On Oprah Winfrey 2020

First, allow me to spend a moment on political theory.  Professor Stephen Skrowronek, author of “The Politics Presidents Make” wrote that American Presidents (and by extension Presidential candidates) exist in “political” time.  By this, he was referring to their relative ability to exercise - based on the political climate in which they operate - a warrant of authority attached to a partisan/ideological agenda.  For example, the limitations of the Adams (Federalist) regime's ability to cope with the challenges facing the nation in 1800 provided an opportunity for a Jeffersonian “Reconstruction” that re-aligned power in this country, with the Democratic-Republicans becoming the majority, governing party at the national level until their “disjunction” under JQA and the rise of the Jacksonians.

His cyclical perspective caught my attention as an undergraduate, and it appeared to attach a coherent framework that explained why certain Presidents (such as GHW Bush) put themselves in electoral jeopardy by straying too far from the prevailing orthodoxies of his day (his decidedly non-Reaganite-seeming “no new taxes” pledge break, which helped bring about the Buchanan challenge) while others (such as Clinton) felt compelled to triangulate to retain office, knowing that the fundamental Reagan reconstruction constituted a functioning conservative governing majority in America, despite the Democratic win at the presidential level in ’92.

Which was why I was annoyed that Skowronek seemed to hedge his bets at the end of his work. I am going from memory here, so bear with me.  As I recall, he projected an “end” to political time and a rise of ad hoc coalitions.  Looking at the larger societal context in recent years, I was wondering if he was perhaps prescient and that we had entered (and this is my theory) a “cultural time” distinct from “political time” insofar as candidates who tapped into deeper cultural tropes would achieve electoral success.  Enter Trump.  Then again, I thought Trump would be a latter-day Horace Greeley and would go down in flames, although perhaps not in quite the same way as Mr. Greeley did in 1872 (look it up).

Now, in our post-Vietnam, post-Watergate, post-Iran-Contra, post-Whitewater, post-#43 Iraq lies era, trust in our public institutions (and most public office-holders) has eroded deeply. No wonder why we have all kinds of “cultural” (ostensibly but not really apolitical) figures who have emerged in the public dialogue (in varying degrees of seriousness) as potential 2020 presidential candidates:  Mark Cuban, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Mark Zuckerberg, Kanye West, Tom Hanks, and yes, Oprah Winfrey.

So perhaps Ms. Winfrey (yes, I am formal) would be the Democrat best situated to defeat Trump, assuming the latter runs for re-election.  One could argue that we look at weak Presidents, like Trump, and (as a nation) we tend to look for candidates who are very much un-like them to make up for their shortcomings.  To that end, one might argue that someone who has held elective office for years (say, a Senator or Governor) and who understands DC from that perspective might offer up a better contrast on the experience metric.  That said, Ms. Winfrey who has held and sustained, for years, Name Identification and Favorability numbers that Biden, Sanders, Clinton, Warren, etc… can only dream of possessing should have no problems at all distinguishing her background, her persona, her policy stances, and her vision of America from that of Donald Trump.

And if she ran in the Democratic primary, with her formidable presence in American culture, her resources, and her media abilities, how could she be challenged effectively?  Granted, she might turn out to be a terrible political candidate, but I doubt it.  And how would a rival Democratic opponent offer up a comparative line of communications without looking like they are attacking OPRAH WINFREY?!  Someone polling at 5% in Iowa who tries that three months out is looking at a career-ending event.

Would she be a good President?  This is purely speculative but I believe she could perform quite well on certain measurements we use to rate performance. As has been discussed by others, yes, I think she would do well on the moral authority metric.  I believe she has the ability to be a great communicator of American purpose in the world.  Unlike #45, I think she would have extremely talented people in her Administration, people who could help her move a legislative agenda through Congress.  I believe she has the skills to repair relations with world leaders. I believe she is a quick study and can grasp extremely complex issues.  Does she have a traditional candidate profile?  No, but perhaps she is the President that America will need. 

