November 2010 About Honesty

Remember gravitas?

It was a word thrown about in the 2000 presidential election which, if you had it, then you possessed a weighty grasp of the issues. Opponents claimed George W. Bush had no gravitas and, as it turned out, they were partially correct. Unfortunately for them, vice-presidential candidate Dick Cheney -- whatever you think of the man -- oozed gravitas and Bush was able to eke out the election on the strength of electoral votes.

The best word to use for this election cycle is "veracity" defined as a "habitual observance of the truth in speech or statement and conformity to fact.

Notice the word of choice is not "ideology" or "conservative" or "enthusiasm."

Most people are tired of a political class who are elitist and too clever by half in trying to accomplish what they think needs to be done to keep themselves in office. They no longer want officials who define themselves by whether they are progressive or liberal or moderate or conservative. They certainly want no one who is holier than thou.

Veracity is a good word because it implies someone who will approach his job with open eyes and communicate the issues to the public in a straightforward manner. If you're an old guy in a rumpled suit with no particular ambitions beyond the office you're running for, you're probably having a good year.

That's why Democrat Jerry Brown is leading Republican Meg Whitman in polling in the California governor's race. He is the old guy (72) in the rumpled suit who has in the past decade positioned himself as a pragmatist, a far cry from his younger "Gov. Moonbeam" days. Whitman, the former eBay CEO, is the kind of person the electorate is moving away from -- the one who thinks she can buy her way into office because she has millions and is entitled. People doubt her, if not cringe, even if they are on her side politically.

The way things are going this election season, there is no way Brown should be within 20 points of Whitman. He's got tremendous baggage for voters who remember his governorship, he's a Democrat in a GOP year, he's a step too extreme on environmental issues and will be supported by the public employee unions that have nearly flushed a beautiful state down the toilet. But he's leading because, while he may not have gravitas, he has veracity.

My bet is if this November election does become a GOP landslide, Whitman will ride the wave to Sacramento. She might turn out to be a good governor, too, for all I know. She should be leading by a lot more than she is currently.

Three other Republican candidates are struggling in Senate races because of "The V Word."

Also in the Golden State, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina is trailing incumbent Democrat Barbara Boxer by a couple of points now. I think if people had one senator they could run out of Washington on a rail, it would be Harry Reid of Nevada, but Boxer would be a very close second choice. Unfortunately, Fiorina is another corporate millionaire who bought her way into the general election and voters really don't know what they will be getting from her. Same with Reid's opponent, the erratic Sharron Angle. In Delaware, Christine O'Donnell is being slammed by Democrats who daily uncover her unusual statements and activities in the past.

I'm not sure if much can be done to change Fiorina's persona, but both Angle and O'Donnell are relatively new to the public eye and, with discipline, can improve their campaigns in the final month. They can eye another Tea Party Patriot, Rand Paul, who is running for Senate in Kentucky, who also had to overcome a truckload of gaffes -- and has and is comfortably leading in the polls. We'll see.

Here's another word for 2010: "sober."

This has nothing to do with staying away from adult beverages, but everything to do with approaching problems in a cool, calm and professional manner. Whitman and Fiorina can do that. People have doubts about whether Angle and O'Donnell can. Like Whitman, Angle should hold a double-digits lead over Reid, who is vastly disliked in his home state. O'Donnell is fresh, having just won, so she has a chance to get on the good side with voters. With independents breaking for Republicans this time, they'll have a chance. They just need to convince voters of their veracity.

Arizona Immigration, Oil Spill

This blog got its start in the last hysteria over illegal immigration, so I might as well post again during the current squabble.

As usual, most of the debate we hear comes from the extremes. Arizona is not being taken over by Nazis and the federal government is actually doing quite a bit about stemming the flow of illegal immigrants, from building border fences to conducting raids on businesses that hire them. That's it's not enough is a sign of the magnitude of the problem, not that we're not trying.

A poll released Monday shows that Americans are much closer to the center on this issue, as they are on most others. Rasmussen Reports found that 58 percent of Americans want an immigration policy that's considered "welcoming." And if you think that racist Republicans are behind the new law in Arizona, members of the GOP were more in favor of the welcoming policy than Democrats. At the same time, the poll found that we need to control the borders.

Control our borders, know who is coming in and leaving, and maintain our status of a melting pot nation of immigrants who follow procedure as they arrive on our shores. That's what we want, and according to the poll results, that's what we've wanted for years.

