From: Evan Smith
To: Greg Curtis, Pam Colloff, Paul Burka, Skip Hollandsworth, Joe Nick Patoski, and Patricia Kilday HartPosted Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 2:40 AM ET
Greg & Pam:
The reason GWB doesn't translate well to a national audience is that he hasn't graduated from local to national figure—not yet, anyway. Clichéd as it sounds, the country is a big place. It isn't Texas times 50, an exponentially larger land mass with people and politics of the same type and stripe. It's a rag-tag collection of special interests and distinct sensibilities, from moderates to mavericks to Bob Jonesers. What works in the Piney Woods of East Texas may not play well, and does not play well, in the fabled Peoria. Of course, every politician faces the same predicament: How to tailor his message to various constituencies and stay true to himself. I've never seen one get it quite right, but Bush, I must say, seems less adept at it than most. Compassionate conservative? Reformer with results? Mushy moderate? Right-wing-ding? Oustider? Insider? Soft-money-grubber? Campaign financer? Seriously, if I were a would-be voter who'd come across him for the first time this primary season, I wouldn't have any idea which guy I was voting for—and I might not stick around till the fall to find out. Or I'd be wearing a neck brace, courtesy of a case of slogan whiplash.
By the way, Greg, the one thing I know is that he is a Texan. How do I know? Because for the first three months of the year he ran around—in his words—"askin' for the vote." [The vote? Which one?] Nothing like a overtly dropped "g" to remind us where you're from, Guv.
Anyway, in my occasionally humble opinion, who he is doesn't matter, because the election isn't about him. Nor is it about Al Gore. Ideological differences aside, and admittedly there are a few significant ones, this is the year of The Man Who Wasn't There. George W. is running against Bill Clinton: the bathtub ring of scandal, the loose morals, the lies. Gore is running against Newt Gingrich: the extremism, the hard-heartedness, the utter failure to connect with the mood of the country. Come to think of it, this is the election we in the press wanted all along. W. has morphed into Bill Bradley, a Gore basher with bad press relations, and Gore has become John McCain, a smug, self-righteous W.-basher who's suspect on campaign finance and not-so-secretly disliked by members of his own party. Now, if only somebody would wake Ross Perot ...
Yrs.,
Evan
From: Evan Smith
To: Greg Curtis, Pam Colloff, Paul Burka, Skip Hollandsworth, Joe Nick Patoski, and Patricia Kilday HartPosted Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 2:40 AM ET How conservative is George W. Bush? How capable? This week, the staff of
Texas Monthly magazine allows
Slate readers to eavesdrop as they discuss what kind of president Bush would make.The participants in this dialogue include
Texas Monthly Editor Greg Curtis, Executive Editor Paul Burka, Deputy Editor Evan Smith, Senior Editors Skip Hollandsworth and Joe Nick Patoski, Associate Editor Pam Colloff, and Contributing Editor Patricia Kilday Hart.
Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note: Should be read after most recent Dialogue entry of the week.]
I find Ms Hart's (perfectly legitimate) complaint [Wednesday] about the "news columns"--ie, that they're showing an abominable if visceral loathing of Mr Bush--quite charming in its innocence. She seems to have somehow managed to avoid realizing that such an attitude has colored reporting of the Clinton administration for years, of Mr Gore, and indeed of just about any gopher who stuck his head up far enough to be hit with a mallet. The sole recent exception---the esteemed Senator from Arizona---avoided this solely by pandering to the reporters' idiot sense of their own moral and intellectual superiority and even he would have been savaged had he had any chance of victory.
I don't particularly like Mr Bush, but he was elected twice by a real state and he did manage to generate an awful lot of money and support among real people. I'm not awfully fond of Mr Gore, but he is pretty smart and well-educated and any sensible analysis of his fundraising activities needs to balanced against a history in which Republicans outspent Democrats dramatically--it's hard not to see Republican complaints about the Clinton/Gore fundraising as analogous to their complaints about many of the administration's policies: how dare they steal our issues/our techniques?
I think they both deserve to be treated seriously, courteously, and dispassionately. The chance of this happening in the current media atmosphere is about equal to the chance I will wake up tall, blonde, and skinny. Why does not a professional journalist realize this as well?