In short, I am not going to be one of those folks who reject, out of hand, a Winfrey candidacy.  We have done far worse and we have seen far weirder.  Frankly, Winfrey’s ability to connect with the average person is something we, as a nation, desperately need…bearing in mind the out-of-touch, craven lunatic that resides at 1600 Pennsylvania.  Let me tell you this – I would sleep much better at night knowing that President Winfrey is on the watch compared to DJT.  

In solidarity.

An Early “First 120 Days” Update

A long-time reader passed along two recent “First 100 Days” news articles. One was focused on Howard County Executive Allan Kittleman, the other on Frederick County Executive Jan Gardner.  While the former presented a list of hits and misses, the latter tended to be a rather glowing review.  Captain Incremental vs. Action Executive. 

Recognizing that media coverage and reality don’t always align perfectly, and that the pieces were quite different in structure, length, and tone, there were some notable themes that emerged in the Kittleman piece:

Thus far, Kittleman seems to be practicing the politics of articulation.  He recognizes the fundamental resiliency of the Ulman Administration, and the electoral realities of Howard County.  This means tempering conservative instincts with moves with populist appeal (the sugar water order) and/or “good-government” technocratic initiatives (flood mitigation program funding).*

Of course, there have been missteps. 

Kittleman appears to be engaged in a modified waffle when it comes to his communications efforts relating to the storm-water fee…vocal in opposition to it when in Annapolis, more willing to articulate a nuanced wait-and-see-what-can-be-done-about-it stance when in HoCo.  Perhaps it is a question of time, place, and manner but he isn’t exactly elevating his leadership profile on this issue.

And while every CE is, and should be, empowered to bring in their own team, he might have ousted too much institutional memory and experienced talent from the previous Administration too quickly. 

His proposed reorganization of the Human Rights Commission seems to have been handled clumsily, as a rush to act resulted in the failure to obtain input from some key stakeholders.  This, in turn, led to the County Council tabling his bill. Not a shining moment for a new Administration that pledged to emphasize collaboration.

Over the next four years (minus @ 120 days), it will be interesting to see how his right-of-center ideological predilections manifest themselves in terms of policy.   Will he attempt to shift to the center and triangulate between a Democratic-majority Council and his Tea Party friends? Would voters perceive such an approach as Authentic Kittleman or merely calculated political positioning? Will his support of Governor Hogan tarnish his brand?  Where is La Isla Bonita? 

Too many unknowns at this point, but we will all have a much better sense of the answer to the question, “Who is the Real Allan Kittleman?” by 2018.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.    

* In a conciliatory state of mind, this author feels compelled to acknowledge that he supports the two specific actions mentioned in that sentence.  The time is now 4:33 in the a.m. and you are watching “Perspectives” with your host, Lionel Osbourne. 

Clash of the Titans

Every so often, it is important to get the adrenaline riled.  Otherwise, the tedium sets in.  Once that happens, sloth and melancholia tend to lurk about, shambling listlessly through dimly lit alleyways. No sense inviting them over.  

For the politically-attuned, General Election Day offers the prospect of serious action, excitement of the first order.  In 2014 anno Domini, in our corner of the known universe, the marquee countywide general election matchup will be County Council member Courtney Watson (D) vs. State Senator Allan Kittleman (R) in the race to succeed the outgoing County Executive, Ken Ulman.   

This is our Ali – Frazier.

Even with historical trends favoring the hypothesis that 2014 will be a decent Republican year, Howard County Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than a 3 to 2 margin (93,354 registered Ds as compared to 56,285 registered Rs).

The Watson campaign, adopting the structures proposed in Professor Stephen Skowronek’s seminal work, The Politics Presidents Make, is practicing the politics of Articulation.  She is assuming that the current County Executive’s regime is resilient, and will be viewed as such through November.  In which case, affiliating with the current Administration makes the most sense.  Her campaign’s messaging reflects a theme of continuity (“continuing the progress in Howard County”).  Watson’s promise is that she will use her expertise to move the County forward, charting her own course yet following a path not too dissimilar from the one chosen by Ulman.

