by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright June 16, 2000
All Rights Reserved.

umping heads in the center of the field, both Democratic and Republican hopefuls finds themselves making a mad dash into each other’s territory trying to capture John McCain’s independent and crossover voters. Engineered by Dick Morris in 1992, Clinton ran around right-end and hijacked Reagan Democrats, independents and crossover Republicans. Pulling the rug out from president Bush, Clinton’s New Democrat image built a solid coalition of 'yuppie' voters disgusted with the seemingly unending recession blamed on the Bush administration. Promising to "invest and grow" the economy, Clinton offered hope to otherwise discouraged voters looking for optimism. Despite the 5-year-old bull market, with the stock market now misfiring and energy prices going through the roof, Americans are losing their confidence, measured by Clinton’s noteworthy decline in his approval rating from 55% to 43%. Quite a reversal for the Teflon chief executive.

       Bad economic news also isn’t good news for Al Gore, hoping to ride the prosperity freight train into the White House. Trailing Bush by around 8% to10% in most polls, Gore finds himself losing traction, trying to sell his 'progress and prosperity' tour, touting the administration’s economic accomplishments. Like Clinton in 1992, Gore must run around right end, convincing moderate voters that his policies aren’t too far to the left. Riding the wave of economic prosperity, many upwardly mobile voters are seeking reassurance that Gore wouldn’t torpedo the nation’s economic expansion. Unlike Clinton, Gore isn’t perceived as a Republican cross-dresser, masterfully balancing Republican economic policies against the budget-busting pressure from liberal special interest groups. Presenting his economic case, Gore needs to convince Wall Street and 'yuppie' voters that his policies wouldn’t hamper economic growth.

       Taking a page from the Clinton play-book, George W. Bush finds himself running around left-end trying to reassure independents and crossover Democrats that he’s not just another right wing extremist. After his bitter slugfest with John McCain in North Carolina, Bush strategically embraced the religious right, successfully derailing McCain’s long-shot bid for the nomination. Now Bush finds himself in a real catch-22. Owing the religious right, he’s hard-pressed to resist the pressure to select a pro-choice running mate, and yet, he’s simultaneously trying to steal Reagan Democrats, crossovers and independents from Al Gore. "Bush in this election is not going to be able to afford to alienate any of his base—even 1%," said Colleen Parro, director of Republican National Coalition for Life, a right wing anti-abortion group. According to Parro, if Bush selects a pro-choice running mate, social conservatives will throw their support to the likely Reform Party nominee, Patrick J. Buchanan.

       While a sizable percentage of conservatives have second thoughts about voting for pro-choice candidates, other factors no doubt affect their vote. Tossing away their vote to Patrick Buchanan on just one issue, most social conservatives would still conclude that the Republican platform best reflects their values. It’s actually possible to have a candidate who’s against abortion but also opposes pro-life constitutional amendments. Many Republicans truly feel it’s better to keep the federal government out of women’s health issues. Gov. Bush seems torn between opposing abortion as a form of birth control and upholding a woman’s right to choose. When fireworks erupted between John McCain and Alan Keyes over abortion, it left George W. Bush looking far more rational and sensitive to women. Like the anti-Castro cause, the anti-abortion crowd fails to recognize that their issue isn’t the only one apple in the barrel.

       As Gov. Bush has said before, his vice presidential choice will be made on who’s best suited for the job. Caving-in to pressure doesn’t reflect principled leadership. While it’s possible that the most qualified candidate opposes abortion, it’s also possible that they’re against legislating the issue. Refusing to knuckle under, Bush already shows the kind of grace-under-pressure needed to be president. Calculating what’s best for the ticket, the party, and, of course, America, also plays into the equation. With the election nearing a statistical dead heat, choosing the right running mate is crucial for Bush and Gore. While Bush’s pressure stems from the anti-abortion cause, Gore feels the heat from a host of other liberal groups. Unlike 1988 in which Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis chose to experiment with a running mate, neither Gore nor Bush can afford to take that risk.

       As the conventions near, both candidates are deluging voters with policy speeches on a wide variety of issues. Wide divergences on key campaign issues are now narrowing to the point that their positions become nearly indistinguishable. Sure there are some differences on education, social security, Medicare, gun control, and national defense, but those distinctions are progressively blurred as both candidates appeal to the same groups. Only tax cuts divide the candidates, but even that’s narrowing. Clandestine operatives will do their best hatchet work to marginalize opposing candidates: Bush portrayed as a right wing zealot and Gore as a tax and spend liberal. After laundering the issues, the charisma factor comes into play. When all is said and done, voters still select the most appealing candidate. Remaining cool and collected becomes a tall order when a candidate’s under constant attack. So far Bush has shown an uncanny ability to remain positive and upbeat. Falling into the trap, Gore sometimes looks negative and overly critical.

       Judging by his nearly 10% lead in the polls, Bush seems on the right track avoiding negativity and projecting a positive image. With economic momentum still with Gore, Bush needs to sharpen his case for why America needs a switch. Unlike campaign 1980, there’s no Ronald Reagan or need to eradicate economic 'malaise.' While Reagan’s tax cut and anti-government crusade worked then, Bush needs to focus on today’s issues, especially education and health care. With Clinton fatigue still lurking, look to the integrity factor to play an unexpected role in campaign 2000. Overdosed with spinmeisters, voters might have had their fill of smoke and scandal. Blowing too much smoke this time around might be good reason to clear the air.

About the Author

John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com and columnist for The Los Angeles Daily Journal. He’s director of a Los Angeles think tank specializing in human behavior, health care, political research and media consultation. He’s the author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2000 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.