More indication the times are a changin’

At his the Decembrist blog, Mark Schmitt offers some fascinating insights about tax-limiting legislation, campaign promises, once-promising campaigners and Republican prospects in upcoming elections, beginning with the states.

Here’s a teaser:

One of the great strengths of the Republican Party heading into the Bush era was the number of big-state Republican governors and the perception that they knew how to govern. People like Gingrich could spout their ideological bombast, but in Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio and elsewhere the face of the Republican party was governors who seemed to know what they were doing. Sure, some of them swept problems under the carpet and then stomped up and down on it, and some mastered the art of consequence-free tax cut politics, but they put on a good face. The perceived-successful Democratic governors circa 1997 you could count on one hand: Governor Hunt in North Carolina, Dean in Vermont, Kitzhaber in Oregon and a few others. Peter Beinart argued in the Wall Street Journal early in 2004 that the reason Dean seemed so strong was that there were no other viable Democratic governors, and that was very true. It’s easy to say that Kerry made a poor candidate because Senators traditionally make poor candidates, but how many alternatives were there?

There are now, though, and the situation is completely reversed. I was in Arizona the other day when a poll came out putting Governor Napolitano’s approval rating at 65% — she’s the anti-Bush, but not the only one. This shift is as important as anything that happens in Congress because governors are where presidents come from, and they are also where Senators come from.

Well-thought-out analysis, this, and highly readable. Schmitt identifies a factor easily capable of changing the political pendulum’s direction. It’s one nobody else seems to be talking about. Look for that situation to change.