Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Talkback Live
Would Americans Vote for Al Gore for President in 2004?
Aired August 13, 2001 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AL GORE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it's safe to say that everybody in the room there is going to be involved in the 2002 elections for their respective candidates and parties, me included.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAVIS SMILEY, GUEST HOST: Is Al Gore going for the comeback kid title?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER GORE CAMPAIGN MANAGER: If the election were held tomorrow, the American people are still split right down the middle between Al Gore and George Bush.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMILEY: After six months in relative seclusion, Gore mugs a new look.
He's working with young Democrats, teaching them the ins and outs of party politics, experience being the best teacher.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: I wish last year that Al Gore and I had spoken more about our values and our sharing the values and concerns of the broad mainstream of the American people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMILEY: Will Gore get a second chance?
Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Tavis Smiley, the newest contributor to the CNN family, delighted to be here, and your host today -- for that matter, all week, filling in for the vacationing Bobbie Battista, a well-deserved vacation. She's gone all week, and I'll be here through Friday.
Today, we talk presidential politics. Too soon, you say? Well, you know, for politicians it's never too soon. Former Vice President Al Gore is in Nashville, Tennessee, teaching campaign skills to young Democrats. He's been slapped around of late by some members of his own party for keeping to himself the first six months of the Bush administration. Is Gore the candidate for 2004?
Let's take a quick look at a recent poll among registered voters. Just 42 percent say yes, 51 percent say no. However, among young voters, who lean toward the Democratic Party, 65 percent want him to be their candidate.
All right. Now you know where we're going with this conversation. Let's meet our guests. Congresswoman Maxine Waters is a Democrat from California, my congresswoman, in my district, as a matter of fact. Maynard Jackson is the national Democratic development chair for the DNC and the former mayor of this great city of Atlanta, and Grover Norquist is the president of Americans for Tax Reform.
Thanks, everybody, for coming.
Congresswoman...
REP. MAXINE WATERS (D), CALIFORNIA: Delighted to be here.
SMILEY: Glad you're with us. Let me start with you.
I wanted to say a moment ago -- and let me -- let me put it out there anyway. I was going to say let me dispense with the silly first and move onto the seriousness, talking about the silly being of course the beard.
When you talk Al Gore, as you know, this really isn't silly, because during the campaign, on the advice of one Naomi Campbell (sic), he tried to change his image. He changed the colors of his suits to like -- what was that? -- taupe or brown. He took off the tie. He tried to be less stiff. He tried to change his image. So in the context of that Al Gore, what do you make of this beard situation?
WATERS: Well, I don't make very much of it. As a matter of fact, I don't think Al Gore acts like a man who wants to be president of the United States.
He's been away for almost eight months now. We've had a lot going on in that eight-month period of time. He's supposed to be the titular head of the party, but the DNC has to raise money and to help lead policy.
There's been some terrific battles in the Congress of the United States dealing with this tax cut by the president of the United States, and Social Security, and stem cells. You name it. And where's Al Gore?
He doesn't act like a man who wants to run again for president of the United States. SMILEY: But congresswoman, let's be fair. I'm no Chris Lehane -- you recall Chris Lehane, Al Gore's press secretary during the campaign, but the truth of the matter is, if Al Gore had been out front challenging George W. Bush, talking about these issues, he would have come across as a sore loser and Americans would not have -- would not accept -- if they're going to accept him at all, they certainly would not accept him coming back to the scene if he appeared to be a sore loser, beating up on Bush every day in the media.
WATERS: Well, I don't think so. I think that the titular head of the party must be the spokesperson. And it's not a matter of beating up, but it is a matter of interpreting and analyzing and having to provide leadership for the party. He hasn't done it. And I don't think he wants to be president of the United States.
I don't know. You know, this debate is going on. He didn't step back into it as if he wanted to be. I think the beard is a joke. I mean, I don't know what that's all about.
GROVER NORQUIST, PRESIDENT, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM: Now wait a minute here?
SMILEY: Go ahead, Grover.
NORQUIST: Wait a minute. I just want to say a kind word for that beard. I think it makes him look manly and virile and bright and cheerful.
(APPLAUSE)
SMILEY: So Grover -- Grover, since you've jumped in...
MAYNARD JACKSON, DEVELOPMENT CHAIRMAN, DNC: Well, I'm assuming that Grover's recommending that George Bush grow a beard now.
SMILEY: Grover, since you jumped in, let me come to you, Grover Norquist. What do you, in all seriousness, make of the beard? Is it much ado about nothing, or do the whiskers actually signify something coming from Al Gore down the pipe?
NORQUIST: I'm not sure it means anything other than he took some time off. And I agree with your premise that the wise move for him, if he was looking to run again in four years, was to step out of the limelight, because it would have looked like he was whining if he had engaged immediately.
Former presidents step aside when somebody follows them -- George Bush did when Clinton came in -- and go for, you know, a year or so without sort of criticizing the new occupant of the White House. So I think it was wise of him to step back. If he wants to re-engage, it would be interesting to see that 2004 presidential race. But the beard I think is -- it just reminds us he's been gone long enough to grow a beard.
