17 August 2000 Watching:  Al Gore's speech

 

The Gore Speech and Media Commentary

I watched Al Gore's speech to the Democratic National Convention, and throughout the thing I kept thinking "He's finished."  In my opinion, the speech was disjointed:  it was full of contradictions (i.e. He's for affirmative action, but against racial profiling; he loves the unshackling of the new economy, but he's against powerful interests/big industry), it was full of promises of handouts to every liberal interest group one can imagine (no New Democratic ideas at all in this speech), and it was full of class warfare (albeit slightly redefined by Gore's focus group work -- now it's the people versus the evil big interests of industry).  The speech seemed to define Gore not by how he would lead (the most significant remark in that regard being a promise he would never let us down) but how he wouldn't lead (he won't raise the social security age, he won't allow school vouchers, he won't, he won't he won't), which suggested to me even more pandering to the liberal interest groups in the audience.  I don't think it made a very effective case as to why he should be elected leader of the free world -- another contradiction, since he promised to tell us SPECIFICALLY how he would lead at the beginning of his speech.

Most of the commentators on PBS thought the speech was wonderful.  The collection of "perspective" idiots -- Michael Beschloss, Doris Kearns Goodwin, and the Ford Library director whose name escapes me, all thought Gore gave the speech of his life.  Mark Shields thought it was wonderful as well.  Indeed, every liberal on the show seemed to like it.  

Paul Gigot, as usual, offered the most astute commentary, and he is the only reason to suffer through the idiocy of the other PBS commentators.  Gigot found the speech unusual in that it was almost a crisis call of economic populism in a time of prosperity.  That is to say, Gore's tone and urgency suggested that he must be elected otherwise the dark forces of big oil, big industry, etc. will overwhelm the people, who don't have a champion.  Gigot noted, correctly, that the timing for this sort of crisis call is questionable, and gave the examples of FDR and Reagan to illustrate when such a crisis call sort of speech is most effective.  

I think Gigot is absolutely right.  If Gore's central theme is going to be "The People versus the Powerful" I think he's going to have a very tough time.  It's a smart gamble -- one Gore really had to take, I suppose, since he's trailing so badly -- in the sense that it brings some coherence to the liberal laundry list (affirmative action, no school vouchers, no tax cuts, more spending in general, or shall we call it "investment" as New Democrats like to do) and may energize the base slightly.  But I suspect it doesn't rally very many moderate voters, who rightly perceive this as a time of prosperity, not crisis.  Of course, the Bush people have to be sure they don't allow Gore to get away with casting them as the villains, which could make things turn quickly.  

I love election time!

<<< >>>

 


Copyright (c) 2000, Kevin L. Whited