 |
|
|
|
||
|
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
|
|
October
23, 2002, 9:00 a.m. By Bill Whalen |
|
SACRAMENTO, CALIF. — Paul McCartney is touring California. So, too, are the Rolling Stones and Sheryl Crow.
But what about the Republicans' rock star, George W. Bush?
Will the president play here before Election Day? Is touching down in the nation's most populous state a good use of his time, or are there worthier venues for the current "W. Across America" campaign tour?
These are tough questions. Unfortunately, California offers no easy answers.
Common sense and conventional wisdom dictate that the president of the United States go out of his way — you don't ignore all of those voters, you don't risk offending all of those donors.
Then again, California and conventionality parted company long ago, in this election cycle.
Yes, we're the biggest political prize: A governor's office that may be ripe for plucking; 55 electoral votes in 2004. But in this particular election cycle, California just might also be America's biggest misfit.
For openers, there's little in the way of spirited competition. Of the state's 150-or-so legislative and congressional races, less than ten will produce Election Night drama. Redistricting and a lack of rising stars on either party's bench translate to little change this time around.
California does not have a U.S. Senate race in 2002, so pet Bush issues like Iraq, judicial nominations, and congressional gridlock aren't foremost on Californians' minds — not part of the dialogue are they are in, say, South Dakota and New Hampshire.
If you want passionate issues, you have to wade far, far down the ticket — past the candidates and statewide propositions, all the way down to local ballot measures: the secession movement in Los Angeles County; moving San Francisco's homeless from cash grants to food and housing vouchers. Besides, presidents don't enter into local squabbles — Bush, for that matter, has never entered San Francisco, period, as president.
And there's a question of logistics. California is the last stop west, which is a headache for Bush roadies. Does is make sense to slip into southern California after a southwest tour through Texas and New Mexico? Do you fly the president into northern California after a stop in Colorado? Do you take a pass on California altogether, to save time deadheading back east?
If all of that seems complicated — well, it is. It's tempting for a Republican president to turn his back on flaky, noninvolved California, especially when so little seems at stake in this election. Then again, there's something about the state that makes the Bush White House want to keep returning.
Which begs the question: What does the White House see when it looks out west?
There's a wonderful episode of Seinfeld where Jerry can't decide if his date is attractive or repulsive, depending on the light she's in ("She's a two-face". . . "So if I ask her out again, I don't know who's showing up — the good, the bad, or the ugly.") That's pretty much W.'s deal with California: The state, she's a "two face." And when he comes a-courtin', the president can't be sure if he'll get the good . . . or the bad . . . or the ugly.
That's true of California's governor's race — it's sexy, or scary, depending on what light it's in.
According to a poll released this week by the San Francisco-based Progressive Policy Institute of California, Democratic Gov. Gray Davis leads Republican Bill Simon Jr., 41 percent-31 percent. At the same time, a three-night tracking poll done on the behalf of the California Teachers Association has Simon trailing by less than three percent, with Simon actually ahead on the third day of polling. That tells us: Davis may be on safe footing; or, he might have one foot on a banana peel, the other in the grave.
So what does the president do? And keep in mind: Bush and his political team have been down this road before — in the final days of the 2000 election, tracking polls said he was within striking distance of Al Gore in California (he ended up losing the state by 12 percent). Does the White House buy into the CTA tracking poll, as well as state Republican surveys that also say it's a narrow race, and come west in hopes that his visit will boost GOP turnout, and maybe put Simon over the top? Or does he stay closer to home, in search of another race the polls say is much more doable (i.e., the Maryland governor's race, which is in the White House's backyard).
Similarly, does the president conclude that he needs to return to the state before the election if he's going to have a chance here in 2004? Or does he take the cynics' posture that what matters more to Californians is his job performance, and the only people counting the number of Bush visits are political junkies?
The thought here, for what it's worth: If the spirit is willing and the schedule permits, the president should take one last stab at California. Not so much because of what it means vis-a-vis this election (unless Simon pulls an upset — then the White House can take partial credit for rallying the faithful), but because President Bush's physical presence does offer the kind of symbolism that lasts beyond two weeks. And that's the end game as far as the president and California are concerned: 2004, not 2002.
Figure it this way: With so many competitive races around the nation that can go in either direction on Nov. 5, there will be plenty of second-guessing regardless of whether the president makes a California excursion. But it's not like Bush would be spending an inordinate amount of time or money here, as he did two years ago.
Two weeks from today, go ahead and argue if you want that a one-day, gone-before-you-knew-he-was-there visit to California cost the Republicans a Senate seat in New Hampshire or Minnesota. Or that it prevented the GOP from keeping Mary Landrieu under 50 percent in Louisiana, or rubbing Tom Daschle's nose in it in South Dakota.
The point is: California's a big target, but if it doesn't work as Republicans hope, it won't be the only state under the broader category of "time wasted." Just as there would be multiple listings under the opposite category of "time better spent." Besides, that's an insider's parlor game — the kind of thing that's argued on Inside Politics, not at dinner tables.
The president shouldn't lose sight of California — and not let hindsight get the better of him.
Or maybe that's dreaming. Remember, it's California: There are always two sides, and two faces.