SMILEY: All right. Maynard Jackson, last word on the beard, and then we'll move from the silly, as I said, to the more serious stuff. JACKSON: Well, I think the beard does not do anything at all to detract from Gore's preoccupation, my preoccupation, of the Democratic Party's preoccupation with a president that proves the Republican Party is not for the people and the Democratic Party is.
The incursion on Social Security...
(APPLAUSE)
... the threat that is being posed now by the Bush administration on Medicare trust fund, on the fact that they're taking care of big oil, big gas and big energy -- $34 billion coming out of the Senate, 20 billion more than Bush even asked for. They're prepared to, you know, stop the serious testing of arsenic and all of that, and to intrude on the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve and drilling and so forth.
All of these things, in my opinion, are so profoundly important that with beard or without beard Gore is deeply concerned, and so are all Democrats in this country.
The Democrats are for the people and the Republicans are not.
SMILEY: Let me -- let me jump in, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Jackson. You, in your very articulate manner, of course, as you always are, kind of detail for us a litany of what the Democratic Party posture is at this moment. Let me quote, though, from Paul Gigot, of course, who writes for "The Wall Street Journal," Maxine Waters, and congresswoman, get your response to this.
I quote from Paul Gigot in "The Wall Street Journal." "Bill Clinton left the U.S. presidency in the post-pardon disgrace but it returning from exile to a hero's welcome from Democrats. Al Gore left the public stage with dignity, but his return is being greeted with sneers, sniping and even taunts about his vacation beard. The contrast," writes Gigot, "explains a lot about the current psychology of the Democratic Party. Mr. Gore deserves better. Mr. Clinton deserves worse. The Democrats" -- let me rephrase that -- "That the Democrats see things in reverse is a signal they still haven't figured out why they lost in 2000."
What do you make of that?
WATERS: Oh, that's nothing but hogwash. That kind of psychology is just a false psychology that's attempting to describe and define Democrats in a way that will get readers, you know, speculating about what he's talking about. The fact of the matter is the American people like to be engaged. They want their leaders talking to them. They want their leaders working with them. They want to see their leaders.
That's why I said to you he did not act as if he wanted to be president of the United States. You don't stay away that long. Of course, he deserved to rest. Of course, he deserves to grow a beard, even if he wants to do it. But the fact of the matter is we've had some important issues being debated over the last eight months. And I think that Maynard Jackson just talked about them in the way that a leader should talk about them.
As a matter of fact, Maynard Jackson is my candidate for president of the United States, and that's what the American people would like to -- would like to hear. Leaders talking about...
JACKSON: Maxine, the last...
WATERS: ... the issues.
JACKSON: The last time you did that you got me into a bunch of trouble.
WATERS: That's OK.
JACKSON: I ended up running for chairman...
WATERS: This is a tough business.
WATERS: ... of the DNC.
SMILEY: Before...
JACKSON: Terry McAuliffe is doing a fantastic job, by the way...
WATERS: Doing a great job.
JACKSON: ... and I'm glad he won.
WATERS: Doing a great job.
JACKSON: That's a real tough job.
WATERS: Doing a great job.
SMILEY: Before we move to talk about -- before we move to talk about Maynard Jackson in '04, let me jump in and get Elizabeth on the phone from California. Elizabeth, what do you have to say?
ELIZABETH: Hi. I'm here right in between -- I'm in Gary Condit's district, and I'm right down the street from Cary Stayner, really a unique position. I am a Gore supporter. I think he was wise to stay out. Let Bush do his thing.
Al Gore's chance will come up next time. I think it was way too an election for him to jump right back in and -- and do anything at this point. I think it's Bush's game right now.
SMILEY: Would you vote for Gore in '04 if he ran again?
ELIZABETH: Oh, yeah.
SMILEY: OK, Chris, you've got a comment in the audience.
CHRIS: Salvatore, so ahead.
SALVATORE: Yeah, I think he looks great as far being a college professor, but if he's going to survive in mainstream politics, he's got to lose the beard. He's got to look clean-cut and more professional.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And see, I believe that the beard does nothing for him but makes him look more distinguished and it gives him an intellectual look. I believe he looks good with it.
SMILEY: You know, the last time we had a president, Grover, anyone -- and Grover Cleveland, by my recollection -- is the only person ever to have been a party's nominee to have lost, come back four years later, and win. And Grover Cleveland had the distinction of having been a former president.
With that kind of statistic, is it even possible, is it even realistic to think that Al Gore, even if he wanted to, beard or no beard, could make a serious run and win in '04?
NORQUIST: Oh, if Al Gore decided to run, he would be the presumptive favorite for the Democrats. Richard Nixon ran and lost in 1960, and then ran again in '68 and won. Ronald Reagan ran in '68 and in '76, lost the primary fight closely in '76, and then won in '80. Mondale lost the vice presidency in '80 and then was the nominee in '84.
So because the country's so large and you need to spend time introducing yourself to the country, there's no shame in running once and losing. A lot of people run -- you wonder sometimes: Why is he running for president? He doesn't have a chance this time.
