NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
In Kerry veepstakes, Clark is the wild cardWASHINGTON -- Three months after folding the tent on his presidential campaign, retired General Wesley K. Clark popped up again last week, delivering the Democratic radio address and declaring, "The truth is, President Bush made mistake after mistake as commander in chief."
The next day Clark was chatting on NBC's "Meet the Press," in what appeared to be an extended audition for the vice-presidential nomination. Clark is hardly alone among former Democratic presidential aspirants and officeholders trying to hop on Kerry's motorcycle, and all the interest serves to raise the fundamental question of what Kerry is looking for in a running mate. No politician from Massachusetts, let alone one who was so enamored of the Kennedys that he dated Jackie's sister, would forget the legend of 1960 -- how John F. Kennedy eked out a win by offering the second spot on the ticket to Lyndon B. Johnson, who delivered the big electoral prize of Texas. Michael S. Dukakis tried to revive the Boston-Austin axis by choosing a lanky Texan of his own, Lloyd Bentsen. He lost Texas by a healthy margin. These days, the chances of the Democrats taking Texas are about the same as General Santa Anna's, but Kerry can still choose from a plate of favorite sons from swing states, including Bob Graham of Florida, Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, and, at least by his own assessment, John Edwards of North Carolina. Clark's supporters point out that his native state, Arkansas, is very much in play, even if Clark has never won an election there. But his stronger argument would be that the Boston-Austin style of ticket-balancing is outmoded when 30-second television spots matter far more than home-state cronyism. The lesson of recent elections is that a presidential nominee should choose a running mate who accentuates the qualities he most wants to emphasize in himself. Bill Clinton's selection of Al Gore puzzled veterans of past veepstakes: Gore was about the same age, from the same corner of the country, and he and his wife seemed compatible enough with the Clintons to be college students on a double date. That turned out to be just the point, as the Clintons and Gores headed off on a bus tour that successfully contrasted their youthful energy with the elder, more detached George and Barbara Bush. By 2000, Gore needed to remind voters that he and Clinton were not, after all, twins, that Gore lived by traditional values. He chose as his running mate Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, whose home state, the reliably Democratic Connecticut, factored little in the choice. But Lieberman's reputation as one of the great moralists in American politics promised to put some distance between the new Democratic ticket and the old one. On the Republican side, George W. Bush's choice of former defense secretary Dick Cheney from the GOP stronghold of Wyoming added some heft, literally and figuratively, to the ticket. But mostly it emphasized what voters were looking for in Bush: A return to a government of low-key professionals, with corporate briefings replacing Clinton's dormlike White House of all-night brainstorming sessions. In a campaign already turning on issues of military authenticity, nominating Clark, who commanded NATO forces in Kosovo, would give the Democrats a team of decorated veterans to go up against a president and vice president who failed to see combat. During the primaries, Clark received better reviews on the hustings, where he galvanized audiences with an electric stump speech, than he did in debates, where he sometimes sputtered. He made it through the harsh vetting of media with only a few scars and became reasonably conversant with domestic issues. Unfortunately for him, he showed his worst colors in dealing with Kerry, beginning when he tried to pull rank in New Hampshire by pointing out that he was a general and Kerry merely a lieutenant. Kerry slapped back that lieutenants take a lot of bullets, while generals often find themselves second-guessed. Then the last days of his campaign, Clark reportedly told a few reporters he was hanging on because he heard Kerry might be exposed as having had an affair with an intern. The affair never materialized, but Clark may have revealed a problem of his own, not being able to keep his mouth shut. On a more basic level, Clark never was able to validate the central premise of his candidacy, that he could offer an alternative military strategy for protecting national security. Having led a broad international coalition and fought a successful war without suffering casualties, Clark ought to have had a lot to say about how to protect the country. But the anti-Iraq war seat on the Democratic dais was occupied by former Vermont governor Howard Dean, and Clark seemed more intent on proving he had mastered health care than strategic bombing. The promise, however, remains. Clark has authored two books on modern warfare and worked closely with the allies America needs most. He could deliver what some Kerry supporters are seeking in a "dream ticket" with John S. McCain, Republican of Arizona: An image of two experienced warriors saddling up to rescue the country. Kerry could do far worse.
Peter S. Canellos can be reached at canellos@globe.com. © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
|
