Jewish World Review March 20, 2000 / 13 Adar II, 5760
Running mates are parts--usually small parts--of the game of "Getting to 270," the winning electoral vote total. Only in 1960, when Lyndon Johnson held most of the South for John Kennedy, was a running mate crucial. But this election may be akin to the cliffhangers of 1976, 1968 and 1960, so a small advantage can be determinative.
But will the election be close? Conventional wisdom is that the polls, showing a dead heat, are grim news for George W. Bush because his double-digit lead over Gore last year has vanished. Actually, the dead heat should worry Al Gore. He is in his fourth national campaign, he coasted to nomination victory aided by peace, prosperity and a president with high job-approval ratings. Bush, a rookie at the national level, had an awkward shakedown process during the dust-up with McCain. Gore's campaign is at an apogee. Bush's is not. And the race is tied.
When comparing those states that voted in 1992 and 1996 for Bill Clinton and those that voted for President George Bush and Bob Dole, only five states (Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia and Montana, with 57 electoral votes) voted once for each party. The 16 states that voted Republican twice in the 1990s have 135 electoral votes. The 29 states and the District of Columbia that voted Democratic twice have 346.
But that is a snapshot of a dynamic process--the endless evolution of the parties' respective Electoral College bases. Analyst Charlie Cook calculates that 16 states with 135 electoral votes are strongly for Bush, and eight with 74 are leaning toward him. Gore is virtually assured of D.C. and six states with 71 votes and is strong in nine others with 136. So assuming a starting-line Bush advantage of two electoral votes, Cook believes the election's focus will be 11 states with 122 electoral votes: Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania.
Both Gore and Bush can make a traditional "state" choice--someone with special drawing power in one or more of the battleground states.
The most plausible woman available to run for vice president, and the most plausible African American, are both Republicans--Elizabeth Dole and Colin Powell. Republicans nominate first this year, and if Dole is chosen, Gore might be under pressure to choose a woman, perhaps Maryland's Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, who is not a national figure and is from a state Gore will carry anyway. Dole would help Republicans close what is called the "gender gap," but perhaps would not help dramatically because the phrase "gender gap" is misleading.
The Democrats' advantage among women is largely provided by support among African Americans and Hispanics. Bush is winning among white women, and almost certainly among all married women. So the category "gender" is a misleading overlay on a class division. Who else could have a broad impact on a category of voters? Colin Powell, of course.
Powell's experience in defense and foreign policy, and the fact that he is pro-choice and favors affirmative action, would help insulate Bush from certain skepticism. And Powell's appeal to minorities would wonderfully scramble America's political arithmetic. Consider two of the three most populous states.
Based on recent primaries, carrying New York will be difficult for Bush, and California even more so. Together they have 87 electoral votes, about one-third of 270, and no one has ever been elected president while losing both.
If Bush is not competitive in those states, Gore can husband his time and money for elsewhere. If Bush does not compete strongly in California, that might depress Republican turnout enough to cost more Republican seats than the Republicans' current House majority (five). A Bush-Powell ticket puts both states, with their large minority populations, in play.
If Powell would rather be secretary of state than vice president, fine. There is no constitutional impediment to being both. What better apprenticeship could there be for what a vice president is, a
03/16/00: Free to Be Politically Intense