RUNNING for president in themidst of a coming war is no easy feat. The approaching conflict with Iraq is clearly an issue dominant in the minds of Americans. In the face of something so large, it has been easy for Americans to forget that, despite the impending war, the nation goes on. With only a year until the Democratic Party will choose their candidate for the 2004 presidential election, the nine making bids for their party's ticket already confront difficult decisions on how to proceed with an inherently political process on the brink of an immediate military encounter. A war with Iraq likely looks to impede the campaign process, probably to the detriment of the Democrats. The candidates need to attempt to run a normal campaign, pulling few punches when it comes to politics. This is one more area in which America must limit how much going to war with Iraq interferes with the necessary processes of the nation.
Democratic candidates have already seen firsthand the eclipse that impending war has cast over all other issues on the campaign trail in Iowa this week. Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri arrived in Iowa to discuss education and health care only to be bombarded with questions on his policy on Iraq. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry's speech in Des Moines on women's issues met a similar fate. With an executive decision for action expected any day, war is becoming not only the biggest but also the only topic that gets press coverage.
But this is only a preview of problems in store for the Democratic race. Even now candidates are struggling with what type of campaigning will be appropriate when and if the United States goes to war. At this point, the American public is still at least vaguely interested in the nine candidates' opinions on the war. The group itself ranges from pro-Bush Sen. Joe Lieberman, to strongly anti-war Rev. Al Sharpton. The real dilemma will come should military action actually commence. The candidates will have a difficult time criticizing the war at all. Speaking negatively of the war with American boys on Iraqi soil will not only look unpatriotic but will do little for soldier and civilian morale when unity of support is most needed. Political sniping ends when the first missile is fired. Some are even considering suspending public campaigning should this happen. When war becomes a sure thing, a condemnation of the proceedings or even presentation of an alternative platform could look like an attack on America itself. And that's the last thing a candidate for the American presidency wants.
Even pro-war candidates find themselves in a bind. John Edwards, Kerry, Lieberman and Gephardt publicly linked themselves to President Bush's war policy by backing the Iraq resolution in Congress last fall. Now they struggle with the delicate task of supporting the war, while still criticizing Bush. Should they even manage to do so without losing public sympathy, the difficulty remains of getting the necessary presstime for these opinions. The front page and its readers can't help but make Bush their cover boy when he's the one controlling the army. Candidates may hesitate to issue any major policy statements or campaign platforms knowing that their announcement easily will be overshadowed by war coverage.
The Democrats' best bet to avoid looking like the bad guy will be to follow Bush's lead for how to run a wartime campaign. However, Bush has already stated that he will not formally begin a reelection campaign until the confrontation with Iraq has been resolved. This is a luxury that Bush can afford that the Democratic candidates, who already command very little of America's attention, cannot.
President Bush has linked himself inextricably to the war with Iraq -- something both inevitable and intentional. Already, this gives Bush an edge. Historically presidents during successful war campaigns have easily found reelection support. Bush's reelection could very well parallel FDR going for his fourth term when the tide of WWII had already turned. Sept. 11 was Bush's first lucky break, and should the conflict in Iraq be resolved as absolutely as Bush expects, his approval ratings will climb to those levels again. Following a formal declaration against Iraq, candidates will have a hard time campaigning against Bush when he is also the Commander-in-Chief of American troops. Opposing Bush becomes tantamount to opposing war. American voters must strive to separate Bush the candidate and Bush the incumbent.
Should the United States become engaged in war, it will be the duty of Americans to support our troops. However, voters must not let the war become the only issue for which they cast ballots. In all likelihood, actual military conflict with Iraq will not continue into the 2004 presidential term. By the time our 44th president is inaugurated, the issues on the domestic agenda will be just as pertinent to American's lives as our foreign policy, and voters should realize this. The duty to prevent the war from creating blinders belongs equally to the voters and the candidates. The former need to be willing to look beyond war and demand the knowledge to make a thoroughly informed decision. Meanwhile, the democratic candidates need to have the courage to put their opinions out there and stop tiptoeing around the war. In many ways, participation in war threatens our traditional way of life. The campaign for the presidency is a standard and necessary process of American society. Impeding it impedes America.
(Kimberly Liu's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at kliu@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