Well, you know, you run once, you learn a lot about the country, the country begins to learn about you, and it gets your name up so that you could run again. I think that Gore is the obvious choice if the Democrats, if he wants it...
SMILEY: That's what -- that's what Grover Norquist says. More importantly, what do you say? Should Al Gore run again in 2004? Take the TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote at cnn.com/talkback, at AOL keyword CNN.
Up next, we'll tell you who the Democrats say they like in '04. Take a look at that in just a moment. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Let's take a look at who Democrats like so far in 2004, according to a CNN-"USA Today"-Gallup poll: 34 percent say Al Gore; 21 percent, Hillary Rodham Clinton; and 12 percent Bill Bradley.
Maxine Waters, after all is said and done, Al Gore is still the front-runner.
WATERS: Well, I want to tell you we've got a lot of very, very capable people who are talking about running for president, or at least people are speculating about them. You've got Daschle, you've got Gephardt. You've got Edwards, you've got Biden, you've got Kerry. We have a wealth of candidates that the American people may not know about at this time. So I think that poll is reflective of the limited information that's put before the voters about who, you know, they know or understand may be a candidate at this time.
SMILEY: Congresswoman, let me...
WATERS: Yes.
SMILEY: You know I love you dearly.
WATERS: Yes.
SMILEY: Let me challenge you -- let me challenge you respectfully.
WATERS: Yes.
SMILEY: You give a nice list of people, and I think respectfully most Americans do know most of the names on that list, we just don't like them. The truth of the matter is that none of the persons you've just listed have any more charisma than Al Gore does.
Is it not true that the Democratic Party has a co-dependent relationship with Bill Clinton, and none of those guys is even half as charismatic as Clinton: Daschle, Gephardt? If they were, why didn't they run last time?
WATERS: Well, I think that you are going to see a lot of candidates from the Democratic Party come forward and start to test the waters. I understand the poll that you just showed. But of course, people know Al Gore. He just ran for president. But of course, their getting known is a function of campaigning. And I think you're going to see a lot of contests out there for the primary.
SMILEY: Grover, if Al Gore were to come back in 2004 and run again, tell me what you think he's going to bring to the table. What might -- I mean, we're speculating here obviously. What might he bring in '04 that he didn't bring in 2000 and is the American public going to buy into his coming back into the ring again after being out for four years?
NORQUIST: Well, a couple of things. First of all, he ran in 2000 as the candidate of gun control, against the Second Amendment, against hunters, against sportsmen. As Bill Clinton pointed out, that probably cost him three or four states, including Tennessee.
The front page of "USA Today" has the Democratic Party rethinking their hostility toward the half of Americans who are gun owners, and more than anyone else, Al Gore understands that being against the Second Amendment, being against hunters and gun owners and sportsmen is not a very smart position to be in. It was one he was pushed into by the politics of the left wing of the Democratic Party and Bill Bradley running as an anti-gun candidate in the primary.
I think Al Gore has learned that that's not the direction that wins for the Democrats. It's why they don't have the House. It's why they don't have the presidency.
JACKSON: Tavis...
SMILEY: Maynard Jackson...
JACKSON: Tavis, let me...
SMILEY: Yes, go ahead. Go ahead, sir.
JACKSON: Yeah. Let me respond. First of all, congratulations to CNN for having you on.
SMILEY: Thank you. I appreciate it.
JACKSON: Tavis Smiley is a...
(APPLAUSE)
Tavis, you do a great job for this country and we're so proud of you. So congratulations to you and to CNN.
SMILEY: That's kind of you. Thank you.
JACKSON: Now, what my colleague here, who is wearing a beard, and therefore, I presume, will not be wearing running for president -- I'm talking about brother Grover Norquist -- has said about Gore or any Democrat being against hunters and so forth is not true.
To be for handgun control -- handgun, not hunting weapons -- is one thing. We're against the people who go into schools and kill schoolchildren. We're against criminals having guns on the street. We're the most heavily armed nation in the free world, and something's got to be controlled there.
That's all that we and the majority of Americans are saying.
SMILEY: Well, Mr. Jackson, it is...
JACKSON: Now, on the other hand, let me just say that...
SMILEY: OK.
JACKSON: ... I think that Mr. Gore, whether he keeps a beard or not, that being totally immaterial to who he is and what he stands for, is going to be one of several candidates. I don't know who others may be. But this is a very productive party. And it would not be at all unusual to see several candidates running. And that is if Mr. Gore runs again. He has not even said what he's going to do. My guess is that he will be running again.
But the bottom line is on Clinton that Clinton created 22 million jobs, and since January, Bush has been responsible for losing a million.
SMILEY: Let me jump in right...
JACKSON: That's the comparative record.
