Friday, November 04, 2005

What Are the Implications of Avian Flu Threat for 2008 Presidential Race?

In 1932, the nation was overwhelmed by the Great Depression. It also had a presidential election.

The incumbent president, Herbert Hoover, was blamed for the economic catastrophe from which ordinary Americans were reeling, for insenstivity to their plight, and for ineffectiveness in dealing with it.

His opponent, Franklin Roosevelt, was rather vague about his program. But, like Hoover, he spoke a lot about balancing the federal budget.

In the end, it didn't matter what the political views of the two major candidates were. The nation was predisposed to booting Mr. Hoover out and Mr. Roosevelt had something very big going for him: A jaunty and reassuring confidence that all would be well.

In emergency situations, we tend to put aside philosophical concerns. Political philosphies are seen as the obsessions of a people so comfortable that they can afford to indulge them.

When emergencies impinge on an electorate, whether those emergencies are economic catastrophe, war, the breakdown of domestic institutions, or mass outbreaks of disease, voters turn the reins of executive power over to people who look like they can lead them to better days.

(Fortunately, in America, at the national level, we've always turned to trustworthy leaders. In 1933, for example, Americans brought Franklin Roosevelt to the White House, while in Germany, Adolf Hitler was installed as chancellor.)

What happens if the Avian Flu becomes an ever-greater possibility as we move into the 2008 campaign, or our collective awareness of it grows, or if, God forbid, the H5N1 virus mutates, making human-to-human transfer of the disease possible before or during the 2008 elections?

Once again, Americans will be looking for a decisive, confident leader they believe can lead them to better days.

Michael Barone and Hugh Hewitt have already given anecdotal evidence that rank-and-file conservative Republicans appear to be willing to lay aside their philosophical qualms with former New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani, believing that he proved his mettle in dealing with national security issues in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001. His unruffled demeanor in the face of horrible circumstances could bring him more support from Republicans.

Another possible beneficiary on the GOP side would be John McCain. McCain's credentials for "unrufllability" have been proven in extremis in a North Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp. He's also seen as a man of principle who won't cave in to the easy answers. Like Giuliani, he's fought and beaten cancer. His chief deficiency is that he has no executive experience. Americans like to give the presidency to governors.

Of course, governors like Mitt Romney in Massachusetts would also have the opportunity to strut their stuff as they dealt with a pandemic outbreak. Another Massachusetts governor first entered the nation's consciousness by his firm handling of an emergency situation, a police strike in Boston. That was Calvin Coolidge and he later became president.

Among the Democrats, the likeliest beneficiary at this point would appear to be the two governors who seem likely to vie for the party's 2008 nomination.

The first is Bill Richardson. He is an impressive guy and a tested administrator who is credentialed in more than a few of the sweet spots of contemporary US politics. He knows energy policy. He knows about the North Koreans. He is Hispanic and deals with the immigration issue in New Mexico every day. I feel certain that, like Haley Barbour in Missisippi, Richardson is both smart and unflappable.

The other is Mark Warner of Virginia. Warner is the one I think likeliest to emerge as the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee anyway. Moderate southern Democrats have a leg-up in runs for the presidency. If they can successfully run the gauntlet of the primaries, they have a capacity for triangulating Republican nominees in general elections. Warner is smart and if he has to deal with the Avian Flu, his leadership abilities will be brought into focus.

I'm praying that this pandemic won't happen. But if it does, it will without doubt, have an impact on the 2008 presidential race.

2 comments:

"ME" Liz Strauss said...

I'm praying with you Mark. I'm also praying that the person who leads is a strong and trustworthy leader. Your post point out what research proves that in time such as these we follow the optimist. I hope the optimist we see is not a false one, but a leader who can make good things come true.

smiles,
Liz

Mark Daniels said...

Liz:
That's definitely something to pray about. In the meantime, we also are called to pray for our leaders, no matter what their parties or our own.

God bless!

Mark