15 Minutes with Matthew Dowd [Interview]

Austinist: You sound really happy and excited about that idea.

Matthew Dowd: I am. I’m very excited at the thought of it. It’s not often that, you know, you know, we’re born in a place, it’s not often that we’re allowed to be in a place to watch that happen. At a crisis point in the world. I mean these things don’t just happen. I’m a huge believer that things align in the universe and in the world. Any other time I don’t think Barack Obama could have won [the nomination] but because of where we were in the country and where we are in the world. Things had to align for this to happen.

It’s a great thing to watch unfold.

[A small pause ensues, during which it is wondered how a supposedly battle-hardened political numbers guy becomes so positively bubbly.]

These things don’t just happen accidentally. I think you have to perform and emerge as a candidate and as a campaign to be given that opportunity. But I think that window opened for him. And if he wins, if that happens... he will be judged in that first year depending on how he performs in that historic role.

Austinist: This election seems to have brought out a lot of political division in some ways—people seem to be confronting their prejudices. Do you think enough of us will rise to the occasion?

Matthew Dowd: Not only do I think we can; I think we’re about to. I think people are ready, and I think they’re made ready because we’re in such a crucible of fire economically and internationally that I think people are ready to sort of say, “Listen, things have got to change. I’ve got to do something that I didn’t think—never thought was possible. It’s time for us to try something else.”

Absent some kind of huge mistake on his part, I think he will be elected. And I don’t think it’ll be fairly late on Election Night. I think we’ll go to bed [on election night] knowing who’s president.

Austinist: In your speech, you talk about public involvement. What role has the internet played in public involvement in politics?

Matthew Dowd: Well, the Internet has given people a way to, without cost, communicate with each other. And for politics, you know, that’s a big change. There’s really no cost in the communication marketplace now. You could talk to one person or to a thousand people now without any major cost. You can sit at your computer and exchange information, exchange ideas. And that has taken a lot of the expensive political advertising and all those things that organizationally you used to have to have, sort of, if you wanted to do fieldwork and all that. It’s taken roadblocks out of the way of average people to be able to have that kind of political communication, and that’s a fundamental thing.

Austinist: Increased interactivity… but doesn’t that still have to translate into face to face interaction?

Matthew Dowd: Yeah, but you’re able to initially build that energy and that ability without a cost and then as people get involved on the internet communicate and believe in something, build community, then it’s much easier to then get somebody to go do something in a neighborhood and all that. So, if the first steps in communication you can do basically free, which is what the internet allows, the next steps that may have some cost associated with them are easier because you’ve already got people more involved.

What I’d like is for people to come away with a belief that getting involved can actually make change and that it requires involvement. In order for change to happen, it requires people’s involvement. And that there’s a way to do that without having to go through the traditional organizations, which I think many people today have been reluctant to do. They just don’t want to get involved in the same old thing.

So I’m hoping they, one, believe that there is enough optimism and hope out there to actually do it and then believe that they have a part in it.

Austinist: You’ve been talking about major shifts in perception. So to bring that down to more local issues, what do you think about Texas? Are we on the verge of shifting?

Matthew Dowd: We already have been. We’ve been shifting, slowly, over the last eight years because of two things: the rise of the Hispanic population in Texas and the change in the suburbs, which have gone from being reliably Republican to being more and more swing. The suburbs in the state used to be the place where Republicans won their elections. So both of those things are happening.

I don’t—I think we’re still a lean Republican state. I think in 2010, you may see the first Democrat statewide win, whether it’s down-ballot or something, for the first time in a while. And then I think after that, then Texas becomes—whether it’s 2012 or 2016—because of the change in the suburbs or the rise in the Hispanic population, a true swing state. The interesting thing is that by the presidential election in 2016, my guess is that Texas will be considered a swing state, just like Ohio, Florida, and Minnesota. It will at that point be one of the states that people say they have to win in order to win the presidency.

Austinist: That would be wonderful.

Matthew Dowd: That would be great, actually.

Austinist: Any statewide races favored for Democrats?

Matthew Dowd: Until 2010, I think it’s going to be hard for a high-profile race. Obviously everything depends on the candidates that emerge, both Democrat and Republican, whether they’re good or bad, how they do, whether they inspire people or not. I think more likely it would be a down ballot race, like comptroller or Lieutenant Governor. Something not as high-profile as a senate or governor’s race. That’s my guess, but it totally is contingent on what candidates are running on each side, who the public taps into.

Austinist: One last question: How do you think history will treat George [W.] Bush?

Matthew Dowd: It’s going to be somewhat contingent on the outcome in Iraq, how that turns out. But right now ... I’d place him maybe among the seventh, eighth worst presidents in American History. When 9/11 happened, he had this grand opportunity to bring people together, to inspire. And he didn’t do it. So I think that if there’s a headline on the Bush presidency, it’ll be something like “Missed Opportunity.” Or maybe “Lost Hope.”