SMILEY: Let me jump in right quick, though. You -- you talk about Clinton and you talk about Gore and you talk about the record. And there are a lot of liberals in the Democratic Party, Mr. Jackson, who are happy, very happy indeed -- your friend Maxine Waters very happy -- that you got the leadership position in the DNC that you now have. But it seems to me that one can argue that -- that liberals in the Democratic Party ought to be more scared. If Clinton didn't move Democrats to the middle enough, if he didn't move us to the right enough, there are a lot of folks who are scared that this next election is going to push us more to the right, because if Gore gets into the race, he knows, as Grover points out, that there are some issues that he has to moderate on.
And if Daschle and if Gephardt and if John Edwards and John Kerry, if they get in the race, they see what happened to Gore four years ago, they're going to want to moderate and move more toward the middle. What happens to good liberals who were happy to see you run?
WATERS: No. Absolutely -- no. No, no, no, Tavis.
SMILEY: Come on. Bring it on, bring it on.
WATERS: No, Tavis.
SMILEY: OK.
WATERS: As a matter of fact, now remember Gore won the popular vote...
SMILEY: He did.
WATERS: ... by 500,000 votes. Remember.
And so when we start to frame his having lost because of his position on issues, I think that's taking it a bit far. What I would like to see is the politics of honesty and integrity. I want to see -- I want to see our candidates talking about the issues and not trying to fashion some kind of position based on putting their fingers in the air and taking some polls.
I don't like this business about, should we be faith-based or shouldn't we be? Should we be a little bit for gun owners or a lot for gun owners? I want to hear from candidates. I want to know where they stand philosophically. What do they care about? And what are they willing to take the leadership on?
So I am not going to sit in my party and allow my party to move to the right because they think somehow that's where the voters are, and they can get more attention no matter where they go on the issues.
We're not going to stand for that. I know some of us are looked at as those liberals to the left. But as a matter of fact, I don't really think that all of these name tags really fit. We need to hear from people. We need to know who they are and what they care about and what they're willing to lead on. And that's what I'm looking for in a candidate, and I think that's what a lot of people in the Democratic Party are looking for.
SMILEY: I've got to take a break. When we come back...
JACKSON: And Tavis, this is...
SMILEY: Yes. Stand by. We'll take a break, we'll come right back. Grover Norquist, Maxine Waters, Maynard Jackson, TALKBACK LIVE continues in just a moment. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Before we jump back into our conversation, let me read a couple of e-mails that we've received. The first one from Lisa in Beloit, Wisconsin, I believe.
"What do we want in our candidates? Experience, knowledge and common sense, of course, and that's what Al Gore has. The reason he tried to be every thing to everyone is because he wanted the job so bad. He needs to listen to his heart more and not the media."
Thank you, Lisa.
And from Fauzi, I believe, in Manhattan Beach, California: "I am a Democrat, and I do not want Gore anywhere near the party, simply because George Bush did not win the election as much as Al Gore lost it. He refused to engage his opponent in any serious debate and backed down from every potential confrontation."
Let me jump from Fauzi's e-mail to you, Grover, and ask you in the context of Fauzi's e-mail whether or not it is true, or whether you believe, that Al Gore is going to have to repair his image. We all remember the story, the fallout after the election between Clinton and Gore.
There are some who suggest that if Gore wants to come back and run again, he's going to have to repair that relationship with Clinton. One, what do you make of that? Should he repair that relationship? Does it need to be repaired? And if it is repaired, does he do what he did a year or two ago and not use Clinton until the last minute, or is it best to just stay away from this guy altogether?
NORQUIST: Well, it's interesting, because of course the fellow who ran for president, Al Gore, doesn't own the machinery of the Democratic Party. The previous president, Bill Clinton, owns the machinery of the Democratic Party and has that control through placing his own guys in the DNC and other places. That's awfully unusual, and I don't know that it has a -- I don't know that you can look through history and see something similar to guide your thinking through it.
Al Gore's challenge is that he ran with the wind at his back. You had peace, you had prosperity, you were running against George W. Bush, who wasn't known by the whole country, and could be caricatured as weak or silly and not terribly articulate. Now, that he's been, you know, president for six months, and the Europeans, who started off picking on him, have basically fallen into line on a lot of these issues, and four years from now, you won't be able to run against Bush's inexperience, and the Democratic running won't have the sort of peace and prosperity and Clinton's fund raising as president.
Headlines today in "The Washington Post," the Republican Party way outpacing the Democrats on fund raising because they have the president, the Democrats don't.
So Al Gore ran with the wind at his back. All of those people who did those little computer calculations tell you Al Gore should have won with 60 points. He didn't. So there was something there that was dragging him down from where you would have historically thought he'd be.
SMILEY: Maynard Jackson, I want to get something to you -- got something for you specifically in a moment. But first, let me squeeze in Joan, I believe, in Ohio.
Joan, you're on the air and I'm glad you called.
JOAN: Hi, Tavis.
SMILEY: Hello.
JOAN: It's good to see you back on TV.
SMILEY: Thank you. I appreciate it.
JOAN: Yes, I would vote for Al Gore, because he really didn't lose anyway, and I'm just looking or forward to the next four years when people see the deficits and the problems with the economy, everything going downhill. And all these people talking about their tax cuts and all the relief it's giving, when they come to pay their taxes come 2002 and see that all they got was a tax credit against their taxes in 2002, I have a lot of Republican friends that are up in the air about it.
