It is 2004, an election year. George W. Bush is the certain Republican nominee. Howard Dean is the odds on favorite to be the Democratic nominee -- dominant in terms of fund raising, poll numbers and grass roots support. All viable challengers will probably be defeated by March. In the general election, Dean will take a predictable step to the center, and Dean's play will be to take the same states that Gore did, plus some that were close in the 2000 election, such as New Hampshire, Florida and much fo the Southwest. No viable third party run is on the horizon at this point.
Two conflicting forces as at work in the world as the general election approaches. The economy is gaining steam (albeit without the restoration of jobs in the manufacturing sector or enough gains to prevent the budget deficits from spiraling out of control), but the war in Iraq is a continuing quagmire. The Bush administration will likely fact setbacks in its civil liberties restricting anti-terrorism policy, and will probably be burdened by a scandal or two as well (the Plame affair being just one of several which could potentially come into play). The September 11th boost GWB received is already gone and his handling of the situation could even become a negative by November. History shows as well that his edge v. a Democratic nominee in the polls will likely slip once the general election begins in earnest.
Democrats are also waiting in horror for an "October surprise", like the capture of Osma bin Laden, or a new terror attack that changes the pysche of the nation, to give George W. Bush a boost just before the election.
Selected U.S. House and Senat seats are in play. Par for the course would be a repeat of the existing razor thin Republican majority in both houses of Congress. A stroke of good Democratic luck puts Democrats in a narrow majority in one or both houses. A stroke of good Republican luck puts the Republicans with a modestly more secure situation in both houses. Still, in January 2005, the vast majority of members of Congress will be incumbents and neither party will have a filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate. This mutual veto power over legislation and appointments will remain.
The House and Senate will not remain entirely static, however. We have been operating under what can be summed up as a four party system, until recently, the two large groups are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. But, there have also been a small number of moderate Democrats (mostly from traditionally "red" states), and a smaller number of moderate Republicans (mostly from traditionally "blue" states). The ranks of the moderates are waning. Several moderate Democrats (Zell Miller and John Edwards among them) are leaving office, and it is unlikely that their replacements will be moderates. We may see similar movement (or even a Jefford's like party switch) on the Republican side. We enter the year polarized, polarizing, and evenly divided.
Traditionally, election years rarely result in major new legislation. The fear of giving a victory to opponent is too great, and the electoral benefits to be received from achieving bipartisan compromises in the national interest is too slight. This year is likely to repeat that trend.
Longer terms battles are going on too. The North-South, secular-evangelical division that has been called the "Culture Wars" continues. So too does the other "culture war" between the European-American oriented "West" on one side, and Islamists (as well as evangelical leaning indigenous Christian movements in Africa and Latin America) on the other. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has no end in sight.
In Europe, negotiations over an enlarged European Union have run aground, and it is unclear whether this will be a brief interruption or the beginning of an enduring deadlock. Environmentalism and anti-globalism have also grown into powerful movements.
Anti-globalism is a case of ends meet irony. Conservatives worry about loss of U.S. prestige and jobs, and also fear with racist undertones, the changes the immigration will make in European and American societies. Liberals are distressed at the way sweat shops replace traditional industries and agriculture abroad with exploitive conditions, and with the power that the mere threat of moving jobs overseas gives employers vis the labor movement at home. Liberals also fear that globalism gives a conservative minority anti-Democratic influence that it can use as an end run around an already corrupted Democratic progress.
And, then there is the baby boomer bulge in the python. As mass retirement looms, everyone else is bracing for the havoc that will be wrecked by this group with immense political clout.
The new year comes with frightening possiblities and dim rays of hope. The best we can do is work for a better new year in 2005.