Bush, Gore back to game of campaigning

By Sridhar Krishnaswami

St.LOUIS (MISSOURI), OCT. 19. After an aggressive and testy face off, it is back to the game of campaigning. Out of respect for Mel Carnahan, the popular Governor of Missouri who died in a plane crash on Monday, neither the Texas Governor, Mr. George Bush, nor the Vice-President, Mr. Albert Gore Jr, took part in any post debate rallies or parties. While Mr. Gore is making his way to Iowa, Michigan and New York, Mr. Bush and his campaign is travelling in Wisconsin, a key swing state in the Mid West.

In spite of all that the post debate polls may be saying, the fact remains that the Presidential race of 2000 is a virtual dead heat, with neither Mr. Bush nor Mr. Gore making any substantial headways. Instant polls in the aftermath of the showdown at the Washington University on Tuesday night had the Vice-President up between two and five percentage points - that is on his performance at the debate.

While Mr. Gore came away better on substance and in his ability to explain issues clearly, surveys gave Mr. Bush rather high marks for demeanour, likeability and leadership. It was a high stakes showdown at the Athletic Centre with Mr. Gore clearly taking a calculated risk in ``being his own'', something that he was not during the second debate in Winston-Salem, North Carolina last week. And for his part, Mr. Bush had to hold his own.

The numbers game or the arithmetic of how all the figures add up may be difficult to fathom, but on the broad themes and philosophies, the differences were rather stark - something that both major party candidates wanted to come out of St. Louis. Mr. Gore, for instance, clearly liked to paint his Republican opponent as being on the side of the rich, someone who is against a National Patient's Bill of Rights, anti-environment and generally one who is not on the side of the middle class.

Mr. Bush, for that matter, was not hesitant to point out as to where he came from, be it with respect of taxes, education, medicare or capital punishment. Time and again, he argued that his Democratic opponent was a ``big spender'' and one who was keen on expanding the scope of the Federal Government. ``If this were a spending contest, I'd come in second,'' Mr. Bush quipped at one point.

With less than three weeks to go for the November 7 elections, the focus will invariably shift away from the debates, now that all of them are out of the way. If there is one thing that comes out from these debates, it is only in the reconfirmation of what the candidates were all about - of the Vice-President being a good debater and solid on facts and numbers (that is for the most part!) and the Texas Governor more comfortable with themes.

If there was one thing that was surprising in Tuesday's debate here, it was that foreign policy hardly mattered. There was only one broad question as opposed to nearly 40 minutes in Winston Salem devoted to global issues and affairs. And given what has been going on in West Asia it was only natural that the question was in this area.

For all the emphasis that the rival party platforms placed on the larger aspects of American national security and relationships with core alliances around the world, foreign policy was not the priority at all, in a town hall setting.

The attention of the campaigns for the next several days leading to November 7 will be on critical regions and those considered as swing states. With 270 electoral college votes needed for a win, it could well be that a candidate will win a majority of the States but not enough to put him over the magic electoral college vote.

Which is one reason why the focus has been shifting to smaller states - Missouri with 11 electoral college votes is seeing a keen fight - and regions such as the South and the Mid West which are not monolithic any longer.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Previous : China obtained missile secrets: paper
Next     : Julie London dead