But anyway, I would vote for Al Gore, and I think the beard, hey, the guy was on vacation. Give him a break.
SMILEY: All right.
JOAN: You know, you're a man. Do you like to shave every day if you're on vacation?
SMILEY: I just shaved this morning to come on television, so I know -- I know the feeling.
JOAN: Well, I'm glad that you're on CNN.
SMILEY: Thank you very much. I'm glad CNN has me on.
Maynard Jackson, let me ask you whether or not -- and this may be a tough question of one who speaks for the Democratic Party, but you're smooth, you can handle this. Does the Democratic Party need new blood?
Is this conversation about Al Gore a ridiculous conversation in the first place? JACKSON: No. The answer is the Democratic Party produces new blood every day. It's that kind of an open party, far more so than the Republican Party is.
The reality is the talk about is A the leader or B the leader does a disservice to the openness of the Democratic Party. Yes, we our titular heads and we appreciate them. But the reality is that we produce leadership every day. And the bottom line, by the way, on this situation about what's going to happen in '04 is going to depend on the record.
Bush is going to have on his record, and that record is going to include opposition to a patients' bill of rights, the Senate's version, by the way, which is tracked by the Texas patients' bill of rights, one of the better, along with Georgia, patients' bill of rights in this country. And yet, the president opposes that. What they're trying to do is cut down on the freedom of access that a majority of Americans would have.
And so the record on which Bush is going to have to run is not going to be great.
But let me just say -- let me just say that there is a critical issue here, and that is a question of voting rights and protecting voting rights. And the Voting Rights Institute of the Democratic National Committee has been at work. It's one of the things that I do and I chair, along with the chairman, of course, of the DNC, who's chairman of everything. And that Voting Rights Institute is now drafting the voting rights action plan. But the Dodd-Conyers bill in the House and the Senate ought to establish, and is going to establish, if it is passed, minimum federal standards for the states. You can do anything you want to be above that, but at least those standards.
SMILEY: I hear you. Got to jump in right quick. Maxine Waters, last word. You've got about 45 seconds.
WATERS: Well, Maynard -- Maynard just brought up voter reform, election reform, and that's extremely important to this party. We're not trying to relive Florida, but we're trying to make sure that disenfranchisement does not exist.
Every American, no matter whether they're Republican, Democratic, want to make sure their vote counted. That's what we've been working on. We want Mr. Gore to jump in there and work with us on that.
JACKSON: Exactly. And more than 30 states, Tavis, not just Florida.
SMILEY: All right. Let me...
WATERS: That's right.
SMILEY: Let me say thank you to my guests for the first half- hour. Congresswoman Maxine Waters, I thank you. Maynard Jackson, former mayor of this great city, I thank you, Mr. Jackson. JACKSON: Thank you. My pleasure.
SMILEY: And Grover Norquist, thank you for coming on as well.
Will there be another match between Gore and Bush in 2004? What are the odds? We'll find out as TALKBACK LIVE continues. Stay right where you are.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Love that e-mail. I'm Tavis Smiley in for the vacationing Bobbie Battista.
How close would the vote be if the Bush-Gore battle were being played out today? Let's call up that CNN-"USA Today"-Gallup poll once again. And we see that it really isn't much different than it was last fall. Is that good news or bad news? I don't know. Almost too close to call. Imagine that.
Talking now with Cynthia Tucker, editorial page editor of "The Atlanta Journal-Constitution" and Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway, and Julian Epstein, former chief Democratic counsel for the House Judiciary Committee. He's starting his own consulting firm, that is, next month called Law and Media Strategies. Congratulations and good luck, Julian.
JULIAN EPSTEIN (D), FORMER CHIEF COUNSEL, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Thank you, Tavis.
SMILEY: Let me start (UNINTELLIGIBLE) on the screen there.
EPSTEIN: OK.
SMILEY: Could there be a Gore-Bush rematch in '04? What do you make of it?
EPSTEIN: Oh, I think it's probably more likely than not. And look, I mean, it's unusual for us, of course, to see Al Gore with the beard. People think of that as an uncharacteristic visage for him. And why is that? I think many people think of the guy as being a very hardworking, very engaged guy, a guy who regardless of whether or not you voted for him, people believe he understands the issues that affect average, every-day Americans and that he's very engaged.
When we get a story, however, about George Bush taking 42 percent of his days since his inauguration in downtime or en route to a vacation place, none of us are that surprised. And I think that reinforces the weakness that George Bush has, which is that he's not very engaged, that he doesn't really care about the every-day concerns of people.
But the extraordinary thing is when you see Al Gore out of the picture now for seven months, George Bush being front and center as president, and the two of them tied at that point, that has got to reinforce the fact that there are ongoing, chronic, very serious ambivalences about this presidency and how engaged he is in the nation's business.
SMILEY: Kellyanne, that might be the question that Julian just raises: What do you make of this poll that, as Julian said, after seven months of being out of the limelight CNN-"USA Today" does a poll, Gore and Bush still a dead heat? And this guy's had the power of the bully pulpit now for seven months.
