“Democrats Nominate Gore!” (A Hypothetical)

Democrats Nominate Gore!

By ROBBY GROSSMAN
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2008

When Al Gore asked America last December to “re-elect” him, voters reacted with surprise and skepticism. He was widely liked, but pundits called to question whether or not such a last-minute campaign was winnable. After Super Tuesday, nothing is clearer: it was. Yesterday, Gore clinched the Democratic Party Presidential nomination.

Perhaps it’s that his rhetoric is more engaging than it was in years past, or perhaps it’s that he’s wittier and more comfortable than he was in years past. Or maybe it’s that he’s more candid than he was in years past. Whatever it is, Democrats like it enough to put it on their ticket.

Although Gore’s candidacy appeared to be a last-minute decision made just in the nick time, the reality is that Gore’s campaign was far more calculating than that. The biggest advantage to getting in a Presidential race early is that there is time to get the candidate’s name out. This was a moot point for Gore, whose most talked about documentary of the decade won two Oscars and who once before received a plurality of the American vote for President.

For Gore, it was most advantageous to wait. By entering the race in December of 2007—10 months after his most formidable opponents Senator Obama and Senator Clinton—Gore gave himself distinct advantages over his competition.

Most notably, he avoided the sick-of-‘em factor that plagued Clinton long before she had even announced her candidacy. Many voters saw Clinton as power-hungry, and such a long and outspoken campaign exaggerated that perception even further. Gore appeared more aware of the negative perception that some voters had of him—that of a sore loser—that emerged after the 2000 general election. It’s not to say that either of these perceptions held any truth, but merely that they existed. By waiting so long to get in the race, Gore minimized the time over which he could be attacked in this manner, reducing the overall effect of such attacks.

In fact, by waiting, Gore ensured that he would face virtually no early criticism within the Democratic Party. Neither political campaigns nor 527 groups had any interest in taking him on before he became a threat. Contrarily, he was praised and openly feared by other candidates. Obama went so far as to call him “extraordinarily formidable,” and candidly admitted that he has “as good a resume as anyone in the field, better than anybody in the field.” The best thing that Gore could do for his image was literally nothing. And while the other big shots duked it out, that’s exactly what he did.

In doing so, he also avoided the criticism of initiating negative campaigning tactics. The great irony of negative campaigning is that although voters respond to it subliminally, they dislike it consciously. Thus, it looks bad when a candidate blatantly attacks his opponents. By staying out of the race, Gore avoided the perception of organizing negativity or personal attacks. This made him particularly likable when he finally entered the race.

As an added bonus to all this, Gore’s late entry guaranteed him significant media coverage in the final days leading up to the Primaries. Voters had heard what each other candidate had to say, and Gore’s late entry intrigued them. Though skeptical, voters were curious and interested in what he had to say. Their willingness to listen—if only for a short period of time—gave Gore the edge he needed to attain a surge of momentous support just as voters drove to the polls.

Now it’s up to the Democrats to carry that momentum into November’s general election.