Will Lieberman's being Jewish help Gore?

A viewer asked this question on 8/8/2000:

Do you think the fact that Mr. Lieberman is Jewish will effect the vote for Al Gore it should not but what is your opinion. What do you think of Al Gore as president

JesseGordon gave this response on 8/9/2000:

Yes, of course it will. Everything has an effect when there are 100,000,000 people voting. People vote based on character and personality as much as they vote based on issues, and Lieberman's religion is part of his character and personality. Maybe in an ideal world, people would vote based only n issues, but the president is a leader as much as he's an issue-shaper, and personality and character count in leaders.

My overall view is that Lieberman's religion will help Gore a lot. Not only in getting the Jewish vote itself (which is overwhelmingly Democratic anyway) but in getting a lot of votes from other deeply religious people regardless of their religion. I think most people today recognize that a person's degree of faith is more important than which religious group they belong to. Of course there will be some anti-Semites who won't vote for Gore because he has a Jewish V.P., but that crowd is unlikely to vote for Gore anyway.

My view of Gore overall is that he'd be a good president, as would Bush. Neither one will destroy the country -- in that sense I think the political process works well. I might have had some reservations making that statement about McCain or Bradley, and certainly would have a real concern about Buchanan or Nader -- hence the process of selecting a "safe" leader works pretty well.

Here's my analysis of why Gore chose Lieberman and how it affects the vote:

1. Gore faces the loss of up to 5% of the vote to Nader, which is much more of a loss than Bush faces from Buchanan (who is currently polling at only 1.5%). The classic counter to a candidate on the left is to pick a V.P. to the left of the candidate, which is called "consolidating your base." But if Gore did that, he'd face the loss of the even larger "independent center" who are politically to his right and to Bush's left. Bush did exactly this, by picking a V.P. to his right, which effectively neutralizes Buchanan's vote loss (Buchanan will get some hard-line votes, but many pro-life and pro-defense advocates will vote for Bush-Cheney).

2. So that's the basic dilemma: How to re-capture Nader voters without losing independent centrist voters. I've been wondering for weeks how Gore would solve that dilemma, and I assumed he would have to choose EITHER to defend against Nader OR to address the center. Gore's solution-- to pick a centrist Jew -- does BOTH. I certainly didn't think of; that's why Gore is Vice President. I think this choice will work because Lieberman re-captures an enormous percentage of Nader voters (since left-leaning and progressive voters who support Nader are heavily Jewish), and also re-captures centrist independents (because Lieberman is to the right of Gore on many issues -- details below).

3. There's also Gore's biggest weakness --Clinton, with regards to Monica and other sleaze. Gore is pretty clean, sleaze-wise, but this would have been his biggest weakness, with Bush & Cheney already incessantly repeating "Let's return honor and dignity to the White House." Well, Lieberman said the same thing, on the Senate floor, before Clinton was impeached and after. He's considered "the conscience of the Senate" on moral issues, and was the first Democrat to criticize Clinton hard. So Lieberman addresses Gore's major political weak point as well.

4. Clinton, on the other hand, is also one of Gore's biggest assets. Clinton is one of the century's great campaigners, and he will campaign for Gore/Lieberman. Gore didn't want to personally chastise Clinton because he needs that campaigning done by him. Lieberman can get away with criticizing Clinton because they have a long-term personal relationship (begun when Clinton attended Yale, in Lieberman's home state of Connecticut, and volunteered for a Lieberman campaign). So Lieberman also manages to cover both sides of Clinton: critical of his misconduct; but he'll still campaign for them.

5. Now on the issues: Gore & Lieberman agree on most of the standard Democrat issues (pro-choice on abortion; pro-gay rights; pro-gun control) and they also agree on the "New Democrat" issues (pro-SDI; pro-death penalty; pro-free trade. These are called "New Democrat" because they're not very liberal!). They disagree on a couple of issues: Lieberman supports school choice vouchers and Gore is dead set against them; Lieberman would limit federal involvement in health care but Gore is for universal coverage; Lieberman has a mixed environmental voting record and Gore wrote the book on the subject. Notice how on the three that they differ, Lieberman is to the right of Gore -- that's what makes him appealing to independent centrists.

