Unconventional Wisdom

By: Carl Graham, CEO, Montana Policy Institute Well its convention time. As youre listening to this the Republicans are wrapping up in Tampa and the Democrats are packing for Charlotte. Both conventions will be filled with fiery speeches, but neither will add much substance to the national debate or enlighten the demos. No matter. Anybody who reads the paper is already aware of the big issues. We mostly know what we want to know about the candidates. And so all that pretty much remains are red carpets, red meat, and monotonously read speeches. But we shouldnt equate the conventions predictability with irrelevance. Even if they lack substance, they put on display for all to see the trends within each Party, often providing an unconventional and even spontaneous view for those who are interested in reading between the lines, or maybe this year in reading the tea leaves. And this year the groups that everyone seems to be reading are the grassroots Right and the big middle the vaunted independents who cant make up their minds, dont like their options, or just arent paying attention. Both of those clusters and most everyone else for that matter want whats best for the most people, but they vary wildly on the best way to get there. Conventions arent really designed to address that kind of substance, but they do provide useful clues as to how the Parties are going to go about building a winning majority. Cutting through the noise and clatter of demonizing opponents and speaking in lofty but unaccountable terms, the conventions hold up a mirror to the major Parties and provide a reflection of where they think the country is going and whose votes they need to lead the effort. Lets not forget after all that our current political system does not reward and rarely results in the election of genuine leaders. Our system rewards those who figure out which way the band is marching, and then are the first to grab a flag and get out in front. The conventions with all their trappings and soaring rhetoric are merely them trying to grab that flag. Chants of Forward have no more meaning than NObama when it comes to substantive policy statements. They are just market-tested slogans designed to conjure up some inner spirits within a targeted demographic without actually committing to or even recommending actionable much less measurable policies. But slogans do tell us something about whom the Parties and their candidates think they need to win. And thats worth knowing.

Unconventional Wisdom
Since as Im writing this the GOP convention is barely underway and the Democratic convention hasnt yet started, I wont try to predict their overt messaging and underlying themes. Im not saying I couldnt. Anybody with a TV set and an IQ above room temperature has the tools to deduce the major points and lines of attack that well be treated to for the next couple of months. But theres no need to go out on a limb when we have our own little microcosm of the national trends right here in our own state. The Tester/Rehberg campaign has been fascinating and, I think, enlightening as a case study of how the political class sees this election. On the one hand, you have a Democrat who has consistently supported policies that are anathema to the new grassroots constitutional conservative movement courting that very group by overtly distancing himself from the president on a few key constitutional issues. And on the other hand you have a Republican who, instead of shoring up his natural base on the Right, is actively alienating them by appealing to Left of center voters who are unaware or in denial about the need for significant entitlement reform. So the Lefts candidate apparently thinks his path to success runs through the Tea Party either by winning them over or getting them to stay home. And the Rights candidate thinks his path to success runs through squishy Centerville. The Democrat sees a rising power on the Right that must be exploited or neutralized, and the Republican apparently sees a winning majority that extends slightly Left of center. Both seem to have largely abandoned their bases and are instead raiding each others camp. Certainly their calculations include the likelihood that much if not most of their bases will support them out of repugnance for the other candidate, but who exactly are they trying to get out in front of and lead? If they win, what exactly do they think the band behind them will look like? Frankly I doubt that either of them has thought very far past winning the election. But I think our Senate race is pretty indicative of what were going to see at the conventions and in the ad wars. The Left understands, I think, that there is a legitimate and durable backlash against the significant expansion and intrusiveness weve seen in federal power over the past twelve (yes, twelve) years. And the Right understands that many voters are not yet comfortable with the complicated and painful discussions we need to have about the unsustainability of spendthrift policies engaged in by the political class over the past several generations. That means that each has to figure out ways to raid the others camp. It should make for an interesting election.
#### For Immediate Release 880 Words Carl Graham is CEO of the Montana Policy Institute, a nonprofit policy research and education center based in Bozeman. He can be reached at: 67 W. Kagy Blvd., Ste. B Bozeman, MT 59715 (406) 219-0508 cgraham@montanapolicy.org 2|Page