--Alan Kornheiser
(To reply, click here.)
(3/31)
I'm not surprised Governor Bush could impress the Texas Monthly writers with his policy expertise in a friendly, sympathetic small-group discussion. Most journalists hardly study policy at all; very little expertise is required to impress them. And, there isn't a politician alive who does not look more impressive talking to a sympathetic small group than he does to a large audience.
I didn't see any recognition in their discussion that a Governor's education policy, however successful, might not be terribly relevant to the conduct of foreign relations and management of the Pentagon. Yet the next President is very likely going to spend much more time in each of these areas that in education, all campaign rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
Finally, I had to laugh at the comment that a dropped "g" at the end of the word "asking" identifies Bush as a Texan. Here in Wisconsin we have a very successful Governor who uses only two "g's", the one in "Governor" and his middle initial. I promise you that no one will ever mistake Tommy Thompson for a Texan.
--Joseph E Britt
(To reply, click here.)
Uh, who the hell is Joe Nick? And what is he so cranky about? Am I missing something?
--Paul
(To reply, click here.)
[Yes you were. Joe Nick Patoski replied here, filling in with the missing entry that made everyone else think he was cranky.]
(3/28)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Twitter and Google Couldn't Stop Facebook. Can Anyone?
Nine Theories for Why It's So Hard To Find Chocolate in China
Why Is Buttoning Up Your Shirt All the Way Hollywood's Shorthand for Retarded?
George Clooney Almost Convinced Me To Like Up in the Air. Almost.
Why Is More Than Half of Congress Still Not on Twitter?
The Best Thing About Alice: Kathy Bates as the Queen of Hearts
Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note: Should be read after most recent Dialogue entry of the week.]
I find Ms Hart's (perfectly legitimate) complaint [Wednesday] about the "news columns"--ie, that they're showing an abominable if visceral loathing of Mr Bush--quite charming in its innocence. She seems to have somehow managed to avoid realizing that such an attitude has colored reporting of the Clinton administration for years, of Mr Gore, and indeed of just about any gopher who stuck his head up far enough to be hit with a mallet. The sole recent exception---the esteemed Senator from Arizona---avoided this solely by pandering to the reporters' idiot sense of their own moral and intellectual superiority and even he would have been savaged had he had any chance of victory.
I don't particularly like Mr Bush, but he was elected twice by a real state and he did manage to generate an awful lot of money and support among real people. I'm not awfully fond of Mr Gore, but he is pretty smart and well-educated and any sensible analysis of his fundraising activities needs to balanced against a history in which Republicans outspent Democrats dramatically--it's hard not to see Republican complaints about the Clinton/Gore fundraising as analogous to their complaints about many of the administration's policies: how dare they steal our issues/our techniques?
I think they both deserve to be treated seriously, courteously, and dispassionately. The chance of this happening in the current media atmosphere is about equal to the chance I will wake up tall, blonde, and skinny. Why does not a professional journalist realize this as well?
--Alan Kornheiser
(To reply, click here.)
(3/31)
I'm not surprised Governor Bush could impress the Texas Monthly writers with his policy expertise in a friendly, sympathetic small-group discussion. Most journalists hardly study policy at all; very little expertise is required to impress them. And, there isn't a politician alive who does not look more impressive talking to a sympathetic small group than he does to a large audience.
I didn't see any recognition in their discussion that a Governor's education policy, however successful, might not be terribly relevant to the conduct of foreign relations and management of the Pentagon. Yet the next President is very likely going to spend much more time in each of these areas that in education, all campaign rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
Finally, I had to laugh at the comment that a dropped "g" at the end of the word "asking" identifies Bush as a Texan. Here in Wisconsin we have a very successful Governor who uses only two "g's", the one in "Governor" and his middle initial. I promise you that no one will ever mistake Tommy Thompson for a Texan.
--Joseph E Britt
(To reply, click here.)
Uh, who the hell is Joe Nick? And what is he so cranky about? Am I missing something?
--Paul
(To reply, click here.)
[Yes you were. Joe Nick Patoski replied here, filling in with the missing entry that made everyone else think he was cranky.]
(3/28)