---

So much for off-shore drilling. When the explosion and fire took place last week off the Gulf Coast, it seemed to be a tragedy only in that it took lives. I use the word "only" advisedly, of course. That's because a second tragedy is unfolding which could do untold environmental damage to an area still recovering from Hurricane Katrina and a couple of successors.

As a resident of a coastal city, I approve of off-shore drilling only reluctantly. I think we need to tap what oil reserves we have because it will take years -- if not decades -- to develop the green, clean energy that we want.

Now I don't see off-shore drilling being approved at all, for any reason. That's a third tragedy.

The Revolutionary Tidal Wave

There's a political revolution underway in the United States of America as clearly indicated by Tuesday's election of Republican Scott Brown to the US Senate from very liberal Massachusetts. Brown's victory is stunning in itself but made more so in that he is taking over Ted Kennedy's seat, and he reportedly won the Democrat icon's home precinct in Hyannis.

Because of what's happening, I thought it was time to resurrect the ol' blog, which has been dormant for some time while I pursued other projects. I don't know if I'll be able to post as much as I used to, but when inspired, I'll come on here and share my thoughts.

One of the things that encouraged me to blog about politics again is that a lot of people are going to try to manipulate the revolution for their own ends. There will be a lot of misinformation out there. Hopefully I can help set things straight.

-- No question that Brown's victory is a repudiation of the health care bill being pushed through by President Obama and Congressional leaders, at all costs. But only in part.

-- Brown's victory reflects voter anger at Obama's presidency so far, both in what he's done (conservatives energized to vote Tuesday) and not done (liberals who stayed home). Again, only in part.

-- Martha Coakley ran a lousy campaign. I have no idea, but she did lose in a Democrat stronghold, so there's some circumstantial evidence.

Here's the real story.

This GOP victory, combined with gubernatorial wins last year in New Jersey and Virginia, are not just part of a huge voter revulsion over the Obama presidency, but a continuation of a revolt against "politics as usual" that began months before the 2006 mid-term elections.

The stuff happening in the health care debate, the back-room deals, the hiding of details from public view, the out-and-out lies, has the public simply outraged. These types of things have always happened in Washington and always will, but the public perception is our so-called "leaders" are way out of control and need to be reined in. So that's what's taking place and it's the Democrats who happen to be in power right now, so they're taking the brunt. In 2006 and to some extent in 2008, the GOP was in power and voters couldn't wait to send them packing.

The public turned to congressional Democrats in 2006 and Obama in 2008 to get away from all the crap, to improve the level of debate, to be honest and open. The Dems and Obama campaigned like they were "change incarnate" and would govern in a way that would be appreciated by the electorate. Well, nothing changed. It arguably got worse.

So the revolution that started in 2006 has become a tidal wave, and angry voters are unwilling to differentiate between the parties. If you're guilty of lying and corruption, you're out.

I stated to several people late last year that in my several decades of following politics, I have never seen a riper time for a third party. I was not then, and still aren't, convinced the Republicans can reform themselves and become the party that takes over in DC and governs responsibly. I think voters, who only recently tossed them out on their elephant hind quarters, feel the same way. But if there were a third party with a platform of economic responsibility and strong national security, they would win a plurality in the House in November, win a majority of the available Senate seats in November, and in 2012 take control of Congress and the White House.

It hasn't happened yet. My prediction is that if the GOP falls short of retaking Congress in November, then there will be an effort made at forming such a third party.

I certainly can't predict what will happen in November at this point, there are just too many things going on.

-- Within the parties, the Democrat moderates and progressives are going to square off against each other following the Massachusetts debacle. Who knows what the outcome will be or what it will mean. Stay tuned. On the GOP side, you have the Tea Party activists taking on the moderates. Same question and remark. We'll see.

-- Advantage Democrats: we're coming out of the recession. Unless commercial real estate goes haywire, most voters will feel reasonably good about their position in life come November causing them to forget some of the more esoteric stuff. Anger over health care will dissipate if it doesn't pass. If it does, we certainly won't feel the damaging economic impacts for a couple years, so many people will head into November wondering what all the fuss was about.

-- Advantage Republicans: congressional math is in their favor, with a lot of Democrats representing districts that lean to the right. There are also some retiring Democrats. Americans didn't like George Bush very much in his last couple of years, but they fear Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. There's a powerful difference and it could prove critical.

The bottom line is that voter sentiment in our country has to be viewed over a broader context, but will of course be swayed by individual issues, as became clear in Massachusetts.