Tampabay: Two great speeches; only one hits home

If your decision this year is based mostly on the fact that Al Gore is a hypocritical, liberal stiff, or that George W. Bush is a spoiled, rich lightweight, you're not alone.

No disrespect intended for anyone who feels a great passion for Bush or Gore. But a big chunk of voters are more or less tolerating their own guy, while getting worked up about why they dislike the other one.

The candidate who grasps this concept is rare. Human nature is to seek out the cheers of friendly crowds.

But a successful candidate will go further to win votes, will try to reassure the undecided voters about his or her alleged flaws.

Ronald Reagan gave us a fine example in his 1980 challenge to Jimmy Carter. Swing voters were worried whether Reagan was a right-wing nut. Carter tried to play that card in one of their debates.

Reagan, folksy, calm and level-headed, just looked at Carter and shook his head. "There you go again," Reagan laughed, before his rebuttal -- and took a giant step toward winning.

By this yardstick, then, which of our 2000 candidates accomplished more in the just-concluded conventions?

Bush.

Both candidates did a great job in their acceptance speeches. The difference is that Gore gave the finest speech of his life, preaching to the choir. Bush gave the finest speech of his life, preaching to the unconverted.

Let's be blunt. The biggest worry about Bush, among non-Republican and swing voters, is that he is a shallow, callow frat boy with no vision.

The second biggest worry is that he is talking sweet talk to mask the same old Republican stuff underneath.

Bush's convention speech was masterful. He sounded like a man with some vision to him, especially on how our prosperity is itself a challenge to our character -- we cannot let it dull "our sense of urgency, of empathy, of duty." He even quoted Robert Frost on "occupying the land with character."

He took a perfect tack on Bill Clinton. Venomous Clinton-hating long ago turned off undecided voters. Instead, Bush shook his head sadly and gently called it a shame: "So many talents. So much charm. Such great skill. But in the end, to what end?"

In a single sentence, Bush divorced himself from Gingrich, Armey, Delay, Hyde and the rest of the party in Congress: "I have no stake in the bitter arguments of the last few years."

Toward the end, Bush spoke movingly of visiting a juvenile jail, and being struck by the question of a 15-year-old boy criminal: "What do you think of me?" Here Bush displayed a previously unseen empathy.

"He seemed to be asking," Bush continued, "like many Americans who struggle . . . "Is there hope for me? Do I have a chance?' And, frankly . . . "Do you, a white man in a suit, really care what happens to me?' "

Gore, in his turn at bat, did a great job of escaping his image of a wooden plodder. He was energetic, likeable, enthusiastic. But the heart of his speech was a shopping list of goodies directed at the room -- unions, teachers, government employees, liberals.

He implied he would litmus-test Supreme Court justices on abortion. He proposed universal health care for children (no details), came out against school vouchers, vowed to defend affirmative action, warned of global warming, and called for gun safety locks, among other things. Oh, yeah, there was universal preschool too.

In sum, the Democratic convention was much more visibly liberal than the Republican was conservative. Democrats call the Bush convention a sham, a cover-up of the party's right wing. If so, the Democrats have 11 weeks to convince the nation of it, and by the nation, I do not mean, "each other."

Back to Tampa Bay area news
Back

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

Special Links

Mary Jo Melone

Howard Troxler

Headlines
From the Times
local news desks