![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The presidential election this year may provide an interesting test of a hypothesis about political dissent. At the current juncture we have two politically similar candidates strongly campaigning for the nomination on the Democratic side. The party seems unified on what it wants and generally on where it wants to go. On the other hand the Republicans have united around a candidate while not having a unified vision of where they want their party to be on the national level. If there had been a single strong conservative candidate and fewer winner take all contests (or in different states) their primary would probably be ongoing and as strongly contested as the 1976 contest between the moderate Ford and the emerging conservative Reagan.
If the substance of general (though not universal) agreement in a party is more important for ability to win an election then the current contest between the Democrats will have very little lasting impact on the race. If on the other hand the appearance of unity is more important than its substance the Republicans' papering over of differences and uniting (largely) behind John McCain will probably result in an electoral win for them despite sharp internal divisions.
The state of the economy, however, may swamp the effect of the public relations value of the continuing Democratic process or the (unofficially) concluded Republican one. If economic conditions get much worse through the summer then I expect that there will be a return to the "no-chance for Republicans this cycle" narrative. Likewise a worsening of the war in Iraq would spell doom for John McCain and whatever running mate he selects for the Republican presidential ticket. But absent either of these two scenarios it looks like as good a test of this hypothesis as we are ever likely to see in an actual presidential election.
That's as close to a prediction as I can make about this year in good conscience. Or anyone else. Comparing this election to almost any other is like driving a car by looking in the rear view mirror. (In other words, ignore other pundits, I'm right.) Seriously though, it is hard to find that much similarity between any presidential campaigns. They're all such unique beasts aside from the occasional rematch. This is not Democrats and Republicans reversed in 1980, this isn't 1988 or 1992 in replay. This is its own thing, both like and unlike the elections of the past. For one thing though we Democrats will do everything we can to point out similarities between John McCain's attitude and positions to President Bush, he's not actually part of the administration. And neither of the two Democrats have been in the executive branch, though Clinton certainly was closely associated with it. This is the first time since Stevenson vs. Eisenhower in 1952 that a President or Vice-President has not been running. And unlike that election none of the current candidates has significant executive experience. This will be unique for political science.
If the substance of general (though not universal) agreement in a party is more important for ability to win an election then the current contest between the Democrats will have very little lasting impact on the race. If on the other hand the appearance of unity is more important than its substance the Republicans' papering over of differences and uniting (largely) behind John McCain will probably result in an electoral win for them despite sharp internal divisions.
The state of the economy, however, may swamp the effect of the public relations value of the continuing Democratic process or the (unofficially) concluded Republican one. If economic conditions get much worse through the summer then I expect that there will be a return to the "no-chance for Republicans this cycle" narrative. Likewise a worsening of the war in Iraq would spell doom for John McCain and whatever running mate he selects for the Republican presidential ticket. But absent either of these two scenarios it looks like as good a test of this hypothesis as we are ever likely to see in an actual presidential election.
That's as close to a prediction as I can make about this year in good conscience. Or anyone else. Comparing this election to almost any other is like driving a car by looking in the rear view mirror. (In other words, ignore other pundits, I'm right.) Seriously though, it is hard to find that much similarity between any presidential campaigns. They're all such unique beasts aside from the occasional rematch. This is not Democrats and Republicans reversed in 1980, this isn't 1988 or 1992 in replay. This is its own thing, both like and unlike the elections of the past. For one thing though we Democrats will do everything we can to point out similarities between John McCain's attitude and positions to President Bush, he's not actually part of the administration. And neither of the two Democrats have been in the executive branch, though Clinton certainly was closely associated with it. This is the first time since Stevenson vs. Eisenhower in 1952 that a President or Vice-President has not been running. And unlike that election none of the current candidates has significant executive experience. This will be unique for political science.