all of this theory is great to speculate about but the fact was driven home in this election: anyone who can't walk and talk and appeal on TV will not win American elections. Kennedy proved that and this election nailed the point home, if people didn't get it with Clinton. Not that I agree with it, or like it, but being able to appear well on TV is part of today's political landscape. Gore loosened up for the FIRST time during his concession speech and he still wasn't nearly as relaxed and didn't come across as a real human being as the former coke addict. best, Don >ublished on Saturday, December 16, 2000 in the Washington Post > Fissures Widening Among Democrats > After Gore's Loss > DLC charges that the populist themes of Gore's campaign were a >major > factor in his loss > by Thomas B. Edsall > > The war between the populist and centrist wings of the Democratic >Party broke out into the > open yesterday as they struggled to set the direction of the >party. > > The opening guns were fired by officials of the Democratic >Leadership Council--a bastion of > loyalists to Vice President Gore's running mate, Connecticut Sen. >Joseph I. Lieberman, a > centrist and possible candidate himself for the White House in >2004. > > At a morning briefing, the DLC charged that the populist themes of >Gore's campaign were a > major factor in his loss to George W. Bush, scaring away just the >voters he needed to > achieve victory. > > "Bush won the white working class [with household incomes below >$75,000 a year] by 13 > points," said Will Marshall, head of the the DLC's Progressive >Policy Institute headquarters. > "The message does not seem to have prevailed with the group it was >supposed to be aimed > at." > > The DLC had been a key Gore backer this year, and the loss of the >group's support could > damage his prospects to run again in four years. > > Major proponents of the populist message, including Gore's >pollster Stanley Greenberg, > counterattacked. This left-progressive wing, which is likely to >back House Minority Leader > Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) in 2004, argued that the populist >message worked fine but that > Gore was undone by the conservative moral and cultural attacks on >the Clinton > administration that began in 1992 and continue to the present. > > The Democratic fault lines that reemerged yesterday are an >extension of an internal battle > that began in the elections of 1968 and 1972, continued unabated >with the unsuccessful > candidacies of Walter F. Mondale and Michael S. Dukakis in 1984 >and 1988, but were > successfully muted by Bill Clinton through the 1990s. > > The battles have been fought over racial issues, especially busing >and affirmative action; > over crime and welfare; and most recently over the identification >of the key constituencies to > win elections. The populist wing argues that white voters without >college degrees hold the > balance of power while the centrist wing contends that "wired >workers" who use the Internet, > and in many cases own stock, are the key voting bloc. > > "It's no secret that I think the populism approach hurt us with >critical swing voters, > particularly wired voters and men in the new economy. We were hurt >because we were > viewed in this election as being too liberal and too much in favor >of big government," said > DLC head Al From. > > Greenberg sharply disputed the DLC claims. "Gore's attacks on Bush >and the thematic and > issue contrasts successfully defined Bush as a candidate of the >wealthy and most > privileged, who would potentially endanger Social Security, oppose >a woman's right to > choose and whose Texas record left him with uncertain experience >for the job." > > While Greenberg acknowledged that this year "Democrats lost ground >with noncollege white > voters, particularly with noncollege white women," he argued, "the >populist theme was very > attractive to the white, noncollege electorate. But populism is >not just a material concept, it > has a strong values component." > > The Gore populism theme of the "people" against "the powerful" >worked effectively during > the convention, winning the support of down-scale whites, but, >Greenberg said, these gains > were quickly eroded as Republicans focused on issues of trust and >honesty, and Gore > faced intense criticism for a series of misstatements and >exaggerations. > > "Gore began to lose that margin when trust and values issues were >raised at end of > September," Greenberg said. Noncollege educated whites began to >"hold back because of > the culture war to bring down Clinton that has been waged since >1992." > > Ruy Teixeira, a leading advocate of the importance of appealing to >white, working-class > voters to build a Democratic majority, contended the problem was >not that Gore used a > populist message, but that he failed to fill it out beyond >promising to protect such existing > social insurance programs as Social Security and Medicare. >Teixeira said that because > Bush was able to stake out positions that quieted fears of GOP >assaults on these > programs, Gore needed to present programs, especially in >education, showing how he > would help working-class voters and their children in ways the GOP >would not. > > From contended that Gore's populism was the equivalent of a retail >store's "loss leader," a > way of building up temporary support among Democratic base voters >that carried the high > cost of alienating moderates who dislike polarizing messages based >on class divisions. > > Mark Penn, who polled for the DLC, said: "The populist message is >by itself a limiting > message. . . . It had a lot of negative resonance with precisely >the voters Gore had to win to > get above 50 percent on Election Day." > > From and Marshall argued that the nation's rising affluence and >the declining share of the > work force employed in traditional manufacturing jobs makes >populism increasingly > irrelevant. Almost none of the 22 million new jobs created over >the past eight years are in > manufacturing, they said, and the ratio of low-income voters >(below $30,000) to > upper-income voters (over $75,000) has changed from 3 to 1 over >these eight years to a > slight edge for upper-income jobs. > > 2000 The Washington Post Company
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/18/00 EST