• Home
• Video
• Books by Ikram Sehgal
• About

Bush or Gore?

By all accounts this is the closest US Presidential race since 1960 when Richard Nixon conceded defeat to John F Kennedy despite lingering doubts about Mayor Daley of Chicago managing a strategic “switch” of some votes (Third World-style) to the Democratic candidate. Based on the polls about popular votes to be cast, Texas Governor George W Bush seems to be still ahead, but in the matter of electoral college votes, it could well be very, very close. The US President is chosen not by adult franchise but by the electoral votes of each State and these differ according to the population. While Bush is expected to carry most of the States, he is not expected to win in New York (33 electoral votes) or California (54), which between them represent almost 25% of the electoral votes needed to win. What is very surprising is that despite the fact of brother Jeb Bush being the Governor, he will probably also lose in Florida (25 votes), Pennsylvania (23 votes) is too close to call. Bush may well win in almost 35 of the 52 States (i.e. about 2/3rds) but could still fall short of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the US Presidency. If colour coding would be used, the coasts would be primarily Democratic while the US heartland solidly Republican. On the other hand Vice – President Gore, striving to be his own man by distancing himself from US President Bill Clinton, if not from his achievements as a President, has major, major problems convincing even the Democratic vote to turn out. To add to that, Ralph Nader, standing as an independent may take away at least 3% of the votes. In any case former Reformist Party candidate and founder Ross Perot has endorsed Bush. In what may be a stinging slap to any home-boy, Gore may well lose his home State of Tennessee to Bush.

The last days of the campaign have seen frenetic activity as the candidates swept through the must-win so-called battleground states of Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania, etc with deep forays into California and Florida. What one sees on TV is that Vice-President Gore’s body language increasingly smacks of desperation while that of George Bush, Jr is one of nervous confidence. That is to be expected given the big swings, first for Bush for almost the whole year till his primary campaign skirmish with Senator John McCain brought him down a peg or two and maybe made a better candidate and campaigner out of him. After the Republican Convention he opened up a wide lead over Gore. However Gore came back strongly after the Democratic Convention in August and reversed the lead over Bush, this lasted till the end of September. From Labour Day onwards, Bush has seized the high ground with respect to the popular vote and while most polls have a margin of error of plus/minus 4%, Bush has consistently shown a lead of 3-4% points nationally. In the key states of New York and California, as well as in Florida, Gore has had far bigger leads, as much as 8-9%. Both in California and in Florida, this lead has narrowed dramatically over the past week.

While Bush opted for better management in government by picking Dick Cheney, former US Defence Secretary (under his father 1988-1992) as his running mate, someone who had the necessary qualifications to be a heartbeat away from the US Presidency, Vice President Gore made a surprising choice in picking the first member of the Jewish community ever to be the running mate for a US Presidential candidate. Joe Lieberman is a well regarded US Congressman but was not a name well-known nationally or internationally before being thrust under the spotlight. It could be that seeing the big lead Bush had in the polls, Gore had to do something dramatic, something that would swing the US public mood his way. The “Economist” published figures recently showing that more than 70% of the US media was supporting Gore, a far cry from the almost equal percentages before Joe Lieberman got on to the ticket. Was this a cynical power play by Gore to use the media to project himself as a winner and with this perception influence voters his way? In any case pollsters have not been able to explain how Mr Gore led Bush for all of September by a margin of about 7-8% and even into the double digits, which was then reversed to 3-4% in Mr Bush’s favour overnight on Labour Day, a swing of nearly 12-15% in 24 to 48 hours.

Mr Gore’s choice of Lieberman was thus a calculated risk gambling on the fact that the perception created by the media has an enormous leverage over the voter. It may not be enough to ensure a Democratic victory but the fact remains that it has been enough to give Gore a fighting chance. Four days before the election, a 24-year old arrest for “driving under the influence of” (DUI) Bush arrest in Maine suddenly popped up. Immediately condemned as a “Dirty Trick” by the Republicans, it was designed to cut into the credibility of the character of George W Bush. Not surprisingly it was immediately pounced upon by some Democratic faithful to try and sway the electorate. On the other hand it also provided a backlash of sorts. What it does for the undecided voter (about 10-12%) only Tuesday morning will tell, however the timing of the disclosure was very suspicious as (1) it was supposed to have been impugned from the record (2) it was released by a known Democratic activist who runs a website and (3) the information was withheld for 4 months so as to gain maximum impact just before Election Day. Bush acknowledged it immediately, saying he had made mistakes in his youth and that he had given up drinking completely 14 years ago. The saving grace was the candour and the swiftness with which it was acknowledged, probably just enough “damage control” to sustain Bush’s lead.

What will a Gore victory mean to Pakistan? While traditionally Democrats are taken in Pakistan to be “soft” on India and hostile to Pakistan, Clinton enjoyed excellent relations with Pakistani Americans, his pragmatic disposition probably stopped him from imposing harsher sanctions against Pakistan. Gore is also known to be close to American Pakistanis like Moeen Qureshi, who is now on his annual “State visit” to Pakistan, but has denied having asked for or been offered the job of PM. Bush also has many Pakistan American friends and traditionally Republicans (Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr) have been known to favour Pakistan but doing so at the expense of India has never been US policy despite the personal inclinations of Republican US Presidents, Nixon foremost among them. Of course, Democrats have had a love-fest with India starting with Kennedy, going on with Carter and more recently with Clinton. Even then a Bush victory may not necessarily translate into a pro-Pakistan policy, however Pakistanis will probably feel more comfortable and secure with Bush in the White House rather than Gore.

So who will win? If you believe the media, they seem to be hoping against hope that Gore will win the electoral college if not the popular vote. That is a sure sign that Bush is ahead, but by how much? In the final analysis, the US voter has shown an inclination for change and the Democrats have had 8 years in the White House. 60% of US citizens believe the economic boom that the Democrats have been taking credit for, has been due to the policies of Republican-appointed Chairman Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, rather than because of the present Democratic incumbent of the White House. The economic turnaround started in Oct 92, just before the US Presidential elections was won by Bill Clinton. By the time this news analysis appears in print, I could be proved wrong but I am willing to put my money where my mouth is in predicting that by 8 am Pakistani time Wednesday 8 November. George W Bush, Jr will be US President-elect for the period 2001-2004.

Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.