I mentioned over at Tapped that Perot and Clinton's 1992 campaigns demonstrated the electorate's appetite for populism. That caused some pushback, but I stand by it. In a way, Clinton's message had two tracks: There was the New Democrat side, which was pushed constantly and effectively to the country's elites, and helped shape coverage of him as a dynamic and fresh-thinking candidate. And then there was his traditional Southern populism, which came out clearly when he spoke before voters. This is from his acceptance speech at the 1992 Convention:
I have news for the forces of greed and the defenders of the status quo: Your time has come and gone. Its time for a change in America.
Tonight 10 million of our fellow Americans are out of work, tens of millions more work harder for lower pay. The incumbent President says unemployment always goes up a little before a recovery begins, but unemployment only has to go up by one more person before a real recovery can begin. And Mr. President, you are that man.
This election is about putting power back in your hands and putting government back on your side. It's about putting people first.[...]
I was raised to believe the American Dream was built on rewarding hard work. But we have seen the folks of Washington turn the American ethic on its head.
For too long those who play by the rules and keep the faith have gotten the shaft, and those who cut corners and cut deals have been rewarded.
People are working harder than ever, spending less time with their children, working nights and weekends at their jobs instead of going to PTA and Little League or Scouts. And their incomes are still going down. Their taxes are still going up. And the costs of health care, housing and education are going through the roof.
Meanwhile, more and more of our best people are falling into poverty even though they work 40 hours a week.
Our people are pleading for change, but government is in the way. It has been hijacked by privileged private interests. It has forgotten who really pays the bills around here. It has taken more of your money and given you less in return. We have got to go beyond the brain-dead politics in Washington and give our people the kind of government they deserve, a government that works for them.[...]
What is George Bush doing about our economic problems?
Now, four years ago he promised 15 million new jobs by this time, and he's over 14 million short. Al Gore and I can do better.
He has raised taxes on the people driving pickup trucks and lowered taxes on the people riding in limousines. We can do better.
He promised to balance the budget, but he hasn't even tried. In fact, the budgets he has submitted to Congress nearly doubled the debt. Even worse, he wasted billions and reduced our investments in education and jobs. We can do better.[...]
He won't take on the big insurance companies and the bureaucracies to control health costs and give us affordable health care for all Americans, but I will.
He also spoke of fiscal responsibility and a more effective government. But much in his presentation could've been inserted directly into Al Gore's "People vs. The Powerful" message. Both elements were in there, and it was their interplay that generated his success. Voters are unimpressed by technocrats and elites are resistant to populists, which forces a tricky straddle for Democratic candidates. Go too far to the one side and you get Lieberman, whose technocratic centrism left the voters completely cold. Go too far to the other and you get media backlash of the type that harmed Gore and Dean. Clinton's genius was in assuaging the concerns of both groups, not in renouncing one for the other.
