-long fame/infamy in our popular culture and his understanding of how to create (and dominate) news in these early days of the 21st Century.  Future candidates should nonetheless peruse his tweets very, very carefully to see how he was able to shape conversations over the course of days, weeks, and months.  This lesson applies regardless of the milieu, Facebook, Twitter, or DodgeWaffle - whatever social media outlets exist in 2020.

3.  Don't hesitate when it comes to going on the offense.  You can't hang back and let your opponents define you, and when you attack when it is too late, it comes across as flailing from a position of weakness.  In short, don't be afraid to go "comparative" early...as long as doing so is in your best strategic interest and it doesn't subvert the candidate's brand.

4.  Establish your brand early.  To that point, you can't undergo a character transformation mid-way through a campaign.  Kasich came close though, he went from quirky, quick-tempered policy wonk to folksy, can-do Midwestern Huggin' Gov in what seemed like a fairly rapid metamorphosis.  It may not take him to March 16, but it allows him to occupy a distinct, and distinguishable, position in the present GOP field.

5. Be prepare to be flexible when it comes to strategy and tactics.  Not to pile on Jeb, but his by-the-book campaign was far too by-the-book.  They failed to adapt to meet the needs of the present environment, choosing instead to ignore the Trump ascendancy until it was far too late.  The summer poll numbers were more than sufficient to warrant a more aggressive posture toward Mr. Trump but the Bush team was too focused on running a playbook for a completely different ballgame.

6. The culture is inseparable from the political.  There is a book concept in here somewhere.  In a pop culture world obsessed with louder, vacuous and/or one-note, but media savvy individuals... is it any surprise that such figures are faring well in the US electorally?  I am not suggesting that 2020 presidential candidates should start appearing on as many reality shows as possible between now and November '20, but they need to think about the larger cultural background and factor that into their planning accordingly.

7. Don't over staff.  Walker.  Bush.  Just so much money wasted that could have been spent on voter contact.  No need for dozens of policy advisors, it's a political campaign and not a think tank.

8. Don't inflate your own expectations.  Come on Senator Rubio. The "3-2-1" approach set yourself up for failure right from the outset of the primary season. It is one of the reasons why he has not emerged as the main alternative to Trump (that and his disastrous debate meltdown, which reminded me of Muskie's crying (melting snow?!) moment...something that was so memorable and so damaging that it will not be soon forgotten).

9. Make it about "the people."  This is why Senator Sander's ads have been better than Senator Clinton's.  His paid communications tend to be more "us"-focused while Senator Clinton still spends too much time talking about how unique her candidacy is.  His are more dialogue driven while hers tend to be more monologue-oriented, and people like being talked with, not at.  I am perhaps over-stating the case for illustration purposes, but go ahead, compare the ads.  Remove the specific candidate and ask, which make me feel more of a sense of belonging?  Which are motivating?  Would Clinton be faring better if she ran Sanders-style ads?  Would Sanders be performing worse if he was running Clinton-style ads?  Something to ponder.

Feel free to save this and post it on your fridge.  The magnet can hold it for four years.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

  

Pandemonium-upon-Stilts

That sums up the past several months.  There is no doubt a book there, but binding Confidentiality Agreements most likely make that a non-starter.  

I have just enough time to offer up some brief thoughts on the likely contours of the 2016 GOP presidential campaign.    

The campaigns most likely to fold up their tents between now and Iowa:  With 15 heavies remaining (sorry Mark Everson), I believe that Senator Rand Paul (R/Lib – Au) and former Governor Jim Gilmore (R – No VA Car Tax!) are the most likely to quit the field between now and February 1, 2016 Iowa caucuses.  The latter might stick around until New Hampshire as his, let’s call it, “strategy” appears more focused on the Granite State.  That said, he might realize that a top 10 showing is not in the cards, and quietly withdraw at some point during the Holiday Season.  The former may decide to focus on his U.S. Senate seat, so keep a close eye on his early-state polling performances in November and December. If he can’t consistently cross the five percent threshold in the weeks prior to Iowa, expect a retreat to Kentucky.  One more to watch:  Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, wonk-turned-red meat hurler, the former Bayou Wunderkind needs to break out of the second tier.  He selected Iowa as the state that gives him just enough of a push to get past the carve-out states (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada).  Unfortunately, for Gov. Jindal, he is facing off against Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX/The Second Choice), former Governor Mike Huckabee, Former Senator Rick Santorum, and Dr. Ben Carson for the social conservative vote. 