KELLYANNE CONWAY, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: The poll you quote was taken of adults across the country, and of course, you know, on election day it's not adults. It's actually likely and actual voters. So if a poll of adults does not screen for voter registration, let alone propensity or likelihood to vote, there's a bit of trouble there, only because we know, unfortunately, Tavis, only 51 percent of us voted in that election last year. So it does show that Gore has some relative strength among nonvoters, people who did not support him last time. Perhaps if he can get them to the polls in the future, then those poll results among adults can meet up at the ballot box.
But Al Gore's biggest struggle in the future is not going to be a guy by the name of George W. Bush. It's going to be Bill Clinton.
The question that we posed last week in last week's "Hotline" "Bull's Eye Poll," a bipartisan poll my firm does with a Democratic firm, asked the question quite squarely: Who should be the leader of the Democratic Party? Bill Clinton or Al Gore? And interestingly, Gore won a plurality of the vote, 41 percent, Clinton at 33. An eye- popping 23 percent volunteered neither one, neither of the above.
But among Democrats, among African-Americans and among Hispanics, three very key groups to a Democratic nominee running for president, Bill Clinton wiped the floor clean with Al Gore in that poll. The African-Americans, Hispanics and the self-identified Democrats would prefer Clinton to be the leader over Gore.
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) different relationship that George W. Bush and Al Gore have with the past two presidents. George W. Bush is quite close to President George Herbert Walker Bush. He's an adviser, he's a morale booster. And Al Gore and Bill Clinton, from what we can tell, aren't on speaking terms.
SMILEY: Cynthia, if Kellyanne's numbers are right that's scary. What I thought I just heard her say was that amongst the most loyal constituencies in the Democratic Party they still prefer Bill Clinton over Al Gore. It's not going to happen. And if Gore in the poll we cited earlier is still the front-runner for the Democratic nomination (UNINTELLIGIBLE), that means, if you combine those two polls, that there is a suggestion that there is no life for some us beyond Bill Clinton. What do you make of that?
CYNTHIA TUCKER, "ATLANTA CONSTITUTION": Well, you know, it's hard for us, Tavis, I think, to move beyond our absolute fascination with Bill Clinton. And that probably applies to us in the news media even more than to the general voting public. After all, Bill Clinton is a larger-than-life personality, with outsized charm but also outsized personality flaws, which are very -- which are very -- which are a lot of fun to cover. Let's be frank. But let me restate what Kellyanne said. She said that Al Gore's biggest problem would be a guy named Bill Clinton. Al Gore's biggest problem, were he to run again, would be the same problem Al Gore had last time, which was...
SMILEY: Let me guess. Al Gore.
TUCKER: There you go. Al Gore's biggest problem is Al Gore. He was absolutely persuaded the last time around that Bill Clinton's moral dalliances, which I make absolutely no excuse for -- Bill Clinton's personal behavior was disgraceful -- but Monica Lewinsky didn't lose the Democratic presidential election in the year 2000. Al Gore did that all by himself.
And so the problem that Al Gore will have to confront is that by comparison to Bill Clinton, he remains boring. He doesn't seem very sure of himself.
SMILEY: That's true of any potential Democratic nominee. There's my point. Is there life after Clinton? If Clinton is going to be the standard-bearer, flaws and all, if he's going to be the standard-bearer, Julian, what do we do? What happens after Bill Clinton? We never have a Democrat run for the White House again because he can't measure up to the charisma of one William Jefferson Clinton.
EPSTEIN: Well, I don't think any politician in America can measure up to the charisma of William Jefferson Clinton. And I think that any Democrat, whether it's Al Gore, whether it's Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, on down the line, is going to figure out how to not only peacefully coexist with President Clinton but actually utilize him.
There is no more effective spokesman in this country for the Democratic Party than Bill Clinton, notwithstanding the fact that Kellyanne has a bee in her bonnet continually about Mr. Clinton.
But you know, I agree -- I agree with the point that was just made, which I think that Al Gore's biggest problem was that he came across as being a little bit awkward on television. He didn't project, he didn't make the case as well as he needed to. But look...
SMILEY: Julian, you are being kind when you say a little bit awkward. You're being very kind to him.
EPSTEIN: Well, but he's a very, very smart guy. People perceive -- now, look, I mean, the perception -- I think the ambivalence about President Bush right now is here's a guy who always sides with the corporate special interests, who doesn't particularly care about average everyday Americans, doesn't care about the American people, is not particularly...
CONWAY: That's not true.
EPSTEIN: ... comfortable, even, with the position of presidency.
Now not withstanding the fact that I think Gore may have been a little bit awkward on television, he's perceived quite differently. He's perceived as a very serious guy. He's got an enormous base out there, a base of voters who are not only in this camp, but angry because they feel that the election was stolen last December.
SMILEY: Let me squeeze in Pat in Florida. Pat's been holding.
Pat, you're on the air and I'm glad you called.
PAT: Thanks. I'm a Republican and I say bring him on, because...
CONWAY: Right.
