The Supper Test

My personal political guru is a man named Charlie Cook. Among other things, Cook is the editor of the Cook Political Report, and he is a political scientist's political scientist, a guy whose judgment is solid and whose instincts are sound. He calls things as he sees them, and never confuses his own political preferences with political reality. I like that. Cook writes a weekly column for the National Journal and this week it's about John McCain.

Cook writes about McCain's track record and presidential ambitions in 2008. The gist of this week's column is that McCain seems to be pulling away from the Republican presidential pack, both in the eyes of regular joe (and josephine) voter and in the eyes of Washington insiders. I agree that McCain seems to be on his way to the Republican nomination and I have honestly mixed feelings about that, mostly because though John McCain and I disagree on a number of issues (gay marriage and abortion to name just a few), I think that his political story is compelling. And I loved the Straight Talk Express in 2000. I have a theory that successful presidential candidates are the folks whom you feel would be welcome to eat supper at your house ---- not fancy supper on Sunday afternoon ----- but just a regular meal. McCain passes my supper test with flying colors. I think that he's thoughtful and engaged and is a genuine and sincere public servant. If he were the Republican nominee for president in 2008, I would give serious thought to giving him my political support and my vote.

This is no small matter for me, as I am a serious liberal. Under normal circumstances, my presidential candidate is whomever the Democratic party offers up. In 1984, while I was a senior in high school, I did so much volunteer work for the Mondale/Ferraro campaign that I was interviewed in a New York Times article about the campaign. I was 16 years old at the time. I turned 17 on election day but my birthday was a sad affair as I watched my country vote overwhelmingly for Ronald Reagan. I was crushed. My dad, in an effort to by sympathetic, told me that only Walter Mondale and I thought he would win in '84. Dad was probably right.

Maybe I was deeply scarred by the Mondale fracas of '84 because over the years I have become politically practical. Studying politics for 9 years and teaching it for more than that has certainly affirmed my streak of practicality. I've always known that my personal politics are far too left of the national electorate and though I admire people who are idealistic enough to pick their ideal candidate and stick with it, that has never been my way. Don't get me wrong, I like the candidate who seems to genuinely care about the future of the nation; a candidate with a compelling personal story and the ability to understand the lives of average Americans. But in the end, I most like the candidate on the left who reads the electorate well and who treads the middle ground. To me, this describes the candidate who can pass the supper test. I liked Bill Clinton in '92 and actually worked for the campaign. He didn't share my views on all issues, but he passed the supper test with flying colors. Heading into the 2000 election, I supported Al Gore but I had fears that he didn't pass the supper test. The close election seemed to confirm my fears. In 2000, I did see Bush as the sort of guy who could pass the supper test. That made me nervous because I didn't like his politics and I felt that he was shifty and unaccomplished. He didn't have a chance for my vote but I feared that he could pass the supper test.

2004 was the worst sort of debacle in my view because the only Democratic candidate who passed the supper test was John Edwards. Kerry, Dean, Clark, Gephardt, and Lieberman didn't even come near to passing the supper test. The idealist in me liked Dean but the practical side of me was okay with Kerry, though I was very nervous about his chances. And we all know how that turned out.

So in 2008 I believe more than ever in the supper test. And as Hilary Clinton increasingly lines up the support to be the Democratic front-runner, I get nervous. She's more moderate than the Rush Limbaugh crowd would have you believe and I like a lot of what she has to say. But she is a lightening-rod for the right-wing and there is just no way that she passes the supper test. So now I'm on the look-out for the Democratic contender for 2008 who can compete with John McCain and pass the supper test.

The Democrat in me wonders who that candidate is and the political scientist in me is starting to worry.