Advancing a Free Society

For years, my favorite column was the late William Safire’s annual “office pool” – the columnist, former speechwriter and language sage predicting twists and turns in politics, economics, world affairs and pop culture.

What Safire produced each year was, as his surname suggested, a gem – often replicated, never quite duplicated.

In that spirit, here’s my effort to lure you into the crystal ball:

1. By the end of 2013, President Obama’s approval rating (over 50% since the election) will be:

a. About the same, the 2^nd-term honeymoon lasts

b. Better, Obama benefitting from GOP turmoil

c. Worse, the honeymoon soon over;

d. Worse – dramatically so, buyer’s remorse

2. The most significant Congressional achievement in 2013:

a. Assault weapons ban

b. Immigration reform

c. Entitlement reform.

d. Kicking the can into 2014

Click to read more.

Soon, Susan Rice’s announced decision to take herself out of the running for U.S. Secretary of State will recede from the spotlight. More pressing matters – the fiscal cliff, international drama, President Obama preparing for a new term and a new agenda – will see to that.

But before the story goes away, brace yourself for some ugliness. Some will say it’s the fault of obstructionist Senate Republicans that Rice wasn’t promoted from her current post as U.N. Ambassador. Others will play the race card (MSBNC’s Andrea Mitchell wasting no time), as Rice would have been America’s third consecutive African-American Secretary of State.

Here are three reasons why, in my estimation, President Obama chose not the go through with the Rice nomination – and it has less to do with Republican machinations (like John McCain joining the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and thus awaiting Rice as a nomination roadblock) – than it does political realities at the year’s-end:

1)  The Cliff Dwellers. At some (eventually, maybe not so soon), President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner will announce a tentative agreement to avoid the federal fiscal cliff. But turning that framework into legislation that can actually reach the President’s desk requires harmony in Congress. Nominating Susan Rice for Foggy Bottom would have put a serious dent in said harmony.

Click to read more.

This won’t be a discussion about what happened to Republicans’ national aspirations in this election. With well 1,450+ days until Election Day 2016, there’s plenty of time for talk of how to put Humpty back together.

Meanwhile, imagine what it was to be Bill Clinton on the morning after Election Night.

On the one hand, you woke up to the reality that the man who deep, deep down you maybe don’t like because took the job your wife covets, kept it – thanks in part to your campaigning in swing starts, plus whatever advice you offered on the golf course. Small wonder the re-elected president placed a phone call to you after the results were official – even if he didn’t mention your name in his acceptance speech (oops).

But by winning re-election, Clinton also woke to a grimmer reality (from his standpoint): Barack Obama may have killed Hillary Clinton’s presidential prospects, whatever they are.

Figure it this way: five times, since 1920, America has voted on what to do next after an eight-year presidency (this excludes Coolidge, Truman, Johnson, Ford who stepped in due to death or resignation). Only once, in 1988, did Americans “stay the course” with the same party. The other four times – 2008, 2000, 1960, 1920 – they changed course by switching party control. That’s not a good omen for Hillaryistas.

The one argument against this: deeper American history.

Click to read more.

Some would argue that there’s no mystery to the outcome of Tuesday’s election – not that it’s a scientific assumption.

Every four years, for example, 7-Eleven sponsors a 7-Election – an outcome driven by the sale of red Republican and blue Democratic coffee cups. In the past two elections, these spots of coffee have been spot-on. In 2008, the 7-Election had it as 52% for Barack Obama. Actually tally: 52.9% for Obama. In 2004, the 7-Election had George W. Bush winning with 51% of the vote. Actual result: Bush 50.7%.

So what’s the 7-Election calling for 2012? It’s Obama, in a caffeinated landslide (59%-41%).

Another predictor: professional football – specifically, the “Redskins Rule”. In 17 of the last 18 presidential elections, dating back to 1940, the following has held true: if the Washington Redskins win their last home before the election, the party that controls the White House stays in power; the Redskins lose, so too does the incumbent party (the lone exception being 2004 – the Redskins lost to the Steelers; Bush beat Kerry).

On Sunday, the Redskins hosted the Carolina Panthers, putting the “rule” to its 2012 test. Final score: Panthers 21, Redskins 13. Advantage: Romney.

If you think all of this is nuts, I’ll give you one more: Mr. Nuts, the San Francisco Bay Area tuxedo cat who makes his predictions by choosing from one of two litter boxes – the losing candidate literally getting the business. Bad news for Mitt Romney: nature called, and Mr. Nuts called on the Romney-labeled litter box (an apt metaphor for the media coverage of Romney, no?)

If you’re not convinced by what all of his means and actually want to watch the election returns, here’s a viewing guide.

Click to read more.

President Obama and Mitt Romney meet for a final time on Monday night – unless Romney prevails on Election Night, in which case there will be a fourth and decidedly frosty encounter at the White House late in the morning on January 20, 2013, when control of the executive branch of the federal government would change hands.

How to anticipate this third presidential debate?

You can argue that, in a forensic best-of-three series, we’re tied at one-apiece. However, that’s not quite accurate. Romney’s decisive win in Denver (he gained in the polls, sent Obama spiraling for the first time as a presidential candidate, and convinced the media the race was genuinely on) far outweighs the President’s marginal “win”at the Hofstra town-hall (Obama’s performance was indeed far-improved, but he didn’t change the campaign’s narrative; to the extent that anyone was doing damage control post-Hofstra, it was Candy Crowley’s employer).

Here’s what’s odd about this final debate: foreign policy and national security, thought to be an after-thought in an election dominated by a weak economy, is back with a vengeance.

Click to read more.