PAT: ... I want to tell you, George Bush is much more of a regular person than Little Lord Fauntleroy raised in a hotel in Washington could ever be. Gore is his own worst enemy.
EPSTEIN: If he's a regular person -- I mean, if he's a regular person, why is it that he sides with the HMO during the HMO debate, why is it that he sides with the polluters when it comes to energy?
CONWAY: Well, Julian...
EPSTEIN: Why is it that he continually sides with the corporate special interests? That is not a regular person in my book.
(APPLAUSE)
SMILEY: Kellyanne, go ahead.
CONWAY: You think Democrats don't want Al Gore don't want Al Gore to run, you should see how many Republicans would like for him to run, because not only did he come across as awkward, as Julian candidly points out, but he also came off as officious, as "I know more than you; I'm smarter than thou." And that's big problem in this country, particularly for the Democratic Party, Tavis, where you can't run into the Democratic-controlled Senate and not bump into about 10 multi-multi-millionaires. Look at who represents the Democratic Party now; all these new millionaire-minted senators. This is not the party of bread and butter anymore, it's the party of brie and baguette. Beginning with Al Gore.
If he wants to run again in 2004, I think he has decided advantages in terms of infrastructure and state party chairmen and other people who'll endorse him, and he has a fund-raising base. However, Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee, Bill Clinton's home state of Arkansas, not because he looked awkward on TV, but because some of his positions on issues were out of step -- you have tons of gun-owners in those states: They rejected Al Gore.
SMILEY: I got to break. Cynthia, when we come back, I want to ask you whether or not Bush might make it easy for Gore to run in '04. I'll tell you what I mean after the break.
Don't forget, lots of ways for you to participate in our show: e-mail, chat room, AOL instant messenger. Don't just sit there, get involved in our conversation. TALKBACK LIVE is back in a moment.
(APPLAUSE)
This fall, Al Gore will teach family-centered community building at Middle Tennessee State and at Fisk University. He will also continue as a research professor at Columbia and UCLA.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.
Cynthia, before the break I made the comment that I want to come back to this issue of whether or not George W. Bush might make it easier for Gore to not just get in the race in '04 but actually win the race in '04 if he comes back. And the argument would go something like this.
If Julian is right, and he is, about Gore -- I mean Bush spending so much of his time on vacation on his way to a vacation spot, a lot of folks think this guy is in over his head. Does anybody in the audience really believe...
(APPLAUSE)
Excuse my Ebonics: I'm not trying to play a hit on the president, but does anybody really believe that Bush could have done a press conference -- a press conference on stem cell research? That had to be a rare announcement.
CONWAY: Yes.
SMILEY: Could he really have handled that?
The point I'm trying to make here is, in four years, do you think Bush will have so damaged himself by appearing in over his head that it makes it easier for us to say, "We made a mistake; we should have voted for the smarter guy, the officious guy."
EPSTEIN: We already have.
TUCKER: Let me see if I can squeeze in between what I think Kellyanne would say and what I think Julian would say on this one. There is no doubt that our current president require as lot more handling than the former president.
(LAUGHTER)
He needs a lot of notes, he needs a lot of tutorials.
But let me also say that I believe that George W. Bush has benefited, in a perverse sort of way, from the lowered expectations. You know, what happens in politics, Tavis, a lot is the expectations game. And there was so much talk that George W. Bush would be in so far over his head, that every time I think he stands up and reads a speech written for him without stumbling over every other sentence, I think Americans think, "Well, he's not nearly as dumb as we thought." CONWAY: That's a bit much.
TUCKER: So, I really do think that President Bush has benefited from lowered expectations and has not done as poorly as many people predicted.
CONWAY: President Bush has benefited from making good on his promise to cut taxes; he did that. He's made good on his promise to expand medical savings accounts and tackle Social Security reform, He's made good on his promise to try to engineer trade promotion authority. He, on vacation, made the most important decision affecting life and death between -- with stem cell research that's been done in a generation.
EPSTEIN: You can go through the litany all you want, Kellyanne...
CONWAY: I mean, all of this -- attacking a president of the United States' intelligence, I think we have Bill Clinton to blame for that, Julian, that he has so changed the job description of president that we can be so overtly disrespectful of whoever holds the office.
SMILEY: Julian, real quick.
EPSTEIN: Sure, the job description that the president has was to give us the best economic record: 20 million jobs. Under George Bush, as Maynard Jackson pointed out, we've now lost a million jobs.
CONWAY: Oh, come on.
EPSTEIN: He gives us the most extraordinary record in terms of the reduction of the crime rate, reduction of the welfare rate...
CONWAY: Right, he did all that.
EPSTEIN: ... reduction of -- increase of benefit and improvement in nearly every economic and social indicator during the Clinton years; under the Bush years almost every single one of them are going down.
Now look, I think Kellyanne plays this interesting game. It's kind of damning someone with faint praise when it comes to Al Gore. Republicans hope that Al Gore will run again because they think he's an easy win. I think that's a bunch of hogwash. For a guy to be sitting on the sidelines for seven months and to be tied with an incumbent president is unprecedented in this country. And...
