John Fund: Some pundits and pols think the 2008 election is a sure thing. They've been wrong before.
The first 2008 presidential primary is nearly a year away, and the general election won't be for another 631 days. But to hear some pundits and politicians talk, you'd think the outcome was already settled.
Columnist Robert Novak reports that leading Washington Democrats, buoyed by Hillary Clinton's successful debut in Iowa, are now saying their party can't lose. Bill Daley, a former Clinton commerce secretary who was Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager, is emphatic: "I don't care who the Democratic nominee is. He will become president in '08." (Mr. Daley backs Barack Obama, which may explain that politically incorrect "he.") Rep. Artur Davis, an Alabama Democrat, describes the Hillary juggernaut: "A lot of my colleagues in the Congress say privately on the floor, 'Well, I like Obama, but Hillary is going to win. We are going to have to deal with her.' "
Some Republicans go halfway to agreeing that their party isn't likely to hold the White House. Former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber, who now serves as policy chairman for Mitt Romney, told Roger Simon of Politico.com that "I don't want to contribute to my own party's demoralization, and it doesn't necessarily mean there will be a Democratic landslide, but I think there is a thumb on their side of the scale that's not going to come off until after the next election."
History should teach us to take such claims with more than a grain of salt. While pundits will constantly remind us when they were right, they fall strangely silent when it comes to recalling their missed calls. Let's look at how the presidential field looked some 21 months before the general election, the equivalent point where we are in this cycle, in three previous campaigns.
In February 1991, Democrats were distraught at then-President Bush's 91% approval numbers in the wake of the Gulf War. Leading Democrats such as Sam Nunn and Mario Cuomo decided not to run. The Los Angeles Times noted that Democrats were so discouraged about their chances in 1992 "that they are talking quietly of drafting an uncharismatic but respected legislative leader to serve as a sort of caretaker nominee." Then-House Speaker Tom Foley was mentioned.
In the event, Mr. Bush's popularity soon tanked in a bad economy. Bill Clinton, who didn't even announce for the 1992 Democratic nomination until October 1991, became the surprise nominee....
Read entire article at WSJ
Columnist Robert Novak reports that leading Washington Democrats, buoyed by Hillary Clinton's successful debut in Iowa, are now saying their party can't lose. Bill Daley, a former Clinton commerce secretary who was Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager, is emphatic: "I don't care who the Democratic nominee is. He will become president in '08." (Mr. Daley backs Barack Obama, which may explain that politically incorrect "he.") Rep. Artur Davis, an Alabama Democrat, describes the Hillary juggernaut: "A lot of my colleagues in the Congress say privately on the floor, 'Well, I like Obama, but Hillary is going to win. We are going to have to deal with her.' "
Some Republicans go halfway to agreeing that their party isn't likely to hold the White House. Former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber, who now serves as policy chairman for Mitt Romney, told Roger Simon of Politico.com that "I don't want to contribute to my own party's demoralization, and it doesn't necessarily mean there will be a Democratic landslide, but I think there is a thumb on their side of the scale that's not going to come off until after the next election."
History should teach us to take such claims with more than a grain of salt. While pundits will constantly remind us when they were right, they fall strangely silent when it comes to recalling their missed calls. Let's look at how the presidential field looked some 21 months before the general election, the equivalent point where we are in this cycle, in three previous campaigns.
In February 1991, Democrats were distraught at then-President Bush's 91% approval numbers in the wake of the Gulf War. Leading Democrats such as Sam Nunn and Mario Cuomo decided not to run. The Los Angeles Times noted that Democrats were so discouraged about their chances in 1992 "that they are talking quietly of drafting an uncharismatic but respected legislative leader to serve as a sort of caretaker nominee." Then-House Speaker Tom Foley was mentioned.
In the event, Mr. Bush's popularity soon tanked in a bad economy. Bill Clinton, who didn't even announce for the 1992 Democratic nomination until October 1991, became the surprise nominee....