ueber die 2008 Wahlen von der heutigen WSJ, die meines Erachtens recht gut und recht breit ist. Sie geht ueber den ueblichen Parteikrampf raus. Da dies eine Subscriptionswebsite ist, kopiere ich den ganzen Artikel hier rein. Die pictures, charts,Tables und Links dabei verschwinden natuerlich. Ich mach's in zwei Teilen, weil die Software sonst herummeckert.
PAGE ONE
DOW JONES REPRINTS
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers, use the Order Reprints tool at the bottom of any article or visit:
www.djreprints.com.
• See a sample reprint in PDF format.
• Order a reprint of this article now.
An Epochal Battle
Iowa kicks off the most wide-open race since '80.
Looking beyond the Reagan-Bush era
By GERALD F. SEIB
January 2, 2008; Page A1
When Iowa voters walk into their state's caucuses tomorrow night, they will be kicking off a milestone campaign year that promises a new political course for America.
For the first time in 80 years, no incumbent president or vice president from either party is seeking the White House, creating an unusually unsettled campaign with no obvious front-runner. Power in Congress is divided so evenly between the two parties that neither has really been in control since the 2006 elections. Now, in the wide-open 2008 general election, voters will declare whom they want to run the executive and legislative branches.
[Image]
Republican presidential hopefuls, from left, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, before a debate last month.
Americans will make that choice at a time when they are distinctly uneasy. Record numbers of voters are choosing to declare themselves politically independent -- and thus open to moving either left or right. Both the Republican president and the Democratic Congress are receiving historically low public-approval ratings, another sign of voter unease. More broadly, the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll1 has in recent months found the nation to be in the midst of the most prolonged period of public dissatisfaction in 15 years, as measured by the share of voters who say the country is "on the wrong track."
In one sense change is inevitable. This year marks the end of what can be considered the Reagan-Bush era in American politics that began when Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980. In six of the last seven general elections, a candidate named Reagan or Bush has appeared atop a national ticket, defining a brand of internationally engaged conservatism that has been the dominant strain in American politics for more than a generation.
Now the stage is set for an ideological rethinking in both parties. "The mood for change is more than one of small incremental adjustments," write Republican pollster Bill McInturff and Democrat Peter Hart, who conduct the Journal/NBC News poll. "It is concern for the next generation as well as widespread unhappiness with both President Bush and the Congress."
The question is: Change to what? At the outset of the year, Democrats, having been out of the White House for the past seven years and in the minority of Congress for six of those years, stand the best chance of benefiting from the mood for change.
So far, it appears that presidential candidates Barack Obama among the Democrats and Mike Huckabee among the Republicans have benefited most from the public desire to shake things up. They are fresh faces who seem to represent departures from the establishment.
Doubts Emerging
Beyond that, public polling suggests some of the directions voters may push the system this year. Americans are unhappy with the Iraq war, though their displeasure is subsiding as the situation improves on the ground. Perhaps more surprisingly, they are displaying ample doubts about international trade and economic globalization, both of which Americans were more likely to consider good for the nation in years past. That suggests some voters are at least flirting with protectionism.
[Chart]
Unease about the economy is at exceptionally high levels, driven by worries over health care and anxiety over the collapse of the housing bubble and the record wave of home foreclosures. The December Journal/NBC News poll2 found the lowest levels of economic satisfaction in the survey's two-decade history. Just 32% of those surveyed said they are satisfied with the U.S. economy, while 68% are dissatisfied. That suggests voters may be open to calls for dramatic changes in economic policy, including greater government intervention in markets.
The other area of voter ferment is on immigration, where attitudes have hardened. With fears of terrorism mingling with record numbers of illegal immigrants in the country, Americans have grown more inclined over the past two years to say that immigration has done more harm than good to the country.
Lingering just behind, of course, is continuing concern about terrorism and uncertainty about the threats posed by Iran.
All of that suggests some paths down which voters, and the politicians they choose this year, could send America:
Fears about trade and globalization could prompt a revival of old-fashioned populism, in which the interests of average people are set against those of perceived economic elites.
On the Democratic side of the presidential campaign, John Edwards has tried to tap into such sentiment with his skepticism about free trade and his railings against the advantages enjoyed by the wealthy.
On the Republican side, Mr. Huckabee has tapped into it with anti-Wall Street rhetoric, his skepticism about some trade deals and his pledges to make the Republican Party more responsive to small taxpayers and business people on Main Street. "I'm not angry at all the folks at Wall Street," Mr. Huckabee said recently. "In fact, I think my policies would do more for them, but it wouldn't just be for them. It would also be for those guys that don't necessarily have a stock portfolio."
Rep. Ron Paul, a dark horse who has enjoyed surprising success with his libertarian message, has gotten traction by voicing deep skepticism about trade deals and the World Trade Organization.