The campaigns most likely to be done after Iowa:  Jindal if he even makes it to February 1.  I believe that Santorum will lose in the Clash of the Most Recent Iowa Victors Match-up, with Huckabee being the better positioned of the two to do anything in South Carolina.  Santorum will wrap up his campaign on Groundhog Day.  Just in time for him to head home to check on Punxsutawney Phil.

The campaigns most likely to be finished after New Hampshire:  Gilmore if he is still in the race.  Former New York Governor George Pataki will likely receive his last hurrah of the primary season in NH.  Either former Governor Chris Christie or Governor John Kasich will be on life-support or decently positioned as the Bush/Rubio alternative after New Hampshire.  Senator Lindsey Graham may opt for a strategic withdrawal and endorsement of another hawk prior to his home-state primary.

So who is a lock to be an active candidate for the South Carolina primary?  Former Governor Jeb Bush, Carson, Cruz, business executive Carly Fiorina, probably Huckabee, either Christie or Kasich, Senator Marco Rubio, and businessman Donald Trump.

What about March?  I think the short-term calendar shapes up nicely for Cruz.  I expect a Huckabee exit as well as a slow Carson (and slower Trump) fade (all to the benefit of Cruz) and that Bush will struggle. 

Beyond that, I think Cruz and Rubio are well situated to go deep.  Trump and Carson could accrue a significant number of delegates, with Fiorina performing well enough to warrant serious consideration as a VP pick.  If this were a Democratic primary, I would give Kasich better odds as a dark-horse candidate.  As it is not, I think he might emerge as the primary Establishment alternative to Rubio, but will have neither the resources nor the skills to compete with either Senator Cruz or Senator Rubio.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.  

And Then There Were 23

Pardon the brief hiatus dear readers. 

You see, my compadre Slats was mistaken for being a man of confidence by a handful of local officials in a small fishing village in Guatemala, about 10 kilometers outside of Champerico.  So that took a bit of time to sort out.  Two tips: taking the 14 out of Escuintla is not a “short cut” and there is no Yelp for locating top-notch English-to-Spanish-to K’iche’ translators.  Lessons learned. Crisis resolved.  Situation = Askew.  Back to “Normal.”

Oh such flights.

As the calendar pages hurtle (of their own accord??) off the wall, we find ourselves slightly less than six months away from the Ames Straw Poll.  With the Iowa Republican Party deciding (unsurprisingly) to retain the event for the current presidential cycle, this means it is quite likely that at least one GOP presidential candidate, someone who hasn't even officially announced yet, will see their electoral ambitions dashed on a hot August night, somewhere in the general vicinity of Pearson Hall, on the Iowa State University campus.  Home of the Tusslin’ Cyclones.      

The thrilling element here, and there is one, is that I count 23 potential serious or semi-serious Republican candidates who might jump into the fray.  I anticipate that that number will dwindle down to 14 by August 2015, but the prospect of such a crowded field should tantalize any self-respecting political junkie. 

Consider this:  from 1980 to 2012, in the election cycles when there was a legitimate contest for the GOP nomination, the fields included 10 to 13 candidates.  Now, I am including some, let us call them lesser lights, in those tallies.  For example, Fred Karger in ’12, Alan Keyes in ’08, Herman Cain in ’00 (yes 2000, but he didn’t get past the exploratory stage),  Morry “The Grizz” Taylor in ’96, as well as Ambassador Ben Fernandez and future Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld…a couple of times. Not to disparage any of these individuals, but they either exited the process very early (as in the year before the Election) or they performed miserably once the caucuses and primaries got underway.  As was expected of them.

In this cycle, there are fewer apparent “longest of long-shots” in the race.  Are there favorites and relative heavies? Absolutely.  Moderate long-shots?  Sure. But complete non-starters?  Not so much.  Even some of the non-traditional candidates are interesting from an electoral perspective.   Consider Dr. Ben Carson.  Some are quick to dismiss him out of hand.  Will he emerge as this cycle’s Santorum 2012?  Doubtful, but he has a personal narrative and a bit of a nascent constituency.   I think he ends up somewhere between Bauer 2000 and Gingrich 2012.  The presence of other, better-known, social conservatives in the field will block his path to the nomination, but I predict he will run a credible campaign.