Her challenge is establishing her own brand in the minds of voters.  At the presidential level, sometimes those who adopt the politics of articulation (“orthodox-innovators” to use Skowronek’s descriptor) fare quite well (Theodore Roosevelt) while others have more difficulty adapting to changing circumstances (George H.W. Bush).  The good news for Watson is that she is a known entity with her own record of accomplishments and that, as of this writing, Howard County voters are less likely to be disenchanted with the state of the county as compared to the state of the state, or the state of the nation. 

Meanwhile, the Kittleman campaign is banking on the politics of Pre-emption.  They recognize that the party affiliation numbers are not in their favor and are downplaying the Republican label, at least outside of Western HoCo.  Their theme is that Kittleman is a “proven Independent leader.” He is promoting his support for marriage equality and reminding voters about his family’s long-standing commitment to civil rights.  In short, he is not running as a conservative Republican.  He has little choice. His electoral predicament is not dissimilar from the one facing Nixon in '68, or Clinton in '92...both of whom were candidates belonging to the non-dominant order of their time.  

The Kittleman strategy is to work for a heavy Republican turnout in County Council District Five and hope for a depressed Democratic turnout countywide.   Unfortunately for his campaign, the one true swing district in the County – Council District One – is held by one Courtney Watson, who has represented Eastern Howard County on the Council since 2006.   If Kittleman can’t win in the First, he is, in all probability, doomed. 

So who will win?  The smart money is on Courtney Watson.   If Democratic turnout is 60% or higher, Watson should win.  60,000 votes should be sufficient for victory this time around, and Ulman garnered 66,121 four years ago in his rout of Trent Kittleman…in what was, nationally, a Republican election cycle.  Sixty percent of 93,354 registered Democrats works out to 56,012 votes…that means that Watson would only need 4,000 votes among Republicans, unaffiliated and “other” voters to reach the 60,000 figure.  Even assuming a two percent under-vote for that particular office, 60% Democratic turnout overall should elect Watson as our next County Executive.

With 60% Democratic turnout, Kittleman will have a tough time cobbling together a coalition that would approach 50% plus one.  His hope rests in a Democratic turnout at or below 50%.  If that occurs, and if Republicans follow the party-line and turn out in sufficient numbers (65%+ GOP turnout; 90% - 10% for the Senator) and if Independents account for approximately 25% of the electorate and if they break 8 – 5 for Kittleman, and if he pulls a slightly higher percentage of Democratic voters into his column (15%) than Watson does among Republicans (10%), then yes, Kittleman could emerge with between 50.1% and 51.5%, with 52% most likely being his hard ceiling.

Notice the number of “ifs” in that paragraph?

Watson’s ceiling is closer to 60%.... and consists of far fewer ifs.  She needs to energize the base.  Turning to elements beyond the direct control of her campaign, it would be helpful to her efforts if the best Democratic candidates emerged victorious in the swing districts in the June primary elections…nominees who can motivate Democrats to cast their ballots in the General Election while also appealing to Independent voters.  Specifically, I am thinking about Howard County Council District One as well as the State House of Delegates District 9B.  I have some thoughts as to the ideal Democratic nominees for both of those races.  I will share them in a later post.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

 

Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind - Maryland Politics Edition

The boffins call it crepuscularity, being active during twilight.   Alert drivers know that deer are more likely to amble near the roads at those hours. 

The opportunities of the day seem most promising at dawn; the possibilities of the night appear greatest at dusk.  At those times of transition, the mind is open to considering multiple riffs in response to the question: “What if?”

Even veteran politicos occasionally ask questions or hold positions that, on their surface, might appear silly or otherwise off base. At times, they are.  Other times, they are plugging into their life experiences and, knowing that the world can be very odd indeed, they speculate out loud on the possible…and realize that even the highly improbable can become Reality. They have seen it happen before.

