Friday, January 04, 2008

David Brooks on Iowa

David Brooks makes some good points in the aftermath of Iowa. He titles his piece The Two Earthquakes -- sensing that what happened last night marks a possible turning point in American politics -- I hope he is right.

First on Obama:

This is a huge moment. It’s one of those times when a movement that seemed ethereal and idealistic became a reality and took on political substance.

Iowa won’t settle the race, but the rest of the primary season is going to be colored by the glow of this result. Whatever their political affiliations, Americans are going to feel good about the Obama victory, which is a story of youth, possibility and unity through diversity — the primordial themes of the American experience.

And Americans are not going to want to see this stopped. When an African-American man is leading a juggernaut to the White House, do you want to be the one to stand up and say No?

Obama has achieved something remarkable. At first blush, his speeches are abstract, secular sermons of personal uplift — filled with disquisitions on the nature of hope and the contours of change.

He talks about erasing old categories like red and blue (and implicitly, black and white) and replacing them with new categories, of which the most important are new and old. He seems at first more preoccupied with changing thinking than changing legislation.

And then on Huckabee:

On the Republican side, my message is: Be not afraid. Some people are going to tell you that Mike Huckabee’s victory last night in Iowa represents a triumph for the creationist crusaders. Wrong.

Huckabee won because he tapped into realities that other Republicans have been slow to recognize. First, evangelicals have changed. Huckabee is the first ironic evangelical on the national stage. He’s funny, campy (see his Chuck Norris fixation) and he’s not at war with modern culture.

Second, Huckabee understands much better than Mitt Romney that we have a crisis of authority in this country. People have lost faith in their leaders’ ability to respond to problems. While Romney embodies the leadership class, Huckabee went after it. He criticized Wall Street and K Street. Most importantly, he sensed that conservatives do not believe their own movement is well led. He took on Rush Limbaugh, the Club for Growth and even President Bush. The old guard threw everything they had at him, and their diminished power is now exposed.

Third, Huckabee understands how middle-class anxiety is really lived. Democrats talk about wages. But real middle-class families have more to fear economically from divorce than from a free trade pact. A person’s lifetime prospects will be threatened more by single parenting than by outsourcing. Huckabee understands that economic well-being is fused with social and moral well-being, and he talks about the inter-relationship in a way no other candidate has.

In that sense, Huckabee’s victory is not a step into the past. It opens up the way for a new coalition.

A conservatism that recognizes stable families as the foundation of economic growth is not hard to imagine. A conservatism that loves capitalism but distrusts capitalists is not hard to imagine either. Adam Smith felt this way. A conservatism that pays attention to people making less than $50,000 a year is the only conservatism worth defending.

If Brooks is correct, we are possibly witnessing a major change in US presidential politics -- and one might say, an evolution in American politics. For the first time in my lifetime, I am excited about a candidate (Obama) and not feeling like I have to choose the least dangerous alternative. I suspect some conservatives feel the same way about Huckabee.

Who knows what will happen going forward, but at least in Iowa they voted with their hearts, with the idea of a better more compassionate future. And that is a monumental change over the politics of recent years.


Eric said...

I know many of us up here in the North are excited by Obama as well.

Here is a guy who has the heart and (maybe) mind to make a change in the way the U.S operates.

We all need Obama as much as American's do.

Huckabee, despite the kind words of Brooks scares me however. I can't trust someone who thinks the world was created 5000ish years ago... Makes me doubt his critical thinking skills...

william harryman said...

I agree about Huckabee -- he scares me too.

I think, though, that part of why he won in Iowa (aside from being a fundamentalist) is that he, like Obama, is running on a platform of hope and possibility. But his version of America is not one I want to live in.

And YES -- America (and the world) could really benefit from an Obama presidency.