On the face of it Bayh seems a particularly odd choice for Sweeney, since his reputation is that of the Newest of New Democrats. But the heart of the matter seems to be trade. And on this issue, at least, Bayh may not be quite the New Dem he seems. Though Bayh now says he'll vote for permanent normal trading relations (PNTR), he's been a hesitant supporter at best.
"We'd like to see him get the chair," Sweeney told the Capitol Hill newspaper, "He's someone we can work with."
It's yet another instance in which Gore is cycling back to some of the themes of Clinton circa 1992, even as he puts symbolic distance between himself and the president.
Brief-Washington-Memo-History-Lesson: Greenberg was Clinton's original pollster, but was later dumped in favor or Mark Penn, who emphasized appeals to affluent suburbanites over working and middle class voters. Gore started his campaign with Penn as chief pollster, but fired him in his big campaign shake-out early last fall. Since then Harrison Hickman has managed polling duties for Gore 2000.
Keep Greenberg in mind as Gore lays out his message over the next 11 weeks.
Frank has liberal credentials none can gainsay; he's one of the sharpest people in American politics; and he's struck upon Nader's unique vulnerability: his indifferent and dismissive attitude toward the Democratic social issue agenda. With these advantages in hand, Frank has been able to make the anti-Nader argument with no apologies, and with particular force.
Nowhere did he do so better than in his speech to the Democratic Convention on Thursday night a few short hours before Al Gore spoke. In fact the speech, which has received relatively little attention, was such an eloquent statement of the stake liberals have in this election, that I am going to quote it in full. . .
(Congressman Barney Frank, speaking to the Democratic National Convention, August 17th, 2000)
I'm here to talk about immorality, the immorality of racial bias in the criminal justice system; the immorality of 15-year-old kids being bullied because of their sexual orientation in high school; the immorality of poverty in this very rich nation. The question is, how do we combat immorality? And as a liberal, I am convinced that the way to combat immorality most effectively between now and November is to vote for Al Gore for president, to help us elect a Democratic House and to elect a Democratic Senate. (Cheers, applause.)
Now, let me say something that may deviate a little from the norm in a political convention. Al Gore is not perfect. Neither is Joe Lieberman. Neither is Tom Daschle or Dick Gephardt or me. All we are is the best you're going to get on liberal issues between now and this election. (Cheers, applause.) The choices are Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, with strong records of support on the important issues of gay and lesbian rights and a woman's right to choose and gun control -- (cheers, applause) -- or a George Bush, who has, throughout his career, done everything possible to undo any possible progress on all three, or a Ralph Nader, who throughout his career has steadfastly ignored gay rights and ignored the right of a woman to choose and ignored gun regulation -- (boos) -- and today diminishes and trivializes those central issues to many of us by denying that there are important differences between Al Gore and George Bush. I'm not a big advocate of censorship, unlike a lot of my congressional colleagues. But God forbid that they should be in charge of telling America what to read or watch. But if I could do censorship, I'd make it illegal to use the words "pragmatism" and "idealism" as if they were opposites. The more committed you are to your ideals, the more you are morally obligated to be as effective as possible in carrying them out. (Cheers, applause.) Pragmatism in the service of idealism is our duty. As a committed liberal, as someone who wants to see an end to homophobia and racism and sexism, I believe I have two jobs, as do all of us here. On the one hand, we work every day to try and make this a better country, to improve the context in which we make our choices. No one better exemplifies that than Jesse Jackson. At the same time, on the day when the choice has to be made in a given situation, it is equally morally important to make the best possible choice. That means you are either going to help Al Gore become president and further our progress, or elect George Bush and let him undo it.
To those who say let's wait for perfection, my answer is this: There are gay kids getting beaten up in high school; there are young women in anguish trying to make the decision about whether to carry a pregnancy to term -- a difficult decision -- and they need not be threatened by the law; there is unchecked gun violence. I can't wait for perfection. I feel it is my obligation to do what I can right away to make improvements in those situations, and that means Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, a Democratic House and a Democratic Senate. (Cheers, applause.)
