A one-term wonder

Neither Al nor George W.
has staying power. Here's who looks good for 2004

by Seth Gitell

Prediction: whoever is elected president in two weeks will be a one-term wonder. Call it the Jimmy Carter factor. The peanut farmer from Georgia provided us with four years of sanctimonious breathing room between the downbeat Nixon-Ford years and the reactionary Reagan years. If George W. Bush is elected, in part because of a "character" backlash, voters will be reeling at what they've done by the time the midterm congressional elections come around. Count Bush out, like Carter, after just four years. If, on the other hand, Al Gore wins, he's likely to suffer the same fate as Bush the elder -- after 12 years of his party, voters will say, "Enough already!"

The interesting question now is: who will be running in 2004? Though few party activists would go on the record, it's what all of them are talking about. A word of caution: we may expect major turnover in the White House four years from now, but that doesn't mean that a politician unknown today is going to miraculously come forward tomorrow. Expect to hear familiar names: Kerry, McCain, Whitman, and even Clinton (see "Gone to the Dogs").

That's right, Clinton, as in Hillary Rodham. In the parlor game that is predicting presidential politics, hers is the first name on every participant's lips. If George W. Bush takes the White House (and if the first lady wins the Senate race in New York -- where she has a slim but steady lead over US Representative Rick Lazio), Hillary Rodham Clinton rockets to the top of many politicos' lists of potential Democratic presidential candidates for 2004. After all, it is Hillary, and not Al, who is the real heir to the Clinton legacy. Unlike Gore, who has gone out of his way to distance himself from the president, Hillary has embraced her Inner Bubba. In fact, she has gotten all the benefits of being associated with the president without any of the negatives. With every twist in the Lewinsky saga, for instance, the public viewed Hillary with more compassion and Gore with more skepticism.

If the economy worsens under a Bush watch -- which is likely, given that the stock market has been on the fritz since March and inflation is slowly creeping upward -- Hillary Rodham Clinton will be the natural

beneficiary of Clinton nostalgia in the same way W. has profited from pro-Bush sentiment. (The public may not be drawn to W. because of his father, but party activists and big donors certainly are.)

The first signal of Hillary 2004 will be her Senate-campaign staff. If she picks up the cream of the Gore campaign and the current White House, then it will look as though she's getting ready to run for the big job. Then, watch to see how much time Clinton spends in New York and how much she spends crisscrossing the country. Look for Hillary Clinton to try to leapfrog seniority-based Senate procedure and join Jesse Helms on the hotly contested Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

One specialist in congressional relations (who, naturally, wanted to remain anonymous) says that if Clinton wins the Senate and Bush wins the presidency, Hillary "emerges as a New Democrat. She becomes a hybrid of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Bill Clinton, and Bobby Kennedy. She becomes the intellect of the Senate, the heir to triangulation, and the soul of the party all put together. She's Franklin and Eleanor all in one."

He goes on to say that if the troubles in the Middle East intensify, Hillary will probably follow the example of Senator Chuck Schumer and lurch to the right on Israel in order to win over the big-money donors. Not that she'll need to. In running for office, Clinton is inheriting more than just her husband's political legacy. She gets his fundraising machine as well.

Since 1992, President Clinton has completely taken over the Democratic Party's fundraising operations. (The most ironic result of this is that, as Gore has hit the campaign trail, he's had to compete for funds with the Clinton juggernaut -- Hillary's run for office, Bill's presidential library. Exhibit A is the brunch and dinner Barbra Streisand held for both Clintons during the Democratic convention. After Bill and Hill blew out of town, Gore was left scrounging for crumbs.)

"She'll dominate that money immediately, so no one else can get it," the congressional expert says. "The Clintons will be back."

THAT DOESN'T mean Hillary's a shoo-in for the Democratic Party nomination in 2004 if Bush wins in 2000. She'll first have to defeat the junior senator from Massachusetts. John Forbes Kerry came very close to challenging Al Gore in 2000, and even closer to being picked as the vice-presidential candidate. If Bush wins, Kerry may come to be seen as having dodged a bullet with Gore's counterintuitive choice of Senator Joseph Lieberman. (And the comparisons between Kerry and President John F. Kennedy will grow. Remember that Kennedy was in the running for the 1956 vice-presidential nod until it went to Estes Kefauver of Tennessee.)

Kerry's an attractive presidential candidate for many of the same reasons he looked so good for the vice-presidency. He's a solid fundraiser. He's a Vietnam veteran -- and a hero at that. (Which makes for a nice contrast with Bush, who spent his wartime years keeping America safe by fooling around in the Texas National Guard.) Plus, if international troubles heat up, Kerry's expertise on defense matters and international affairs will look particularly good.

