The Tie Breaker

The Tie Breaker
by Linda A. Prussen-Razzano

I know what you are expecting. You are expecting me to lambaste Gore and praise Bush. You are expecting me to trot out the latest Gore exaggeration, obfuscation, or downright lie and overlook Bush's occasional incoherence or more than occasional obvious confusion.

I won't.

Let us speak plainly, shall we? Whether on the left or on the right, several things are clear: Gore won the first debate. As a policy wonk with hundreds of legitimate facts at his fingertips, an extensive understanding of the issues, and a firm liberal basis for his agenda, Gore is able to express his positions in a detailed and persuasive manner. On the personal end, his tendency to exaggerate, obfuscate, or downright lie decimated any points he might have scored with voters. His image, which had already been reinvented so many times as to become a running joke, was further tarnished by the huffs, puffs, and sighs. Through the sweat of his own brow, Gore managed to turn what could have been a decisive debate victory, replete with substantive policy points, into a personality contest.

This was an ill omen for the Gore camp.

Anxious to regain his lost ground, Gore was so tame in the second debate, one might have thought his handlers had privately emasculated him. After waiting all of his political life for this one moment, a chance to be President, what should have been a cake walk for Gore evolved into a dog fight against a man with only a fraction of the political experience who can't, at times, even adequately defend his own policies. With Gore tethered, buoying confidence in favorable poll numbers, and in a complimentary setting, Bush defied the odds by appearing amiable, informed, composed, and positive, while still remaining above "the fray." Gore was gentlemanly and poised.

Because Bush scored several sound policy points, and because Gore's personality seemed dramatically different from just a few days ago, the win definitely went to Bush. Bush represented consistency in personality and positions; while Gore represented consistency in just positions. Although the popular trend suggested two wins for Bush, in my mind, it was still a tie.

This evening's debate exemplifies how and why America is slowly slipping into the morass of ambiguity and low expectations. Governor Bush was handed several incredible softball questions, questions he should have been able to belt right out of the park. At times, he appeared to be answering different questions altogether. At others, he seemed incapable of adequately detailing his own plans for America's future. Conversely, when he did speak from the heart, the level of genuine conviction in his voice was undeniable.

Vice President Gore, on the other hand, returned to his true personality - that of the detailed and aggressive policy manager. Articulate and dexterous, he landed several telling blows on Bush. Conversely, his use of the "I" and "you" did not ring true. In the cult of personality, Al Gore is not a winner. If I were to make my decision based solely on the three debates, and presuming I was part of the fiercely contested and largely uninformed mushy middle, my vote would go to Al Gore.

Mind you, that's a titanic IF.

In truth, I knew four years ago that I would never vote for Gore. It took all my reserve, a pack of cigarettes, a bottle of aspirin, and some Pepto Bismo just to make it through the debates without kicking in my television set. And since I'm being perfectly honest, I really hate feeling this way. Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush - agree or disagree with their policies, one could still look upon them and believe that in a time of crisis, they would actually make decisions that were in the best interest of the country.

Several times Gore had the opportunity to do the same thing. After weathering several crises at the White House, he could have done something uniquely courageous and astoundingly moral; he could have turned his back on the corruption of the Clinton White House. He could have publicly said, "No more."

He didn't. Because he didn't, he's complicit in all of it.

There are those who argue for Gore, proclaiming it was his job to be loyal to the President. "See how hard he fought for the President?" they insist. "See how loyal he was to his party? He'll fight that hard for us."

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why Gore will most likely lose on election day to the affable and intuitive Governor Bush, despite Bush's lesser record and verbal shortcomings. Gore's first loyalty should not have been towards the President, or the Administration, or the Democrat party. His first loyalty should have been to us.