President Who

What is that saying about it being better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt? That seems apt as the political season picks up steam and candidates attempt, or are forced, to speak their minds on every issue under the sun, more or less spontaneously. The debates and unrehearsed interviews interest me more by far than the planned speeches we hear later on, which are meticulously crafted by wily folks to bump up the polls. Candidates find themselves often speaking off the cuff, and that's when, to me, they are apt to let slip what they really think, under pressure of the moment.

So who looks good to me so far? Probably on the Democratic side, surprisingly, Hillary Clinton. I like the way she has come across as much more levelheaded, knowledgable, and sensible in fielding questions and dodging bullets than most of her male counterparts, and I find it refreshing that she isn't easily flustered or phony, not given to empty platitudes or sure-to-please slogans. She has stood by her record unapologetically and refused to resort to cosmetic backpedaling, even when it has cost her in the polls. I think she's head and shoulders better prepared for the office than the others, in experience, temperament, and character. And she has, again surprising to me, the ability to recognize her own foibles and even poke fun at them with us. That's something John F. Kennedy had, and we called it grace. Best of all, I think she understands the complexity of issues and people and sees the world realistically. I disagree with her basic liberal positions often, but respect her reasons to hold them. On the minus side, I don't believe she is the best public speaker running. She often comes across as strident and too full of herself, whining this and that at too high and pompous a timbre. Ted Kennedy couldn't avoid the same problem when he tried to run and couldn't avoid the solemn vapors when he got going good, and pretty soon here came the vibrato and tremulous thunders no one wanted. Hillary should learn from her husband's masterful soft delivery. The content carries its own weight, if it's good. It only gets weakened by getting louder and begins to sound like hysteria, the last thing she needs.

Barack O'Bama has been the most impressive candidate in convention speeches and as a spokesmen for liberal causes. He doesn't quite have the lyric poetry of a Jesse Jackson or the clever wit of an Al Sharpton, but he can be a stemwinder nonetheless. Where he breaks down is in his one-on-one interviews and unrehearsed question and answer sessions, because unfortunately he doesn't have good answers, and he's not yet knowledgeable enough or sure enough of his convictions to supply them. Further, I think his vision is somewhat limited to social issues he understands from his experience, and he doesn't understand enough of foreign policy or economics to be an effective President. He is, however, shrewd and astute as a fundraiser and effective organizer. I don't yet sense whether he's a good judge of human nature, but if he is, he could be an effective arm-twister in the mold of Lyndon Johnson in moving legislation forward as a vice-president.

John Edwards seems stronger right now than O'Bama to me, and better experienced for having run in '04. He's an effective speaker and champion of social liberalism, and labor especially should love him. He seems so passionately anti-big business, however, that I don't think he's electable in critical borderline states. His mission is to fight for fairness, for justice, and a break for the little guy, and he does that very well. But I don't think he has the gravitas or understanding to be a world leader. I like his refreshing honesty, keen sense of irony and quick wit though, and I'd like to know more about his positions on economic and world issues before I make up my mind about him.

Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinic, and other democratic contenders are worth further attention as the debates heat up, all practised and experienced politicians, each with some impressive strengths but not front-runners at this point. However, I am reminded of what happened to the Kerry campaign early on, when he as a dark horse seemed on the point of collapse then won big in later primaries and pulled it out, almost taking the general election. It could happen again for one of these candidates, but it would take the right external events occuring that played to their strengths to give them a catapulting issue.

On the Republican side, I like Rudy Guiliani best right now. He might not get husband- or father-of-the-year honors or the Firemen's Hero award, but in terms of what a President needs, I think he's probably the best bet. He's a proven leader and pragmatic politician, not so full of himself that he's blinded to needs and realities, self-deprecating enough and even-tempered enough to run a steady ship of state despite criticism. I'm a little disappointed Michael Bloomberg is sitting this one out, though. I think he has an even better presidential character and judgement than Rudy.

I find John McCain to be the most honest and realistic candidate running, sticking by his convictions and statements regardless of popularity or unpopularity with any constituency and polls be damned, and most capable of understanding the complexities of the world and a brilliant student of human nature. Unfortunately, he is also the most thin-skinned and volatile, and perhaps the least politically effective candidate running in either party, I'm afraid. He isn't a good administrator, can't manage even his campaign finances, and is prone to self-destructive candor and offhand gaffes and attacks that can destroy his support from independents, conservatives, and liberals alike, his only hope of nomination as he seeks to build a center coalition. I would miss him, but I think he'll do a fast fade after disappointing early primaries this time around.

Mitt Romney is a candidate I'll have to learn more about before I'll be ready to pass judgement. I like some of the things he's said but wonder if he has thick enough, or slick enough, skin to stay compatible with the press or the critics, or would he become another Nixon, battling the fifth estate to the death--his. And I wonder if he has the political skills to build consensus for his vision, and for that matter, wonder what exactly his vision is. I see him right now as kind of a John Edwards of the G.O.P.--likely as a vice presidential pick but not having the character or convictions to garner the trust needed from enough segments of society to win the nomination or general election.

Fred Thompson entering the race this week, I think, will be interesting. I don't know a lot about his views and don't watch Law and Order, but I believe he is viewed as a Reagan Republican here to save the day. He will be embraced like no other candidate by the right wing conservatives, but I think their influence in the '08 race will be far less than it was in either of the past two elections. Silent majorities are silent for a reason: they prefer to remain in the background unless they perceive the country going to the dogs in a fit of hedonistic liberalism. I think even the most staunchly conservative of voters are prepared to shift more to the center this time around, after the scandals of corporate executive misdeeds, massive financial bailouts, badly bungled adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and several cycles of big oil profiteering at public expense. There is after all such a thing as excess, be it to the right or to the left, and we've all seen what can happen when it things tilt too far either way. Though I'm open to being convinced otherwise, I'm afraid Thompson's simply running at the wrong time of history.

What I look forward to most in the upcoming debates is revealing the candidate with the best grip on present realities as well as the best vision for the future. If I perceive that he (or she) has the character, skill, and experience to lead effectively as well, I'll certainly vote for that person regardless of party or gender. After all, despite my conservative leanings, I'm still a registered Independent.