PDQ Bachmann

The last presidential election demonstrated rather vividly that growing portions of both political parties are embracing the idea of electing a woman to the executive branch of the federal government, as either president or vice president.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton was narrowly beaten for the presidential nomination by Barack Obama in a race that came to be seen by many as a battle between historical guilt trips, misogyny and racism. And, on the Republican side, of course, Sarah Palin became the first woman nominated by the GOP for vice president.

But each party wants different things from its female candidates — and will tolerate nothing less from the other side. And both continue to hold female politicians to expectations they would never impose on men. In that regard, I suppose, women continue to be subjected to a political double standard if not a societal one.

As far as they have come in my lifetime — and that includes occupying seats on the Supreme Court, traveling in space, acting as diplomats on behalf of the United States and serving as speaker of the House — women are still expected to do things that no man is expected to do — like remain young and attractive long after it is natural for anyone to be young and attractive.

In our highly visual age, appearances have taken on more influence than ever before, but men are not subjected to anything like the scrutiny that women are. Gray hair on a man is seen as distinguished; it is a sign of advanced age in a woman. A few extra pounds have seldom stood between a man and electoral victory; on a woman, they can be politically fatal.

I suppose that accounts for the reaction to Newsweek's unflattering photo of Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann on its cover.

Such negative stereotypes are offset, to a degree, by positive ones — such as the image of nurturer and healer — that make the idea of electing a woman president an appealing one for so many in these troubling times. They see a dysfunctional political system that needs a "woman's touch" after being taken to the brink of catastrophe too many times in recent years.

In Republican circles, Palin had that market cornered for a long time because she was really the only female whose name was being bandied about. But things have changed. While Palin has been motoring around the country, Bachmann jumped into the 2012 race and won yesterday's straw poll in her home state of Iowa — and some are wondering if Palin's moment in the spotlight has ended. She is supposed to reveal her 2012 plans next month.

(Personally, I would think that Palin — if she really does intend to run for president, and I am inclined to think she will not — would not mind relinquishing the spotlight for awhile.)

It's made me think about expectations, cliches and modern "firsts" in the American presidency in ways I never did before.

There is a desperation in people's expectations these days, I believe, born in part from a certain amount of disappointment in the policies of the current administration. Many of the president's supporters seem content to give him the benefit of the doubt — and additional time for these saplings to bear fruit. But not everyone, particularly the unemployed, is so generous — and patient.

This president was symbolic, of course, because of his race. He was the first black president. Whatever history may ultimately say about his tenure in the Oval Office, he will always be the first black to be nominated for — and elected to — the presidency.

When a female becomes president, she will be the first of her gender — and therefore will be symbolic as well.

Such distinctions may have made Barack Obama — and may someday make the first female president — sensitive (and vulnerable) to allegations of favoritism or preferential treatment. The religious issue presented similar challenges for John F. Kennedy half a century ago.

My experience is that, after a certain point, most historic "firsts" in the American presidency became isolated, no matter how successful the groundbreaking president may have been, and that the second of whatever it is hasn't come along rapidly.

Kennedy, of course, was the first Catholic to be elected president. He wasn't the first Catholic to be nominated, but he was the first in more than three decades. As president, his job approval ratings never fell below 56%.

Well, it's been more than 50 years since Kennedy was elected and nearly 50 since he was assassinated, but America still has not elected its second Catholic president. Catholics have sought the nomination, including JFK's younger brothers, but only one has been nominated for the presidency.

That's three Catholic presidential nominees in 83 years.

This applies to the vice presidency, too. Geraldine Ferraro was the first woman on a Democratic ticket. There have been half a dozen Democratic tickets since then, and none of the nominees was a woman.

I strongly doubt that Bachmann will be nominated in 2012, but if Republicans really are strongly considering nominating a woman for president, it may be largely because they and the voters who support her believe the kind of healing and nurturing the nation and its economy need can only be provided by a woman.

To meet the unrealistic expectations of the voters, that woman would need to revive this economy P.D.Q. — in an era long before texting, that was a well–known abbreviation for "pretty damned quick." Given the dire forecasts from economists, that doesn't seem likely.

With unemployment stuck in the 9% range and the stock market bouncing back and forth like a tennis ball, the experiment with a black president (whether it is acknowledged as such or not) may come to be widely regarded as a failure, and it may be as long before America elects its second black president as it has been between Catholic presidents.

Even if Barack Obama turns things around and manages to win re–election, my gut feeling is that it will be decades until another black candidate is nominated for the presidency. If he is replaced with a woman — Bachmann, Palin or someone else — this economy may prove too stubborn for her, and the next female presidency will be a long time coming as well.

I don't know what to expect in 2012. There are times when I think Obama is on the verge of righting the ship and really living up to the standards he set for himself and the nation — but then he does something that tells me that my original conclusion, that he is in over his head, was the correct one.

Sometimes, though, presidents rise to the occasion.

And if there is anything of which I am certain, it is that the next president, whoever he or she turns out to be, must rise to the occasion.

Or he/she seems likely to be the last American president.

Much Ado About Nothing

---

"I've had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it."

Groucho Marx

---

Peter Hamby of CNN reports that today's straw poll in Ames, Iowa, could make or break Republican presidential candidacies.

Well, perhaps. Frankly, though, I think it's a non–event. No delegates are assigned. Very few people participate in it (there are roughly 3 million people in Iowa, and fewer than 15,000 took part in the 2007 straw poll — the high water mark for the poll was in 1999, when just under 24,000 participated).

Over the years, I've heard a lot of people complain about the inordinate influence that New Hampshire has on the races for the nominations by holding the first presidential primary every four years — and at least the New Hampshire primary has the redeeming quality of allocating actual delegates, few though they may be.

