Al, Again
An Editorial
August 5, 2001
From The New York Times
"But Mr. Gore is sorely needed as a voice on behalf of the issues he
championed in 2000. The Democrats have missed having a leader in the
national debate over the Bush policies, particularly in foreign affairs and the
environment."
A l Gore is coming back. We should
have expected him. Bill Clinton came
back last week, at a giddy welcoming party
from the neighbors of his new Harlem office.
The former president was looking so charismatic that it seemed it would be
only a matter of time before Mr. Gore would pop up, too, so we could make
unfavorable comparisons of his people skills.
While Mr. Gore has been vacationing in Spain, growing a beard and working
on a book with his wife, he has also been laying the groundwork for his
re-emergence into public life. Later this month, he'll run some training
sessions in Tennessee for young political activists. He intends to campaign for
Democratic candidates this fall, and to start a new political action committee
to help Congressional candidates in 2002. All this has naturally led to
speculation that Mr. Gore is preparing to run again for president.
A lot has happened since the former vice president withdrew from public
activity after George W. Bush's inauguration. Congress passed the tax-cut
plan that Mr. Gore had denounced during the campaign. Mr. Bush shelved
the international treaty on global warming that Mr. Gore had done so much
to nurture. Last week, the House approved an energy bill that gave
environmentalists the shivers.
Mr. Gore has always been one of his party's smartest and most articulate
leaders — on foreign affairs, communications issues and finance, as well as
the environment. But he kept his reactions to himself, saying he wanted to
refrain from criticizing the new president so America would have time to
recover from the trauma of the Florida recount. Meanwhile, Mr. Bush and
his allies used that time to promote programs that may have an effect on the
country long after Florida has become a historical footnote.
Some Democrats were furious at the silence from the top. Others are still so
angry about the loss of the White House that they don't have room for
additional ire. It is probably fair to say that a sizable chunk of his party would
be perfectly happy if Mr. Gore stayed out of sight indefinitely. He is, after all,
the man who wrested defeat out of the longest economic boom in American
history, the champion debater who managed to go 1 for 3 against George
W. Bush.
Mr. Gore's fans point out that Richard Nixon rebuilt his political career after
narrowly losing a race he should have won against John F. Kennedy. (It is a
measure of Mr. Gore's luck that even his friends wind up comparing him to
people like Mr. Nixon. And that 500,000-vote winning margin in the popular
vote will mean a lifetime of being lumped with fellow Electoral College
victims Samuel Tilden and Grover Cleveland.)
Obviously, Mr. Gore has a right to leap back into the presidential
sweepstakes and take his chances. The number of invitations he gets to
campaign for Democratic candidates in high-profile races over the next year
will be one indication of how good his standing in the party is, and his
success or failure as a drawing card may indicate something about the
public's sentiments. It could be a tough comeback. There are plenty of other
people, including virtually every Democrat in the Senate, who think they
could have run a better race last year and are ready to try to prove it.
But Mr. Gore is sorely needed as a voice on behalf of the issues he
championed in 2000. The Democrats have missed having a leader in the
national debate over the Bush policies, particularly in foreign affairs and the
environment. And if Mr. Gore decides to opt for being a sort of elder
statesman rather than a presidential hopeful, he will never have to hear
another critique of his wardrobe.
nytimes.com |