It is with these thoughts as a prologue that I turn my attention to the Maryland gubernatorial campaign – specifically the Democratic primary.

Using Professor Skowronek’s classification system, the front-runner, Lt. Governor Anthony Brown, would probably best be described as an “orthodox innovator.”  Elect the ticket of Brown and his running mate, Howard County Executive Ken Ulman, and you can expect an Administration that builds upon the work of the outgoing Governor, Martin O’Malley.  Two smart, competent public servants who are pledging the equivalent of Keeping Maryland Moving.

The Brown/Ulman campaign is leading in the polls, has considerable establishment support, and is raising steaming heaps of cash.  

Unfortunately, the talent-heavy combo is running a bit too cautious.  Their new ad “Trusted” is a well-produced bio spot but it feels like a safe move to reinforce the brand.  This happens to front-runners.  Muskie ’72 took a similar path and that campaign found itself on the wrong end of a boot stomping…and when the electability argument falters, there had better be something to replace it. 

Perhaps their records are strong enough, and their vision will be clear enough, to surmount the inevitable challenges that will arise between now and the June primary, but I don’t think the duo is quite there yet.

If the Brown/Ulman ticket is Coca-Cola, the Gansler-Ivey team is Royal Crown.  Had Congressman Delaney or Congressman Ruppersberger…or Comptroller Franchot…entered the fray, the conversation right now would be focused on how Attorney General Gansler can break the 10% barrier and if he could pay his staffers their gas reimbursements in anything other than IOUs for bitcoins.

His “For Us” ad is not bad. It connects to voter concerns and hopes.  This is smart politics but also – in his case – necessary.  His Party Selfie Shown Round the World and allegations of being a bit less than levelheaded require him to shift the focus from “the man” to “our cause.”  While he can raise some funds, he feels too close to his ceiling (despite current polls showing him only in the 14% - 15% range).  With luck, his campaign would finish with 28% of the vote but I would wager that is the high-water mark for that ticket.  He probably ends up with closer to 24%.  By July, his running mate, Delegate Jolene Ivey, will have a much brighter political future than Gansler.

Delegate Heather Mizeur has embraced the insurgent, issue-oriented, progressive positioning.  As a general rule, such campaigns are fun to watch.  Also as a general rule, they usually don’t win (at the presidential level, Dean 2004 leaps to mind…interestingly, the organization that he founded, Democracy for America, is backing Mizeur).

Her selection of Reverend Delman Coates, much like then-Governor Clinton’s pick of then-Senator Al Gore as his running mate, represents a decision to double down on a narrative.  In the case of Mizeur-Coates: an Outsider/Anti-Establishment theme.

Which may be smart politics in 2014.  Voter anxiety levels are revved up.  As it is a non-presidential election year, turnout is unlikely to be high…with the more ideologically driven voters constituting a larger part of the electorate.  Frustration is not limited to Republicans and Independents.  There are Democrats who feel alienated from their government, from politicians who they believe do not listen, or truly understand, their problems.  If they are looking to send a message of change instead of continuity, a vote for Heather Mizeur for Governor would send such a message.

The challenge for Mizeur is to ramp up her profile to the point where voters can make the connection that her candidacy is the best vehicle for change.  Not just intellectually, but viscerally.  That requires some heavy lifting in a relatively short period of time.

And perhaps the majority of Maryland Democrats favor some version of the status quo. However, her campaign is based on the animating principle that the voters want a new choice and a different direction.   Is she right? It remains to be seen.

Which brings me back to where I started.  Although she is running third in the polls, and contrary to what passes for conventional wisdom these days, I believe that Delegate Mizeur might just pull off the upset and win the primary.  If so, it will be by the narrowest of margins over Brown.  More likely, she runs a very respectable second and becomes the instant-front runner for another public office in a not-too-distant election cycle….but there is a path to victory for her in 2014.

I may be wrong and events may follow a different course, but I am open to the idea of that improbability becoming a reality…and the sun is high overhead.

 Stay tuned, as more will follow.