Along with Kerry, Representative Richard Gephardt of Missouri is a strong candidate. He becomes an even stronger one if the Democratic Party rebels against the centrist Democratic Leadership Council (which gave us Clinton, Gore, and Lieberman) and tilts back to the left, where Gephardt comfortably resides. Even if the Democrats retake the House, Gephardt could pass the Speakership off to Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island and make a play for the presidency.

And in one sense, if Bush wins in 2000, no politician will be better positioned for 2004 than Lieberman. Everyone in the country now knows his name. He made a great speech at the convention and handled himself impressively during the vice-presidential debate. His biggest hurdle -- besides Clinton, Kerry, and Gephardt -- will be restoring his credibility should voters remember that he softened his positions on affirmative action, vouchers, and Israel in order to run with Gore.

Although some in the party are recycling many of the same names for president in 2004 that were rejected for vice-president in 2000, don't believe them. Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana and John Edwards of North Carolina proved themselves not-ready-for-prime-time players. A more solid possibility is Governor Gray Davis of California. But he's said to be lacking in pizzazz. "He's the opposite of somebody who is going to set the world on fire," says Joel Kotkin, a senior fellow at the Davenport Institute at Pepperdine University in Southern California.

Oh, and before we forget -- if the election is especially close, as it now seems it will be, a defeated Gore could come back. So far we've seen at least two versions of Gore: the combative populist who dueled with the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and the 2000 alpha male. Could there be a third? Stranger things have been known to happen. No one ever thought Richard Nixon -- who served as President Dwight Eisenhower's VP for two terms -- had a future in politics after he lost to Kennedy in 1960.

IN ALL likelihood, Bush will win and we'll be concentrating on Democratic candidates come 2004. Although current polls suggest that the race is in a statistical dead heat, there is a sense on the Gore team that the campaign is slipping through their fingers. But if they come up with a last-minute winning recipe, the Republicans will be left wondering where they went wrong. In which case Gore, in 2004, may very well end up facing someone many Americans preferred to either presidential nominee in 2000 -- Senator John McCain. McCain obviously was the one presidential candidate this year who most electrified voters across the political spectrum.

That said, McCain will be 68 in 2004. He's previously acknowledged that after years in a North Vietnamese prison camp, he's old for his age -- and he's just had another bout with skin cancer. Even if McCain is in good health four years from now, he still will have to deal with the Republican establishment. What makes anyone think that the Republican money men who anointed Bush will take kindly to McCain's campaign-finance-reform crusade?

If not McCain, then how about someone from the state level? The Republicans boast an impressive array of governors. (Sorry, not you, Argeo.) Those who look strong include Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin, John Engler of Michigan, and Frank Keating of Oklahoma. Each is from an important swing state. Thompson has taken an innovative approach to domestic issues, such as school vouchers and welfare reform. Engler has won the support of the important union vote in his home state. Keating launched himself into the national limelight after the Oklahoma City bombing. Governor Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania is pro-choice and, like Kerry, a Vietnam veteran -- which makes for an intriguing GOP combination. Then there's Governor Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey, also pro-choice and once a rising star -- she could come back. Governor Jeb Bush of Florida looks good too, but if his brother loses in 2000, he can kiss his political ambitions goodbye, and GOP activists can give up their dreams of a "smarter Bush campaign."

In the Senate, either Chuck Hagel of Nebraska or Fred Thompson of Tennessee could run as the heirs to McCain's legacy. Like McCain, Hagel is a veteran. Thompson, a former movie actor, has charisma. In the House, Representative John Kasich, who helped himself by pulling out of the presidential race early and backing Bush, could capture the national eye. Kasich won a national reputation in the various budget fights of the 1990s -- fighting pork along with spending -- and may resurface after getting out of Washington this November.

THE SPECULATION game is interesting, but there's one word to describe these Democratic and Republican prospects: boring. (Even Hillary Rodham Clinton, while fascinating because of her connection to Bill, is nothing more than a fairly conventional Democrat.) If America really begins to careen out of control, the prospects for a serious third-party candidate grow exponentially. In which case, we should look no further than Governor Jesse Ventura of Minnesota. Ventura is that rare politician with national name recognition. Four more years in office will give him some much-needed seasoning. If the Green Party costs the Democrats the election this year -- which is how things look as of this writing -- the Greens, perhaps with Ventura on their ticket, could come back in 2004 with an even more serious presidential effort.

It's been said that the times make the leaders. In recent years, good times have meant we haven't needed strong leaders. But if things get worse, we can hope that at least the politicians will improve. If they don't, we'll all be in trouble.

Seth Gitell can be reached at sgitell[a]phx.com.