In this issue . . .

Guest Editorials:
The threat of bipolarity; China and the WTO; beware the Albanian mafia
Features:
Money laundering, the future of democratic Indonesia, and Europe after Kosovo
Human Rights, Ethnicity and National Identify:
Reflections on the meaning and implication of identity at the turn of the millennium
Elections Outlook:
India, South Africa, Turkey, Israel, Argentina, and Chile
Charles Cook on Washington:
The highly charged polls in the 2000 races

In the Balance: The 2000 U.S. Elections

Excerpt:

Every year we hear that the upcoming election in the United States is to be one of the most important in modern history. And while a credible case can be made that those elections were indeed important, the 2000 elections are truly the most important in years. The 2000 elections feature a battle for control of the House of Representatives, a wide-open race for president, and a number of high-profile Senate races.

The Presidency

In the race for president, Texas governor George W. Bush has dominated the campaign for the Republican Party's nomination earlier than any candidate in modern history. The traditionally hierarchical Republican Party seemed to lack a true heir-apparent for the 2000 contest until late spring, when Bush suddenly took command. Bush now has a significant and perhaps insurmountable lead over his potential rivals in polls and fundraising.

Bush has raised a record $37 million so far, outpacing his nearest Republican rival, Arizona senator John McCain, by over $30 million. Not only has Bush raised more money in the first six months of 1999 than the rest of the Republican field combined, but he has raised more during that period than any previous candidate for the office has in any six-month period, incumbents included. His fundraising success virtually ensures that he will forgo federal matching funds and so will be able to spend freely to secure both his party's nomination and victory in the general election.

Polls also show Bush far out in front. In a Gallup poll for CNN and USA Today, taken June 25-27, Bush led the field with a whopping 59 percent,13 points higher than in the two previous Gallup polls in late May and early June. All other Republican contenders were in single digits. Similarly, in the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, taken June 16-19, Bush did even better with 61 percent of the vote, though former Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Dole did barely manage to move into double digits with 11 percent, compared to her 8-percent, second-place showing in the late-June Gallup poll. It is unprecedented for a nonincumbent presidential candidate to so dominate a race this early.

Increasingly, the question being asked is not whether Bush's bid for the GOP nomination will be stopped but whether it can be stopped. Every week Governor Bush's campaign juggernaut seems to clear yet another checkpoint without serious mishap. Bush made it through his initial foray into Iowa, New Hampshire, and the Northeast without a major misstep, and that was with a level of press coverage previously reserved for papal visits. That trip featured microscopic scrutiny of Bush's performance. More recently he made it through California and almost a dozen other states, as well as the all-important second-quarter campaign finance reporting period.

The obvious caveat is that front-runners not only can stumble, but they usually do stumble, giving eternal hope not only to the second-tier candidates but also the darkest of horses who have convinced themselves that they still have a chance to win. But although early leaders usually do stumble, in the end they generally manage to win. Former California governor Ronald Reagan lost the 1980 Iowa Caucus to former CIA Director George Bush, but Reagan recovered from his stumble just weeks later in New Hampshire and never looked back. Four years later, former Vice President Walter Mondale underperformed in New Hampshire against Sen. Gary Hart but recovered to win the nomination. In 1988 it was Vice President Bush's turn to stumble, placing third in the Iowa Caucus behind Sen. Robert Dole and Rev. Pat Robertson, though Bush made a comeback in New Hampshire and prevailed from then on. In 1992 the Granite State turned rock-hard for Bush. He beat television commentator Pat Buchanan but without an impressive point spread, thus showing an early vulnerability that turned out to be an omen for the fall campaign. Finally, in 1996 Dole won the Iowa Caucus by a less-than-convincing margin, then lost to Buchanan in New Hampshire, narrowly edging out former Tennessee governor Lamar Alexander for third place, barely averting what would have been a disaster for his campaign. But Dole ended up clinching the nomination soon after New Hampshire.

In each case, the stumbling front-runner regained his stride and prevailed. Front-runners are uniquely positioned to attract more money, assemble better campaign organizations, and collect endorsements. Especially important is the endorsement of governors, because they have grassroots organizations that can muscle a weak presidential candidate through a tough primary.

At what point does Bush's momentum become so powerful that even a great stumble would not deprive him the GOP nod? ....

Download the full article, available in Adobe Acrobat [.pdf] format.