With six (yes six), occasionally over-lapping, significant voting blocs in today’s Republican Party, potential candidates are envisioning multiple paths to victory, based on the coalitions they believe they could forge…with the right financial resources, talent, communications, calendar, fortune, intervention by Providence, etc….I will elaborate on this in future posts but the six are, in no particular order:  Social Conservatives, Libertarians, Establishment Center/Right, Tea Party-Aligned, Working Class Cultural Conservatives, and the small number of remaining GOP Moderates & “Liberals.”      

Examining each of those blocs, with the recent decision of Senator Bob Corker to take a mighty pass this time around, are 23 likely candidates. 

I believe that at least seven and possibly all nine of the following group will announce that they are running for President this year:

Paul, Carson, Cruz, Perry, Santorum, Bush, Huckabee, Walker, and Christie. 

With the exception of Carson, all are Governors or Senators or former Governors and Senators.  All have appeal within multiple GOP constituencies (some more pronounced than others).  This is the single strongest Republican field since ’80.  Frankly, it is probably deeper based on this tier alone.

Beyond that first grouping, I anticipate that at least half of the following will enter the race:

Jindal, Fiorina, Graham, and Rubio.  

No slouches here.  I think Graham’s entry, if it transpires, could diminish the perceived value that South Carolina primary generally enjoys. It could be akin to Harkin ’92 when other Democratic candidates avoiding competing on the Senator’s home turf, which inflated the importance of the New Hampshire primary, which helped Clinton and his “Comeback Kid” narrative and the rest is history.  Fiorina, despite her 42% performance against Senator Boxer in 2010, should not be underestimated.  With her business credentials and (potentially) being the only woman on many Republican presidential primary ballots, she could catch fire and go deeper into the calendar than most of the other contenders.

Many within the third group will ultimately decide to forego being a presidential candidate in 2016, but I project at least a couple will mount challenges:

Bolton, Pence, Gilmore, Ehrlich, Pete King, Pataki, Kasich, Snyder, Palin, and Trump.

OK, Trump is a non-starter, but his celebrity (read: notoriety, apparent lack of filter, and not inconsiderable wealth) will generate some buzz…if he gets in (I don’t believe he will).  Governor Mike Pence is serious, as is John Kasich, but they will have to ramp up their efforts, soon, if they want to compete in the Not-so Invisible Primary.  Especially with fellow Midwestern Governor Scott Walker garnering attention and making interesting staff hires. 

Sarah Palin.  She has indicated interest.  Ignore that.  If she runs, it will be an attempt to prop up the Brand.  Based on her public statements, I generously estimate a 9% chance that she gives it a shot in 2016.  In reality, it is most likely under five percent.

Beyond these 23, are there others?  Why yes, I am glad you asked.

My long list has 67 Republicans.  Don’t worry, I won’t run through them all, I will just mention one more worth noting:

Mitt Romney.  Yes, I know he just bowed out.  I peruse Le Monde like you do.  But let’s assume, for a moment, that it is late August 2015.  The Bush campaign is hobbling along. His controversial positions on Common Core and immigration, in conjunction with some gaffes, lower-than-expected fundraising totals, declining poll numbers, and various miscues make him look vulnerable.   Christie acts like Christie and is on the brink of imploding after yelling at some Iowa farmers. Pence and Kasich decided to stay home, so Walker is left standing as the top choice of the Establishment Right…barely.  Would Mitt see himself as the only one standing in the way of a Cruz or Santorum or Huckabee nomination?  He is probably the only one who could jump-start a campaign around Labor Day and pull a serious organization together.  In short, keep glancing over at Romney.  It might not be over for him. And if he is a candidate by September 15, 2015, you read it here first!

A long post?  Absolutely.  Yet the primary season itself is long and full of wonder.  Savor it.  I mean it, commence with the savoring already!

Now if I can only find that luggage.  Waiting for a call from La Aurora International Airport…

Stay tuned, as more will follow.  Count on it.