THE ONLY THING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD IS SUCCESSFUL POLITICIANS:

Despised and Successful: Tony Blair is about to win another election. (Gerard Baker, 05/09/2005, Weekly Standard)

To Americans who follow these things, the standing of the British prime minister is hard to fathom. American conservatives revere him as the steadfast ally of President George Bush, the solid friend of America who stood firm in the darkest days of the war against terrorism. Bush himself, though diplomatically quiet during the campaign, has not disguised his desire to see Blair continue in office. Yet Democrats, even those who opposed the war, admire the way Blair has done something they have signally failed to do: take the main left-of-center party out of the wilderness and fashion it into the most effective electoral machine in Western politics.

The Democratic party's high priests of electoral strategy have flocked to London in the last few months to offer help to Blair's campaign and, perhaps, to learn a thing or two themselves. Bob Shrum, the eight-time losing presidential campaign adviser, was here this month. Joe Trippi, Howard Dean's campaign manager, has also sipped tea with Blair at Downing Street. "I wasn't really there to offer advice. I admire him enormously," Trippi told me.

How is it that the man lionized by both George Bush and Joe Trippi could be so loathed by the British, with apparently equal energy and, it seems, in an oddly parallel way, by both sides of the political divide? And how is it that, despite the loathing, he still seems assured of victory--and is set to become only the second British prime minister in more than a century to win three straight parliamentary majorities? [...]

Undoubtedly part of the animus Blair arouses on the right owes to his remarkable success, Clinton-style, at repositioning Labour in the middle ground of British politics. Not only has Blair bucked his party and taken a firmly pro-American stance, he has shifted Labour to the center on big domestic issues. Even as he was fighting an uphill battle over Iraq, Blair took on the left of his party over two more small but symbolic issues: the introduction of a more realistic tuition system for Britain's chronically underfunded universities and the extension of private choice into the bloated bureaucracy of the National Health Service.

A Downing Street adviser told me that, if reelected, Blair will push even more aggressively to reform public services and will tackle the welfare spending threatening to undermine Britain's economic success. Such theft of Conservative issues has redefined Labour, but it drives the Tories nuts. Blair's governing style arouses reasonable indignation on the right. Many conservatives object to what they see as an unprepossessing authoritarian streak in his government. The absurd ban on fox-hunting Blair piloted through parliament was a mean, illiberal piece of pandering to the left of his party and a clarion call to the worst class instincts of the British. He has run a troublingly centralized, informal system of government where quiet chats on the prime minister's sofas seem to be the conduit for dramatic changes in the country's direction. Blair has also, despite promises to reform public services, presided over a steady and stealthy expansion of the state through increased taxes. If Labour is reelected, the tax take as a proportion of national income will rise above 40 percent, its highest level in 25 years.

Clearly impatient with patriotic talk, Blair shows no interest in the idea of Britain. Immigration policy looks at times like a free-for-all. He has dismantled half the British constitution and is extremely eager to hand over large chunks of British sovereignty to the European Union. And though his enemies are wrong and unfair when they claim he lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, the charge has had such public resonance because there has often been something slightly tangential about Blair's relationship to the arc of political truth. And yet, with fewer friends on either the left or right than when he was first elected eight years ago, he seems certain to win. Why?

Part of the explanation is that, for most voters, even those who profess unhappiness with Blair, Iraq, and even these other political issues have been eclipsed by the economy. Blair is, implausible as it may seem, right when he claims that the British economy has been enjoying its longest period of economic growth since the industrial revolution. Blair also faces a weak and divided opposition. The Conservative party has not yet adapted to the trauma of the loss of its governing majority eight years ago; it has a leader in Michael Howard who is failing to persuade the public that it is fit for office.

Any Third Way figure will inevitably be loathed by both sides of the divide, as was Bill Clinton and is George Bush.

Posted by Orrin Judd at May 4, 2005 12:15 PM