We're working right now on filling out Lieberman's views on the issues; you can see his voting record and in a couple of days everything else at http://issues2000.org/Joseph_Lieberman.htm

peaceable rated this answer:

Thank you for your comments I think it will be good for the country to have the Al Gore and Lieberman ticket win.

baseballman777 asked this question on 8/7/2000:

Why do you think Gore picked Lieberman for a running mate, In your own opinion. Thanks Sincerely, George

madpol gave this response on 8/7/2000:

Gore is following two strategies here, playing to his base and balancing the ticket geographically.

Most experts agree that Gore's chance to win the Presidency rests on his ability to generate turnout. Polls show Bush with a double digit lead among likely voters, but within the margin of error with registered voters. Anything that brings more voters to the polls in November improves Gore's chances.

Lieberman is an Orthodox Jew with a good Civil Rights record and an excellent record on Social Security and aging issues. Just the thing to energize the crucial Liberal and Senior Citizen Constituencies.

Lieberman can also provide a needed boost in the battleground New England states and California, New York and Florida.

I think that Gore is counting on having the Religious Right raise a fuss over having a Jew "A heartbeat from the Presidency." Should that happens Bush would have to take a stand that would either alienate the Conservatives who form his personal base, or the Moderates and Independents he has been courting for support in the general election.

madpol gave this follow-up answer on 8/7/2000:

Lieberman has also weighed in on some issues considered pro-family and was one of the first Democratic Senators to criticize Bill Clinton for his affair with Monica Lewinsky. That will help Gore in his efforts to distance himself from Clinton's sex scandals.

baseballman777 asked this question on 8/7/2000:

Why do you think Gore picked Lieberman for a running mate, In your own opinion. Thanks Sincerely,
George

npscott gave this response on 8/8/2000:

Vice President's used to be selected in 'smoke filled' convention rooms, and often were the result of political compromises within the party, and power brokering by party leaders.

Sometimes the selection had a very simple reason. When John Kennedy picked Lyndon Johnson, he did so because Johnson would help him carry the South.

Kennedy felt his New England accent and Catholicism and democratic liberalism would be too much for the southern section of the party. So he selected Johnson to "balance" the ticket.

But today, polls and focus groups are key tools in helping Presidential candidates choose their running mates.

Most polls show that the Vice Presidential pick barely makes a statistical dent in the polls. Most possible VP candidates are interchangeable in the effect they has on adding or taking away from the vote for the Party.

People vote the top of the ticket, not the bottom.

However, in a close election even a running mate who makes as little as a +2% difference could determine the outcome.

Bush chose Cheney, I'm willing to bet, to:

1) Shore up his conservative base
2) Add maturity to the ticket;
3) Add a candidate with cross/party and independent voter appeal.

Gore has not had a very good showing lately. But his selection of Senator Joe Lieberman demonstrates a politician who not only knows how to shrewdly read polls and the results of focus groups; but also how to lead.

Lieberman's assets are:

1) Age & Maturity:

Lieberman, like Cheney, gives off an avuncular, or 'favorite uncle' image. Mature, wise, solid character, deliberate.

2) Integrity:

Lieberman was the first Democrat to express his dismay over President Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky. He established a reputation as a man of courage and integrity.

The Republicans have had some success in portraying Gore as tainted by that scandal. By choosing a man who supported Clinton, while also opposing and denouncing his behavior, Gore sides with "right" on that issue. Gore also shows confidence on this issue, by selecting Lieberman.

3) Jewish:

This has pluses and negatives, but mostly pluses. It solidifies a major segment of the Democratic Party. Just as many Catholics voted for JFK out of pride in "one's own", so can Gore probably count on a near unanimous Jewish vote for Gore-Lieberman.

The Jewish vote is almost all Democratic anyway. But, Jewish voters will be activated and motivated in a way they would not have been otherwise.

{This is not bias voting, which is negative centered. Minorities always vote for the early advancement of their own group for elective office.
Once it's established that all public offices are fairly within their group's grasp, just as the Catholicism of Catholic Presidential candidates isn't even noticed by the press anymore (can you say which candidates in the primaries were Catholic), then so do minority voting patterns change to focus on issues and party.]

Religious Faith and ethnicity as a voter test for public office is mostly a thing of the past. Gone are the days--which are only a couple of decades removed--when Catholic and Protestants wouldn't think of working together in a community program.

[The volunteer driver on my nights for Meals on Wheels delivery (early 1970's) was Catholic. One night she said, "You know, just five years ago, I wouldn't have been here, driving for a Methodist Church-sponsored program."]