SMILEY: To the audience we go.
EPSTEIN: And I agree -- if I can just finish a quick point.
SMILEY: Go ahead.
EPSTEIN: I agree with Cynthia and I agree with Kellyanne that George Bush has Al Gore when it comes to the smiles and to the levity, but I think that people are going to want to go for substance over smiles four years from now. And I think when it comes to issues of HMO reform, prescription drugs, reducing class sizes, balancing the budget, protecting the environment, on every single one of those issues, on the substance of them -- I'm not talking about the smiley faces; the substance -- Al Gore wins over George Bush hand over foot every time, seven days as week.
SMILEY: Hey, Julian, watch the attacks on Smileys, all right? Ease up on that.
To the audience we go.
RON: Well, we talked about before about this is really early to be talking about the president and who's going to running. My thought is that the famous questions there were before are going to be asked after three years of Bush: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" and, "It's the economy stupid."
EPSTEIN: Exactly.
RON: That's the answer.
SMILEY: Louisiana you're on the phone. Lucia, go ahead.
LUCIA: Hi, Tavis. I absolutely love you on BET, and you're doing an excellent job here today.
SMILEY: That's kind of you.
LUCIA: I am a Democrat that voted for Gore and I would again in a heartbeat, but I feel the concern should be focused on the disenfranchised voters. We're talking about who's running and many people are just plain and simple not going to vote next year due to the fact that our vote didn't count this year. What do we do about that?
EPSTEIN: Well, you know, there's a bill out there -- there's a bill that has been sponsored by Congressman Conyers and Senator Dodd that creates basic federal minimal standards to ensure that every state has the machinery so that we don't get undervotes and overvotes, so that people can go through provisional voting; a whole host of things. The president, the White House has not indicated that it would support it. The Democrats support it hook, line and sinker. It's an easy way we can solve the problem. And again, the fact that the Bush administration doesn't seem to want to embrace that legislation raises question as to how much it really wants to fix the problem.
SMILEY: Julian, gotta break.
When we come back in this last segment, I want to come right back to this point and find out if the machines are working properly, and if the ballots are up to par, what will happen if there is a Gore-Bush rematch. We're back in just a moment. Stay with TALKBACK LIVE.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.
Two more e-mail right quick. Steve in Johnston, Rhode Island: "I voted for Gore last November, and I'd vote for him again."
And Allan in Princeton, New Jersey: "I voted for Gore once. I will not vote for him again. Give me Clinton back. Does that take a revolution? If so, how do we do it?"
Good segue to this question. I got 2 1/2 minutes left, and I want to cover two questions with all three guests.
Cynthia first: What is the role Clinton's going to play in '04, since, excuse me, he ain't going nowhere? And number two: What about the rematch?
TUCKER: It's hard to push Bill off the stage, even if the news media wanted to. I think that Bill Clinton will still be a very good fund-raiser for the Democratic Party in 2004, and I think that he will be called out to campaign in certain areas where he's popular.
But, you know, it's not a foregone conclusion that Al Gore will be the Democratic nominee. He's not going to be welcomed back as the conquering hero, and there a number of folk, familiar names and unfamiliar ones, lining up to challenge him for the Democratic nomination.
SMILEY: Right quick, Julian, what about Clinton in '04? What role does he play, and what about the rematch, right quick?
EPSTEIN: I agree with everything Cynthia just said. Clinton plays a major role as a major party spokesman. Nobody can do it better.
But she's also right about Gore: There are other names, Daschle Gephardt, Feingold, a lot of names, a lot of good candidates out there. There's an embarrassment of riches for Democrats who believe that they can take this president out because they're right on the issues.
SMILEY: Kellyanne, what do we do with Clinton in '04 and what do you make of a rematch?
CONWAY: Sure, the thing for Gore is is he still running for president or will he run for president again? I think Al Gore's fortunes rest on how he behaves in '02 and '03. Does he help to try to get other Democrats elected? Does he go and get a day job like the rest of us in this country? Or is he still running for president.
The greatest average that George W. Bush will have in 2004 is the advantage Clinton had in '96, which is he will be an incumbent. There is no substitute for the power of incumbency. We Americans love to pretend we love new blood and choice and change and options and revolution, yet we always stick with what we know, we don't rock the boat. SMILEY: Kellyanne Conway...
EPSTEIN: Except for his father, who ran a similar type of presidency.
SMILEY: Ooh, OK. Kellyanne Conway, Julian Epstein and Cynthia Tucker, thank all of you for coming on the program today.
Before we get out of here, let's check the online viewer vote. Today's question: Should Al Gore run for president again in 2004?
Yes -- is that 69 percent of you? -- 60 percent of you say yes, 40 percent of you say no. Interesting. One thing is for certain: Time will tell.
Thanks to all of our guests for coming on today. We're back tomorrow and the rest of the week filling in for the vacationing Bobbie Battista. TALKBACK LIVE here again tomorrow at 3 p.m. Eastern. We'll see you then. Thanks for tuning in.
(APPLAUSE)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
