The Nation.



Prince Al

By David Corn

This article appeared in the January 1, 2001 edition of The Nation.

December 14, 2000

After this, four Gore years? Is the Democratic Party stuck with Prince Al until the next election? Did Campaign 2004: Bush versus Gore II begin the moment the Supreme Court issued its 5-to-4 decision? The bad blood created by the disposition of this election will not disappear quickly. The bitterness of this round's losers could even dwarf the profound disappointment of pro-impeachment Americans. In fact, the balance of emotions in US politics may well shift. Those who were upset that Clinton escaped impeachment conviction and who craved revenge are now able to claim George W. Bush's win as vindication and wallow in satisfaction; those who welcomed Bill Clinton's acquittal and who saw Republican losses in 1998 as just deserts for the impeachment crusade are now the aggrieved and outraged. And perhaps they'll feel it is time to seek retribution and justice. As Republicans and conservatives were furiously motivated by Monicagate and impeachment, so the Democrats and their liberal allies could be moved by Bush's Supreme Court-assisted victory--though it's hard to envision Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt bearing a grudge as fiercely as Tom DeLay and Trent Lott. In fact, several conservative Democrats--Senator John Breaux and the Blue Dogs of the House--have already stuck out their hands, realizing that with Bush in the White House and Congress split, their deal-making influence can be enhanced.

The Democratic Party as a whole may not forge a unified (and passionate) anti-Bush front, and that could sharpen the pre-existing tensions between the party's progressives and conservatives. It's unlikely that African-American voters in Florida (and perhaps elsewhere) will forget what many consider to be a Bush-led Republican effort to disfranchise their community. Certainly, any Republican official in Florida not in a safe seat should worry--especially if he or she represents an area with a large African-American population. Black voter turnout in Florida in 2002, when Governor Jeb Bush will be up for re-election, ought to be astronomical. (Would it be too high a price for George W. Bush to win the presidency at the cost of his brother's GOP in Florida? Nah.) But beyond Florida, will Gore try to ride a wave of resentment--become the Democratic Nixon, a Veep who loses closely and waits in the wings? If Gore does, will anyone in the party attempt to knock him off this mount of anger?

The arguments on each side are obvious. Gore partisans will assert that he really won and deserves another shot at the White House, which is rightfully his--particularly if a subsequent counting of the Florida ballots does show that Gore drew more votes than Bush. Other Dems can reply that Gore, whatever the injustices, did not prevail at a time that was tremendously favorable for an incumbent Vice President. But in party politics, it is tough to bounce the apparent leader. In 1984 the Democratic Party could not shake itself free of Walter Mondale, its most recent Vice President--and Mondale, unlike Gore, had lost decisively in 1980 as President Jimmy Carter's ticket partner. The Republicans could not avoid Bob Dole in 1996. And in 2000, both parties embraced the party-establishment candidates, each of whom thwarted a maverick challenger with crossover appeal. Can Joseph Lieberman dare challenge Gore? (That ingrate!) Can those rule of law-citing Democrats who battled for Gore during Recount-O-Rama, like Senators John Kerry and Bob Kerrey, block Gore's quest for justice? The Supreme Court's decision installed Bush in the White House, and it probably installed Gore--if he decides to stay in this line of work--as the permanent Democratic contender for the throne.

Subscriber Login

4 ISSUES FREE

Subscribe Now!

The only way to read this article and the full contents of each week's issue of The Nation online is by subscribing to the magazine. Subscribe now and read this article -- and every article published since for the past five years -- right now.

There's no obligation -- try The Nation for four weeks free.

.

About David Corn

David Corn is Mother Jones' Washington bureau chief. Until 2007, he was The Nation's Washington editor and is co-author, with Michael Isikoff, of Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War.

Corn's work has appeared in the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, Harper's Magazine and many other publications. His books include The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception (a New York Times bestseller), Blond Ghost: Ted Shackley and the CIA's Crusade and the novel Deep Background.

more...
Popular Topics
Most Searched

Issues »

Most Emailed

Issues »

Blogs

» The Notion

New Obama Ad Rebuts Palin Pick | Forget McCain/Palin, says the new Obama strategy, the ticket is still McCain/Bush.
Ari Melber

» Campaign 08

One Republican Ticket: Eleven Houses | Between the two of them, McCain and Palin own eleven houses. And they want to take it to thirteen?
John Nichols

» ActNow!

Take Back Labor Day | World-class music, cutting-edge activism, family fun and podcasts. Plus videos from Billy Bragg, Pete Seeger and Phil Ochs.
Peter Rothberg

» Capitolism

Sarah Palin, Buchananite | McCain appeases the base.
Christopher Hayes

» The Beat

Obama's Tough New Populism | Trading soaring rhetoric for a smart and incisive populism, Barack Obama is taking his campaign to the people.
John Nichols

» The Dreyfuss Report

For the Record: Obama, Biden on Georgia | Two tough guys.
Robert Dreyfuss

» And Another Thing

I Heart Michelle Obama | Will she be able to reassure white voters?
Katha Pollitt

» Editor's Cut

Taking On Poverty and Inequality | Until we close the gap between the very rich and the rest of America, we can't confront the major challenges of our time.
Katrina vanden Heuvel