|
|Monday Nov. 8, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
It's
terrorism, stupid!
"It's
the economy, stupid." So went the well-known campaign slogan, coined
by illustrious Democratic strategist James Carville. It was the key
to Bill Clinton's victory over George Bush Sr. in the 1992 U.S.
presidential election. This time, John Kerry's advisers tried to
unsuccessfully repeat the same feat, but didn't understand that the
music had changed: "It's the terrorism, stupid."
The
economy has always been the main determining factor in U.S.
presidential elections. U.S. president F.D. Roosevelt is told to
have once said, "Put a few dollars in the pockets of an American,
and he will swear of not knowing anyone by the name of Marx, Hitler,
Mussolini, or even Jesus Christ." This escaped the father of the
current President Bush, George Sr. He thought he could return to the
White House in 1992 thanks to the victory of the first Gulf War of
1990.
Carville, on the other hand, understood that U.S. voters
had already left Iraq behind and were concerned with the economy. It
was smack in the middle of a long recession in the early 1990s.
The organizers of John Kerry's campaign dismissed some
of the social issues that Americans still have problems accepting
(same-sex marriage for one) and believed, especially in the
beginning, that in order to defeat George W. Bush they had to remind
voters of the million jobs lost during the four years of Republican
presidency.
Moreover, they thought U.S. citizens were tired of the
Iraq massacre, a war Bush "invented" that sheds every day fresh
American blood.
In short, Kerry thought American voters were ready to
change and rid themselves of this cowboy president. In this, he was
right, of course. But where Kerry was wrong was in not understanding
that, while Americans did not approve Bush's methods in fighting
terrorism, they still considered terrorism the main issue of this
campaign. Americans blame Bush not for launching a war against
terrorism, but for not winning it. Kerry still based his campaign on
James Carville's slogan, "It's the economy, stupid!" This was true
in 1992, but no more in 2004. With Bush out of the equation, only
two issues faced U.S. voters: national security and John Kerry.
Right or wrong, they concluded that the two did not match.
If one does not consider the dramatic change in the
mindset of Americans, these results apparently absurd from a
traditional standpoint are inexplicable.
Take Ohio, the state that ended up handing the White
House back to George W. Bush. This is a state undergoing a harsh
economic crisis, with the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. I
visited Columbus and Cleveland while the U.S. presidential campaign
was in full swing, and the criticism against President Bush was
ferocious. A state that should have chosen Kerry in a landslide went
instead, even if by a narrow margin, to Bush.
Voters are still split, with 58 million votes for Bush
and 54.5 million for Kerry. But this result came despite the
aversion of a great many Americans for a President who led his
country in a bloody and extremely expensive war, and who destroyed
one million jobs in four years. The amazing thing is that the
incumbent U.S. President didn't lose votes from 2000; he gained
instead.
This shows how deep the change was that took place,
which is not understood or, of course, justified outside the U.S.
Sept. 11 changed Americans forever. They gave their
contribution in defence of peace and democracy fighting dictators
like Hitler, but never accepted interference of any kind in their
hemisphere. Dating from the application of the Monroe Doctrine of
1823, Americans defended strenuously their turf, encompassing the
whole of North and South America. That philosophy makes them see
themselves as the masters of the whole continent, and this is what
made former president John F. Kennedy defy Nikita Khrushchev in
Cuba.
This changed on 9/11, as Osama bin Laden brought war to
New York City, the heart of the United States. It is guerrilla
warfare, but the effect is the same. Americans are not afraid of
terrorists, are ready to fight them all over the world; but can't
accept the idea of fighting them at home. It gave them a terrible
feeling of insecurity. They aren't safe at the shopping mall, at
work, or in an elevator lift.
George Bush understood this, John Kerry didn't.
Did the American voters make the right choice? I was
unimpressed with Democratic candidate Kerry, but I was also not
convinced that Bush is the answer to the worries of Americans. If
nothing else, because armies win wars, but terrorism can only be
beaten by politics and certainly, not through the politics George
Bush believes in.
|
