Analyzes the 1988 US presidential election; concludes that the Democrats did not exploit the weak points of the opposition, and that they were out of step with mainstream America when it came to basic values.
Norman J. Ornstein is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and co-director of the Gallup/Times Mirror survey of the American electorate. Mark Schmitt is a researcher at the American Enterprise Institute.
In 1988 a Republican won the presidency for the fifth time in the last six tries, and for the seventh time in the last ten. In the past six presidential elections-over a quarter-century-Democrats have averaged approximately 43 percent of the national popular presidential vote. Over the past forty years Democrats have managed to exceed 50.1 percent of the popular vote only once, in 1964, in the wake of the Kennedy assassination.
The American public is sending a message with its voting behavior. Is it a profound message about what Americans want in their government at home and how they want America represented and projected abroad? Or are they separate messages for individual elections, unique reactions to specific circumstances that happen to mesh into a pattern of Republican hegemony? The answer is not at all clear, but which answer is correct matters less than which answer prevails in the interpretation of the 1988 vote.
The approach that each political party takes toward governing during the new administration comes down to whether the 1988 election is viewed as a seminal event involving a significant choice between two well-matched opponents, or a predictable and narrow victory for continuity over change. The more significance each party assigns to the outcome of the election, the more aggressive that party will be in the branch of government it controls.
Even before the results were in, the media seemed to decide the election was not important: "issueless," "personal," "trivial," "negative" were the usual expressions of disgust. There was a good deal of overstatement here, and it will take some time before we can fully understand the significance of 1988. In this essay we will try to put the election into context, examining the issues discussed and ignored, using the election to frame an analysis of the policy battles, options and outcomes ahead.
II
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Related
The process of nominating and confirming executive appointments is slow, burdensome, and intrusive. This failed system impedes good governance, frustrates nominees, and hampers recruitment. The next president must rationalize and streamline the appointment process -- starting now.
"The mood of the American electorate radiates anxiety, mistrust, pessimism and an implacable determination to change the way things are done in Washington". This, and the end of the Cold War, are "likely to effect a major transformation of American foreign policy", in terms of shift from geopolitics towards a definition of the national economic interest and an enhancement of US industrial competitiveness. This is not simply a reaction to the recession, but a more basic lack of confidence in US economic management.
Reviews (1) the decline of US technological superiority in consumer electronics, semiconductors and superconductors (2) the technology transfer issues raised by the US-Japanese negotiations on the FSX fighter aircraft programme (3) US debate about whether HDTV (high-definition television) market potential is sufficient to warrant US investment as a player (4) currents of thought in other countries facing analogous science and technology policy issues (5) possible measures for strengthening the US manufacturing base and for sharpening US technology policy management. Asserts that the emergence of technological competitiveness as a matter of prime US strategic economic concern, and its extension into the centre of US foreign policy-making, require 'institutional realignments' in Washington.
