The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008

This is not a book about the justification for the war in Iraq, or the merits of tax cuts. It is not an attempt to relitigate the contested 2000 election. It is not an attempt to assess presidential records in a historical context.

Even in the context of contemporary politics, reputations are highly ¿uid. When we embarked on this project at the Little Rock library dedication in the wake of the 2004 election, many Republicans believed, and many Democrats feared, that the newly reelected president, through his political and policy victories, had shifted the balance of power in America in long-term ways -- a realignment, in the parlance of political scientists. Demoralized Democrats, like the hapless pursuers of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, gazed at Bush and Rove and wondered, "Who are those guys?"

But by the fall of 2005, an assortment of political and policy debacles -- the failure of Social Security reform, the bungled response to Hurricane Katrina, the grinding war in Iraq -- had left Bush with some of the lowest job approval ratings of any modern president. In 2006, the war dragged on sullenly, congressional Republicans were mired in scandal, and the hope for the party was to avoid a rout in the midterm elections, never mind the dream of realignment. It seemed entirely possible that the twelve-year GOP reign on Capitol Hill would soon come crashing down, leaving Bush to limp through the balance of his second term. After nearly two years under the shadow of a criminal investigation in the Valerie Plame CIA leak case, Rove was cleared by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in June2006. Still, Rove remained the chief political strategist for a crippled presidency -- not exactly the mark of a genius.

Election success cannot be viewed as separate and distinct from governing failure. As adherents of the permanent campaign, in which politics and policy are always integrated, Clinton and Rove would agree.

But neither do the setbacks Clinton and Bush faced in their second terms negate their electoral achievements. Clinton in 1992 was the first Democrat to be elected president in twelve years, and in 1996 he was the first Democrat to win two consecutive elections since Franklin D. Roosevelt. Bush in 2000 defeated an incumbent party that was running amid peace and prosperity. In 2002, he denied historical trends by leading his party to big gains in the midterm elections. In 2004, despite deep public unease over the economy and the Iraq war, Bush beat a Democratic Party that had never been more energized or better organized. This record amply demonstrates that Clinton, Bush, and Rove know something about the way to win.

Conservatives who decried Clinton's alleged character defects as blatantly disqualifying still must wonder how he bested them so often. Liberals who regard Bush's political strategist as Satan scan the Democratic Party and ask plaintively, "Where is our Karl Rove?"

The Way to Win is meant partly for fun. We are not political strategists, and we do not presume to give advice to politicians. But as political reporters, we share the obsession with electoral strategy and maneuver, not to mention with the gaudy carnival of presidential elections.

But The Way to Win is meant mainly as serious argument. The United States is on the brink of what promises to be one of the most intensely fought and consequential presidential elections in its history. American politics has grown more heated, suspicious, and erratic. It is less apt to confront, illuminate, and resolve genuine issues. The Bushes and Clintons have governed in this deteriorating environment, and in certain ways they are responsible for the situation. People who think American politics is broken and needs fixing must reckon with the impact of these leaders and their political allies.

Divisive though they may be, both families have won political victories in this perilous new environment. Their Trade Secrets are not gimmicks or abstractions, but substantive ideas and tactics gleaned through tough experience. The candidate who masters their lessons will take the White House in 2008.

November 18, 2004, was very much Bill Clinton's day. His bid for historical immortality was ready to open its doors -- a gargantuan glass and steel structure on the banks of the Arkansas River. How had the Bushes come to honor a Clinton on that slick stage in Little Rock? Twelve years earlier, Clinton's 1992 victory had sent George H. W. Bush into involuntary retirement. The elder Bush had spent the fall campaign alerting the country to Clinton's alleged misdeeds, and kept faith until nearly the end that voters ultimately would take heed of his warnings. A few days after the election, as they strolled through the Maryland woods at Camp David, Bush turned to Colin Powell, his top military adviser, and confessed, "I just never thought they'd elect him. Don't understand it."

Now, in the pouring rain, the first President Bush at last was ready with an explanation: "Of course, it always has to be said that Bill Clinton was one of the most gifted American political figures in modern times. Trust me, I learned this the hard way."

After years of enmity, the former presidents had in the preceding months developed a curious affection for each other, linked by the bond of shared experience in power.