Opening Night for the Dems

Tonight I watched the opening night of the Democratic National Convention.  Halfway through, I thought "The Democrats are in BIG trouble."  The PBS coverage started with a grouchy and bitchy (not to mention overweight, as one imagines the proverbial pig gathering at the trough) Barbara Mikulski, the repulsive Senator from Maryland.  I don't think the woman knows how to smile.  The appearance that came across was that of a sourpuss.  She used part of her time to spotlight key Democratic women.  As a partisan, I smiled at this actually.  First, Mikulski's dour appearance was in sharp contrast with the mood of the Republican convention.  Second, many of the Democratic women who were paraded (Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton in particular) aren't exactly the sorts of women who endear themselves to the female crowd that Republicans have been losing bigtime lately (suburban moms), but who, thus far, have been pretty supportive of George Bush.  

Mikulski (and Hillary later) went on to advocate typical old Democratic policies (spend spend spend, ban guns, use the government to fix everything).  Somewhere in the mix was a tribute to Jimmy Carter.  Carter, in all fairness, has been a very good ex-president.  But a tribute?  This was the liberal who presided over precipitous American decline, and who was overwhelmingly defeated by Ronald Reagan as a result.  The celebration of his presidency also made me smile, because if the Democrats are really wanting to make this election about old Democratic, Carter-style liberalism, something George Bush will be happy to do, they are going to get pounded.

But then Bill Clinton arrived, preceded by a tribute to his own presidency.  In his acceptance speech, George Bush noted the exceptional promise of Bill Clinton, and almost lamented how he fell so short of that promise.  I couldn't help but think throughout the video (which was most moving when it showed the President giving passionate speeches -- he's quite an impressive speaker) that he could have been one of the nation's greatest presidents.

And then I thought, no, not really, because to an extent his party limited him.  Clinton is great at the rhetoric of inclusion and helping the less fortunate, but he has been most successful when he has governed as a moderate Republican.  Think of his most successful initiatives:  being tougher on crime, welfare reform, and the economy.  For the most part, the positions he's advocated were/are moderate Republican positions.  That he was able to move the Democratic Party there, and then co-opt the issues from Republicans, illustrates tremendous political ability and foresight.  Unfortunately, his personal scandals left him beholden to the "Old Democratic" base, and that's one reason to lament Clinton's presidency, because had Old (liberal) Democrats not had to save him from impeachment -- thereby creating an obligation on his part -- he might have been able to advocate the sorts of Social Security reforms (supported by fellow moderate Democrats like Bob Kerrey) and healthcare reforms now put forth by Governor Bush.  President Clinton's personal problems, in addition to diminishing the office, also diminished his Presidency, because as a direct result he could no longer govern as a New Democrat.

Tonight has changed my mind about the presidential race.  Before, I thought that Al Gore needed to run as far as possible away from Bill Clinton, despite the prosperity of the Clinton years.  Now, I think that Al Gore needs to tie himself as closely as possible to the Bill Clinton who, at one time, WAS a New Democrat.  He needs to run a campaign that basically highlights Clinton at his very best -- which at times was amazing -- and market himself as the New Democrat who will continue the tradition.  He's not going to.  He's going to run away from Bill Clinton while trying to take credit for the economy.  Tonight, I saw why that won't work.  It's really not "the economy, stupid," at least not completely.  Clinton's appeal was that he's an amazingly charismatic man who could talk about typical Democratic ideals without sounding like Jimmy Carter, Tip O'Neill, or Ted Kennedy.  The economy's recent performance was a bonus, but not the key.  

Bill Clinton is a remarkable political figure.  He could have been a remarkable President, but for the reasons I've described above.  I don't think Al Gore can bring together his party's liberal base with the more moderate New Democrats like Bill Clinton could.  That's why Al Gore needs Bill Clinton in this race.  He doesn't realize it, and it's probably going to cost him.