 |
 |
|||||
 |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
||||||
| Gore's Unhappy Paradox
by John M. Curtis Copyright August 14, 2000
While President Clinton still commands attention, Gore must find a way to capture the limelight without trashing Hollywood. Sure, Joe Lieberman and Bill Bennett already pointed the finger for exacerbating America’s social ills, but everyone knows it’s not time for Democrats to fall on their swords. Get over it. Hollywood has little to do with America’s unwanted social problems, they only mirror back—just like skillful politicians—what the public demands. "The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the Senate," said Proximo in the movie Gladiator, "it’s the sand of the Coloseum." Preaching too much hell, fire, and brimstone gets boring real fast. Gore and Lieberman must get back on track, showing the American public what they intend to do about pressing issues itemized in the Democratic platform—including education, health care, civil rights and poverty. Starting off on the wrong foot, Gore and Lieberman can’t afford to ride fruitless philosophical tangents. Climbing a slippery slope, Gore has the unenviable task of coming from behind. Like the Lakers, he’s hoping to be graced with the same fairy dust at LA’s glittery Staples Center. When the curtain rises, the Democrats must seize the moment, reassuring their liberal base that they haven’t abandoned the Party’s great goals. Though Lieberman energized the ticket, everyone must be on the same page. Gore can’t afford to have Lieberman frighten off his supporters by preaching too much religiosity while ignoring essential concerns of mainstream Democrats. Clinton’s 'New Democrat' agenda was a brilliant strategy upending 12 consecutive years of Republican rule. His charisma and a poor economy enabled him to reverse a 30-year trend of Republican domination of the executive branch. Without the same magnetic quality, Gore and Lieberman must capitalize by offering voters convincing proof for continuing and going beyond the Clinton legacy. Falling back on only the economic 'progress and prosperity' of the Clinton-Gore administration isn’t going to be enough. Forty years ago, another nominee—John F. Kennedy—electrified the convention by raising expectations and giving the less fortunate reason for hope. He captivated Hollywood by dazzling them with contagious idealism and star power, manicured by his own brilliant publicity campaign. Allowing Republicans to monopolize the word 'compassionate' in campaign 2000 undermines Democrats’ magnetic appeal as the real party of hope and compassion. Liebermans’s more conservative views on core Democratic issues shouldn’t turn off Democrats by perceiving the party as less sensitive and out of touch. Unlike Clinton, Gore can’t command the troops with sheer charisma, forcing the faithful to accept a more conservative agenda to win the White House. Gore walks a dangerous tightrope trying to satisfy his party’s base and independents now drawn toward Bush’s Southern charm or the radical agendas of Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan. Nader’s already siphoned off some youthful voters, not yet jaded by the realities of two-party politics and American enterprise. No matter how Gore and Lieberman straddle the fence, they still have to remind their base that they haven’t abandoned the Party’s great national goals. When the curtain opens up, reconciliation with different factions of the party assures that Democrats of various walks of life can still join hands and live under the same tent. Hoping to recapture the same magic enjoyed by John F. Kennedy 40 years ago, Al Gore needs to inspire idealism much the way Clinton did in 1992. Without harnessing energy and enthusiasm, Gore and Lieberman face an uphill battle retaining Clinton’s fragile coalition pieced together largely from economic prosperity. Riding Clinton’s economic coattails won’t be enough to propel Gore and Lieberman into the White House. They must make a compelling case for their own vision and great national goals. Polishing and finishing Clinton’s legacy simply won’t inspire enough disenfranchised souls to hop on board. Lecturing the country on morality, Gore and Lieberman send a negative message falling on deaf ears. Though Gore selected Lieberman to reinforce his boy scout image, preaching too much morality has a tendency to backfire. Gore’s paying way too much attention answering his G.O.P. critics rather than delivering an irresistible message to prospective voters. If the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal taught anything, it’s that few politicians—or others for that matter—are so squeaky clean that they’re truly beyond the fray. Americans have little patience or trust for politicians setting themselves up as paragons of morality. Focusing on morality undermines Gore and Lieberman’s credibility by arrogantly lecturing rather than opening up an intimate, one-to-one dialogue with undecided voters. As McCain learned painfully in the primaries, it’s best to leave the preaching to those already in the business. Gore mustn’t forget that most voters are more interested in his qualifications and competence than his eligibility for the clergy. Voters have little patience for holier-than-thou politicians. 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. |
||||||
rabbing the spotlight from Republican challenger Gov. George W. Bush, it’s now Vice President Al Gore’s turn to step up to the plate at the Democratic National Convention. With his stunning selection of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Con.) temporarily stealing the G.O.P. show, Gore succeeded in derailing the Republican publicity freight train heading into Los Angeles. Whether he can keep the momentum is anyone’s guess. Still lagging in most polls, Gore must make all the right moves as Democrats take the stage. He and Lieberman must check their Hollywood clubs at the door and speak to the real issues. Some 40 years ago, another Democratic candidate—John F. Kennedy—found Hollywood a most hospitable host for Democrats capable of biting their tongues and playing the game. Bashing Hollywood in their own backyard won’t help Democrat’s current fund raising woes and will surely boomerang. Following Clinton’s lead, Gore and Lieberman need to bury the preachy rhetoric and start talking the talk.|
Home || Articles || Books || The Teflon Report || Reactions || About Discobolos This site designed, developed and hosted by the experts at ©1999-2000 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc. |
