From the consolidating, consensual conservatism of the 1950s to the shattering of the postwar consensus at the hands of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the British and American political cycles have more often been in synch than not. But, after a period in the 1990s when ‘third way’ politics emerged on both sides of the Atlantic as an electorally successful antidote to the resurgent right, the knife-edge presidential election of 2000 dramatically severed this link. Labour, then nearing the end of its first term, was left to face the most rightwing administration in recent US history with detrimental consequences for the party, country and wider world.
The election of Barack Obama offers the possibility of a new unity of purpose. We should be careful not to overstate the case: as Denis MacShane convincingly argues on page 20, many Europeans wrongly assume that Obama will be ‘their’ president. But while the president-elect may see America’s interests as more aligned with those of Europe, we shouldn’t forget that the former will always trump the latter.
Labour’s immediate political task, however, is to mull the lessons of the election for its own future fortunes. We believe there are three.
First, do not overestimate the appeal of experience. As he demonstrated amply on the campaign trail, Obama has many qualities: grace under pressure; an ability to define and stick to a bold strategic course; and, perhaps most importantly, an eloquence which, combined with considerable organisational skill, inspired the kind of grassroots popular movement all too rarely seen in modern politics.
The president-elect is not, however, imbued with considerable executive experience – a potential weakness which he flipped to a strength by turning the election into a crusade for change. The warning here for Labour barely needs spelling out. In election after election over the past year, the candidate of change has invariably triumphed: from Kevin Rudd’s victory last November in Australia to Boris Johnson’s win in the London mayoral election; from Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the Democratic primaries to Helen Clark’s ousting in the New Zealand general election last month. Obama’s victory confirms this trend.
Gordon Brown’s riposte to David Cameron’s pretensions to leadership – ‘this is no time for a novice’ – has highlighted the experience deficit between the prime minister and Tory leader. There is, moreover, a world of difference between the millstone-like Bush record which Obama hung around John McCain’s neck, and that which Labour will defend at the next election. And the Republican candidate’s self-evident lack of knowledge about economics is not a charge that the Tories will easily stick on the prime minister.
But, with all these caveats, Labour should still beware the temptation to turn the next election into a simple choice about the relative levels of experience of the two men who would be prime minister. Instead, the US elections reaffirm the need for Labour to run as the agents of change; an anti-establishment party impatient with, and dedicated to removing, the obstacles which hinder the aspirations of those lower and middle-income citizens whose corner it is pledged to fight.
Second, progressive politics thrives in an atmosphere of real debate. Throughout the primary season, many predicted that the prolonged battle between Obama and Clinton would weaken the eventual nominee’s ability to win the general election. Instead, the battle for the nomination, and the debates between the eventual two contenders, brought thousands of new recruits into Democratic party politics, and educated millions more about the issues facing the country. Obama emerged a stronger candidate thanks to the vigorous primary process, while, had she ended up slipping past him at the finishing line, the same would also have gone for Clinton.
The lesson here for Labour is clear: in future, elections should be seen as an opportunity and not a threat. The fear of the appearance of division, which turned last year’s party leadership election into a non-election, should be weighed against the much bigger prizes on offer: drawing new people into the party, showcasing its talent, and placing Labour at the centre of a national debate about the country’s future direction.
Finally, don’t abandon the centre ground. The two-jab punch delivered to the Republicans over the past two years – first the loss of Congress in the 2006 mid-terms and now the presidency – reminds us again what happens to parties which stray too far from the centre ground. Like Labour in the 1980s and the Tories in the 1990s, the Republicans mistook their own ideological obsessions for the concerns of the wider electorate.
By contrast, Obama never forgot that elections are about both turning out your own supporters and winning new converts to your cause. He audaciously fought the Republicans on their own turf, and he justifiably reaped rich electoral dividends. As Labour’s years in office grow, and with it the temptation to retreat to old ideological comfort zones, this, above all else, should be the lesson that the party takes from the remarkable and enthralling contest that has been this year’s US presidential election.