Polls cited on TV network news this evening reveal that 92% of voters would vote for a qualified candidate for President who is Jewish. It follows, it's a less important issue for Vice President.

Of course, there will be a small, extreme-right and white-power group backlash to Lieberman because of how he worships God. But these votes would go (unwanted) either to splinter parties or the GOP candidate anyway.

4) Accomplishments:

Sen. Lieberman, agree or disagree with his opinions, has not just a solid record as a legislator, but as a man of kindness and reason. He is seen as a man who could lunch with Dick Cheney in a genuinely friendly and sociable way, even in the heat of the campaign.

5) A man who could be President:

With all respect for Dan Quayle, more prayers were probably raised for Pres. George Bush's safety over Quayle's presence as VP, than any other reason.

Gore has clearly thought this one through. And the Republican reaction as to the strength and wisdom of Gore's decision, is evident.

The worst thing the GOP could find to say about Lieberman, was that Lieberman is more like Bush in his voting record, than Gore is.

baseballman777 asked this question on 8/7/2000:

Why do you think Gore picked Lieberman for a running mate, In your own opinion. Thanks Sincerely,
George

stevehaddock gave this response on 8/7/2000:

I agree with everyone else, with the following additions.

The fact that Lieberman was from New England was a big factor in my opinion. That area is heavily Democratic, but feels alienated from Southern Democrats like Gore who tend to be on the conservative side. It's a great way to "balance the ticket" - Dukakis/Bentsen and Kennedy/Johnson went with the same tactic.

And I hate to speak up for affirmative action, but it is about time a Jewish person was invited to be a part of the executive of the United States. The choice of someone Jewish is an "electric fence" issue for Bush & Cheney (touch it and die), but, regrettably, some whackos down south will make it an issue (the KKK has on several occasions said that there is no way there will ever be a Jewish President, but they said the same thing about Catholics). It allows Gore to distance himself from that type of Southern Democrat. Unlike Geraldine Ferraro, Lieberman seems to have "the right stuff".

Anonymous asked this question on 8/19/2000:

What do you think the effect will be of Gore's selection of Joe Lieberman as his running mate?

stevehaddock gave this response on 8/19/2000:

Well, it has turned out great so far. I heard Gore's leading the polls today.

But more subjectively speaking

- Choosing an Orthodox Jew can't do anything but help. Kennedy's Catholicism was an open issue in 1960, but Lieberman's religion probably won't raise any eyebrows. It's an electric fence issue for Republicans - anyone who even mentions it is likely to die at the polling booth.

- Choosing a man with impeccable liberal credentials can't do anything but help. Gore is seen by many hard-core Democrats as too conservative. Embracing a more liberal running mate has the effect of showing that Gore might move to the left after taking office. That's what most Democratic voters want.

- Choosing a New Englander will help. Democrats in that part of the country have seen the Democrats drift towards "Southern" Democrats - more conservative socially and economically. Without Lieberman, it is likely that many in the north-east would have rejected the Democrats as being too much like the Republicans. The funny thing is that Democrats who feel that way usually vote Republican.

- Choosing a man as well respected as Lieberman will help. Lieberman has no ethical or political baggage. He is respected by both Democrats and Republicans alike as being thoughtful, hard-working and straightforward. Lieberman hasn't shown any signs of arrogance or overwhelming ambition either, which I've always felt was a good point for a politician. Honesty works - one of the reasons Lincoln out-polled Douglas was that Douglas was identified with corruption.

Anonymous rated this answer:

Very good analysis. I also happen to agree. ;)

violet16 asked this question on 11/11/2000:

why did Al Gore choose Joseph Lieberman as running mate

JesseGordon gave this response on 11/11/2000:

Here's my analysis of why Gore chose Lieberman and how it affected the vote (and may prove decisiv in Florida!):

1. Gore faced the loss of up to 5% of the vote to Nader, which is much more of a loss than Bush faces from Buchanan (who polled at under 1%). The classic counter to a candidate on the left is to pick a V.P. to the left of the candidate, which is called "consolidating your base." But if Gore did that, he'd face the loss of the even larger "independent center" who are politically to his right and to Bush's left. Bush did exactly this, by picking a V.P. to his right, which effectively neutralizes Buchanan's vote loss (Buchanan will get some hard-line votes, but many pro-life and pro-defense advocates will vote for Bush-Cheney).

You can see Lieberman's views on the issues and his voting record at http://issues2000.org/Joseph_Lieberman.htm

Return to index