Search the Web's most comprehensive Political Directory:

Submit a site





Alex Aichinger
Kirsten Andersen
Brent Barksdale
The Cynic
Natalie Farr

Joe Giardiello
Bret Hrbek

Ramesh Ponnuru
Dorothy Seese
Jason Soter

 

 

Al Gore taught a lesson in Politics 101
by Joseph M. Giardiello joe@politicalusa.com
PoliticalUSA.com
Bombs Away  
Contest

As any political novice who has been through even one campaign can tell you, debates cannot help you; they can only hurt.  The objective in a debate is to not make any major mistakes thus not giving people a reason to vote against you.  Since this policy works so well in local elections, there is no reason to believe it wouldn’t work in a presidential election. 

So why hasn’t Al Gore, after a lifetime in politics, learned this?

Either by design or by default, the Bush team seemed to understand this.  They knew all Bush had to do was present a presidential image – not too frat-boyish, informed on the issues, level headed.  By most accounts, even if it was relative in terms of expectations, Bush did just that. 

Gore, on the other hand, kept trying to reinvent himself for each debate, looking for that magic formula that would propel him to victory in the minds of the debate watchers.  Should he be the aggressive Gore?  Or maybe the brainiac Gore?  I know, lets try the thoughtful, introspective Gore. 

As people watched each passing Gore, they gave him credit for knowing the “numbers,” but began to question what kind of person Al Gore really was.  In essence, he won the battle, but voters began to question if he was fighting on the right side.  The tide began to turn in the war. 

One can almost imagine the scene in Gore Headquarters.  After winning the first debate they probably expected an easy coast through numbers 2 and 3.  But a funny thing happened on the way to inauguration.  Post-debate spin.  Gore’s aggressiveness caused him, in the heat of the moment to say some things that weren’t exactly true - Even giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying they weren’t intentional lies.  Gore and his campaign knew this was his Achilles’ heel and they should have been alert to it.  Instead, expecting the debate to help him achieve victory, Gore blustered his way to a major mistake. 

No apology, no amount of contriteness in Debate II could make up for it.  (Let’s face it, we’ve seen all the lip biting and excuses we can stand in the last eight years.)  The damage was done.  Far from helping him, his performance in Debate 1 will be seen as the turning point in Campaign 2000.  Ironically, a debate he won.

© Joseph M. Giardiello, 2000

See our latest columns:
Dorothy Seese explain why Campaign 2000 is still a horserace

Alan Caruba pops the champagne corks

The Real Prescription Drug Problem
Mario Lopez tells us this is not your father's Farrakhan
 

View expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Political USA.


Home | PUSA Columnists | Talking Heads | Directories | News
Chat Boards | Links | Advertise | Submit | Contact

Copyright Political USA, 1999-2000. Unauthorized use of materials is prohibited. If you want something, just ask us!