Iowa's straw poll doesn't even do that. In fact, it doesn't have much of a record.

Hamby points out that, since the straw poll (which is conducted whenever the Republican nomination seems to be up for grabs) began in 1979, the winner has gone on to win the general election only once.

The poll's record in forecasting the eventual Republican nominee is only slightly better. Two of the winners of the previous five polls went on to be nominated the next year.

Most of the time, the winner of the poll means nothing. Mitt Romney won it last time; John McCain, the eventual nominee, was last among the active candidates.

In 1987, Pat Robertson won the straw poll. Vice President George H.W. Bush was nominated the next year; he finished third in the poll.

Bush was the winner of the first straw poll in 1979, but Ronald Reagan won the nomination and picked Bush to be his running mate.

The Iowa caucus is only marginally better. It does mean something in the pursuit of delegates to the national convention, but the winner of the straw poll and the winner of the caucus are not always the same candidate.

(Actually, Iowa had little, if any, role in choosing presidential nominees before 1976. Jimmy Carter finished first among the candidates — "uncommitted" received the most support — in Iowa's Democratic caucus, which received little attention prior to that year, and that gave him the momentum that helped him win early primaries and, ultimately, the nomination.)

George H.W. Bush did win the caucus in 1980, but Bob Dole won it in 1988. Dole was a particular favorite in Iowa, most likely because of his Midwestern roots; he won the caucus again in 1996 en route to the nomination after sharing the victory in the straw poll with Phil Gramm.

George W. Bush won both the straw poll (outright) and the caucus in 1999, the first to do so since his father 20 years earlier.

Four years ago, after Romney won the straw poll, Mike Huckabee won the caucus.

Romney is skipping the straw poll this year. Been there, done that, he says. He says he's focusing on winning the nomination this time.

So, too, apparently is Rick Perry, governor of my state, who will be in South Carolina this weekend, presumably to make his candidacy official. Jon Huntsman won't be participating in the straw poll, either. I'm not sure what he's doing this weekend.

For that matter, I don't know what noted political observer Stuart Rothenberg is doing this weekend, but he won't be in Iowa. He writes in Roll Call that it is "little more than an opportunity to consume large amounts of beef, gossip and alcohol with my fellow journalists."

He has no objection to that, Rothenberg writes, but it "wasn't enough of an incentive to schlep halfway across the country to cover something that is close to being irrelevant."

Rothenberg acknowledges that a poor showing in the poll could prompt a candidate to drop out — months before any delegates have actually been committed to any candidates. It has happened before.

"But, really now," he writes, "would a candidate who does so poorly in Ames that he drops out have had much of a chance anyway?"

Probably not. And my guess is that, at best, the Iowa straw poll might produce the dark horse that lasts into a few of the early primaries. But current surveys suggest that the top two candidates are Romney and Perry — and the only way they will get any votes in this grassroots organization–driven poll is if people write in their names.

Thus, that dark horse could make it a three–candidate race for awhile.

It's even possible that someone could emerge as a serious candidate — but we won't really know that until voters start going to the polls early next year.

Until then — and even, probably, thereafter — what happens in Iowa is, as Rothenberg writes, irrelevant.

Romney, Huckabee Favorites At The Values Voters Summit

Republicans have been gathering in Washington this weekend to appeal to Christian conservatives at the Values Voters Summit.

There never really was any question that abortion would be a hot topic at the summit.

And former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani deserves credit for facing up to his stated position, which isn't very popular with Christian conservatives. Giuliani is pro-choice, and he didn't walk away from that position to win some votes.

"Isn't it better that I tell you what I really believe instead of pretending to change all of my positions to fit the prevailing winds?" Giuliani asked his listeners.

The sentiment was admirable, but not successful.

Even though Giuliani spoke about his own faith and his reliance on religion being "at the core of who I am," former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney finished first in a straw poll of Christian conservatives at the Values Voters Summit, receiving 1,595 votes (27.6%) from 5,775 that were cast online, in person or by mail.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee came in a close second with 1,565 votes (27.1%), Texas Rep. Ron Paul was third with 865 votes (15.0%) and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson was fourth with 564 votes (9.8%).

The remaining 20% were divided among the other Republican candidates. In that group, Giuliani received just 102 votes (1.8%).

Based on that, it appears that Giuliani has considerable work to do to convince Christian conservatives to support him in both his bid for the nomination and, if successful, his bid to win the general election -- even though Giuliani tried to reassure the restless Christian conservatives by telling them that he would appoint conservative judges, support school choice and demand victory in Iraq.

Those are all issues that are important to Christian conservatives -- but it appears that abortion remains the No. 1 issue with that voting bloc.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who emphasized his own conservative credentials and his opposition to abortion, appears to be increasingly irrelevant to the presidential campaign. He received only 81 votes (1.4%).

Among those who voted in person at the summit and heard all the candidates speak, Huckabee, who criticized the "holocaust of liberalized abortion," was the clear choice, receiving 488 of 952 in-person votes (51.3%). Romney received 99 in-person votes (10.4%).

It's odd that Romney should win the overall vote, based on his support for the anti-abortion cause. His original position was pro-choice, but he has switched to pro-life since deciding to enter the presidential race. Romney also has some work to do to persuade Christian conservatives that Mormons are Christians. About half of Christian conservatives polled are unconvinced.

On the Democratic side, there's some news from Iowa. The Storm Lake Times endorsed Delaware Sen. Joe Biden for the presidency, following Biden's recent visit to the small town of Storm Lake in western Iowa. The newspaper told its readers that Biden has the "professional skills and ... the personal strength" to be president.