Bill Kristol, Fox News political analyst and editor of The Weekly Standard, recently addressed a John Locke Foundation Headliner luncheon in Pinehurst. He also discussed the 2008 presidential campaign with Mitch Kokai for Carolina Journal Radio. (Click here to find a station near you or to learn about the weekly CJ Radio podcast.)
Before the interview, Kristol explained why so many conservatives feel gloomy about 2008.
Kristol: It’s the end of the Bush presidency. It’s been a rough seven years. I would defend a lot of what Bush has done. I voted for him twice and had mixed relations with them because they’re … Even more than most politicians, I would say, this crew in the White House does not believe there is such a thing as constructive criticism. You know, they think that’s a contradiction in terms. You know, you try to explain that maybe it’s not such a good idea to push this immigration bill right now, and it’s going to fracture the conservative base, and incidentally it’s not even a very good policy, and they get all upset as if you’re attacking them instead of helping them. But you know, that’s how — maybe you haven’t noticed — politicians are a little thin skinned. And so it’s a mixed bag. But the truth is they’ve accomplished a lot. The country is better off on the whole, I think, for the president having been there and for the basic policies he’s pursued. But, historically, Americans get tired after eight years. After every eight-year presidency since World War II, with the exception of 1988, the White House has changed hands. The Oval Office has changed hands. Republicans lost the presidency; after eight years of Eisenhower, Republicans lost in ’60. After eight years of Kennedy-Johnson, the Democrats lost in ’68. After eight years of Nixon-Ford, Republicans lost in ’76. After eight years of Clinton, Democrats lost in 2000. The one exception was ’88, where Reagan was strong enough really and the Democrats were weak enough in a sense that he was able to kind of win a third term.
Kokai: Democrats and even many Republicans are talking about a potential Clinton presidency. Why are you in a better mood than many other Republicans?
Kristol: Maybe it’s just a desire to be different. I don’t know. Look, I was in the Bush White House in 1991, and everyone thought the first President Bush was going to beat whoever the Democrats nominated against him, especially an inexperienced person like Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton. The Democrats were feeling very good at this time in 1987, [when] the first Vice President Bush looked very weak. So a year is a heck of a long time in politics. Things can turn around. I think the war is going better. The economy is good. I think the American people remain fundamentally moderately conservative. So I think Republicans have a pretty good chance at the White House.
Kokai: People on the other side are going to say, “Wait a minute. We won big in 2006. All the polls show people are leaning toward supporting Democrats.” What is your response to them?
Kristol: They did win in 2006. It was a pretty big Democratic victory, and I think they still have some momentum from that. Right now if the election were held today and you just had to vote for a generic Democrat or a generic Republican, I think it probably would be a Democratic margin. But first of all, you don’t vote for a generic Democrat or generic Republican. You vote for a particular person. I think some of the Republican candidates have a chance to do better than the Democratic presidential candidates. And again, in a year a lot can change. Has the Democratic Congress performed as well as voters who voted for it hoped? What will they look like a year from now? What will the Bush administration — couldn’t it look a little better a year from now? I think if you just take an analysis, an analytical approach, you’ve got to say it’s 50/50 in 2008.
Kokai: In a recent column you advised conservatives to cheer up, and you mentioned some steps the Bush administration could take in the next year that would help conservatives as the next election approaches.
Kristol: Well, generally I think the problems the Bush administration has run into were in the second term when they backed off in foreign policy. They were winning. We were winning. The U.S. was winning in the first term of the Bush administration. We made some mistakes, but we were winning in Afghanistan. We removed Saddam in Iraq. There were democratic revolutions in Ukraine and Lebanon. The radicals were on their heels. Al Qaeda was on the run. We let off the pressure in 2005-2006, made some serious mistakes in Iraq, obviously. I think we’ve now recouped those with Gen. [David] Petraeus, and I think things are going much better there, and I think will continue to go better. That’s an awfully important front in the war on terror. I’m worried that we are not being strong enough in some of the other areas, with respect to Iran, with respect to North Korea. We’ll see how that plays out over the next year.
Kokai: You also say that one of the best things that could happen to the party that now holds the White House is a “reinvigorated conservatism.” What do you mean by that?
Kristol: Well, I think whenever a party is in power for seven years, people get tired. Individuals get tired. Ideas get — feel — stale, even if they are not stale. You try certain reforms. Maybe they don’t work perfectly, and then people get disillusioned. In a way I don’t think the party needs to reinvent itself. I don’t think they need brand new ideas. That would be silly. There probably aren’t any brand new ideas. But a sort of back-to-basics confidence that limited government, tax cuts, a strong defense, constitutional government, is good for the country. I think that’s what the evidence of the last 25-30 years shows. You know, some of us were conservatives before conservative ideas got put into practice, but I think we can feel pretty good about the way they worked out in practice. Didn’t Reagan’s economic policies really help the U.S., not just for the years he was in power, but for the next 20 years? Certainly peace and strength prevailed against the Soviet Union. On the constitutional issues, I think there’s an increasing consensus that it was a horrible mistake to try to make social policy for the whole country in the 1960s and ’70s. Didn’t conservative ideas on crime and welfare pay off pretty well in New York City and in a lot of other cities in the country? So I do think conservatives need to regain just some of their confidence and make their case to the American people.
Kokai: If conservatives do hope to win in the 2008 elections, how important is it for them to hold their coalition together and not fight among themselves? I know you hear a lot of criticism as a “neocon.”
Kristol: I’m less concerned about that than some people. I think a little healthy debate is fine. Sometimes that spills over into a little bit of nasty debate or, you know, impugning people’s motives, which is unfortunate, but look, a healthy, vigorous movement is going to have a lot of people in it with strong ideas and somewhat different ideas. And if you look at political history, world history in a way, nations aren’t strongest when they are all saying exact — political movements aren’t strongest when they are totally united. That’s kind of a myth. I mean, it sounds contradictory to say. Obviously a football team plays better if everyone is on the same page, but a political movement in a way is often most vigorous when there are three or four or five elements to it in some creative tension with one another. Now, they have to be willing to pull together, you know, when the election approaches. They have to be willing not to kill each other. But I think a certain amount of debate and tension isn’t bad, and I think that’s where the conservative movement is now.
Kokai: The alternative to conservative policies is liberal policies. Some would suggest that’s what voters wanted when they cast their ballots in 2006.
Kristol: I don’t think that’s what happened in 2006. I think there’s not much evidence that people wanted the country to go back to high taxes and liberal welfare policies and activist judges, and I don’t think — if that is the choice in 2008 — I think conservatives have a pretty good chance.
Kokai: If you had to say right now what is going to happen a year from now, November 2008, what’s your best prediction?
Kristol: Republican president, Democratic Congress. I think that’s the most likely outcome.
Kokai: Why?
Kristol: I think voters will get nervous about a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress. I don’t think they want Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi sort of running the country. I think the Republican candidate, the Republican nominee, whether it’s Thompson or McCain or Giuliani or Romney — it’s probably going to be one of those four — will have a strong general election campaign. They’ll set off behind but they’ll end up winning. That’s my prediction.