No Broad Appeal : Democrats Fear Lack of Message

Facing the muddle of their presidential nomination battle in the wake of the Illinois primary, Democratic Party leaders Wednesday expressed growing concern about the ability of any candidate to develop a message with broad appeal in a general election.

“So far, no one is connecting with a large amount of the electorate,” said Paul Tully, former political director of the presidential campaign of Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis.

The concern grows out of the last two presidential elections, in which voters deserted the party in droves. Now the party’s struggle to redefine itself in the midst of a presidential campaign appears to underlie the Democrats’ difficulty in agreeing on a nominee.

The discord was dramatized here by the victory of favorite son Sen. Paul Simon, who had come close to dropping out of the race prior to the Illinois vote, and the third place finish of Dukakis, who until Tuesday was beginning to claim front-runner status.

Some party leaders argue that the continuing turmoil is a healthy sign. “What is happening now could be very good for the Democratic Party,” New York Gov. Mario M. Cuomo said after the Illinois returns came in. “There is a race, there is a fight. Our interest is going to be high. And we’re going to be picking issues and studying issues all the way through to the end.”

But all that is clear now is that the Democrats must go through a long and tortuous tunnel before they see any light.

‘Party in Transition’

“There are no dominant candidates and no dominant issues in this campaign,” said Richard Moe, an adviser to the presidential campaign of Missouri Rep. Richard A. Gephardt and before that chief of staff to former Vice President Walter F. Mondale. “We are a party in transition.”

This transition was forced on the Democrats by landslide defeats in 1980 and 1984 and by the disappearance from the presidential stage of such long dominant figures as Mondale and Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. The problem has been compounded by the need to find new themes to replace the faded dogmas of New Deal liberalism that had sustained the Democrats for so long.

“We’re going through a generational change and we’re also going though a definitional change,” said Tully, who worked previously for the 1980 Kennedy campaign and the 1984 Mondale campaign. “So, what you’re seeing now is four or five different Democratic parties.”

Other factors, such as the structure of the nominating process, have contributed to the current foggy state of the Democratic race. For example, the Super Tuesday primary on March 8, stretching across 20 states, apparently made it difficult for Gephardt to explain his argument for tougher trade policy and instead gave an advantage to the well-financed Dukakis, who used his funds to bludgeon Gephardt with negative commercials.

Attacking a Concept

For all his financial resources, though, Dukakis has had difficulty developing a positive message, a weakness that was demonstrated here in Illinois when he concentrated his campaign mainly on attacking the concept of a “brokered convention.”

“You can’t run a campaign against a process,” said Mark Siegel, a member of the party executive committee and neutral in the presidential race. “You have to give voters a reason to vote for you.”

Despite all the confusion, most Democratic professionals agree on what candidates need to do to establish a clear identity for themselves and make a strong claim on voter support.

“If somebody is going to emerge as dominant, he is going to have to address the major economic issues facing the country,” Moe said.

Making much the same point, Richard Weiner, chairman of the Democratic Party in Michigan, where caucuses on March 26 are the next major contest for delegates, said: “The argument in this campaign ought to be about who can best deal with the problems left over by the Reagan Administration, particularly the economic problems.”

But, so far, such a debate has not developed in a campaign that has been dominated by emphasis on negative television commercials and pointing with pride to past accomplishments. This failure, Siegel contends, is reflected by what he says is the low participation by blue-collar voters in the Democratic nominating process.

Black-Yuppie Competition

“So far, this campaign has been a competition between blacks and yuppies,” Siegel said. “Those who make up the traditional Democratic base are not voting for any of these people. We’re talking about people who sweat.”

What is needed, Tully contended, is a candidate who will say to voters: “This is my view of the changes taking place in this country and your life, and how this reflects my understanding of the problems you face.”

The Rev. Jesse Jackson has projected a powerful message along those lines, stressing what he calls “economic violence” being waged against lower- and middle-class wage earners by large corporations who seek to move jobs overseas. But many party leaders contend that his message will not appeal to the broad audience in a general election campaign.

Whatever the ultimate outcome of the struggle over issues and ideas, the battle for delegates goes on at another level, with Dukakis holding a narrow advantage of 465.5 to 460.5 over Jackson; with 354.8 for Tennessee Sen. Albert Gore Jr., 171.5 for Simon, and 145 for Gephardt, according to the Associated Press.

Dukakis hopes to build on that advantage significantly in Michigan by using his far bigger advantage in financial resources. The Massachusetts governor also has the personal endorsements of the state’s two most prestigious Democrats, Gov. James J. Blanchard and Detroit Mayor Coleman Young.

Dukakis’ director of field operations, Jack Corrigan, contends that, by winning a bit more than half of the delegates still to be chosen, Dukakis can break 1,400 by the time the primary season ends.

Hopes for Defectors

That would leave him short of the 2,082 needed for a majority. But the assumption of many party leaders is that a significant number of the 645 so-called “super delegates,” party and elected officials who are free to back whomever they want, will come over to Dukakis. That, along with other uncommitted delegates and delegates who might defect from other candidates, would be enough to push him over the top.

Jackson has designs on Michigan, too. Some think that Jackson should be considered the front runner there because of the enthusiasm he has been able to arouse among black voters around the country and because his Michigan campaign is said to be efficiently run. Moreover, in Michigan, as elsewhere, Jackson will be up against a field of white rivals--Dukakis, Simon, Gore and Gephardt, who is making a last-ditch effort there to save his candidacy.

“I like those numbers,” one senior Jackson strategist said. “We’re in a no-lose situation.”

But Jackson may not be able to enjoy that sort of advantage for long, because the field of white candidates is likely to narrow. Unless Gephardt finishes first in Michigan, or a very close second, he is expected to drop out of the race. Simon, whose candidacy was on the ropes before Illinois, is not expected to make a major effort in Michigan and probably needs a victory in the April 5 Wisconsin primary to maintain the credibility of his candidacy.

Another set of numbers that will turn against Jackson in future contests are the figures for the percentage of voting-age blacks. Among the big states that loom ahead, only New York has as high a figure as Illinois’ 14%. The rest range from 13% in Michigan to 7% in California. This may impose a ceiling on Jackson’s vote, because he has had trouble getting more than 10% of the white vote in most states and won only about 7% in his home state of Illinois.

Needs Strong Showing

Gore remains a possibility for standard bearer in the view of some party leaders, although others suspect he is now running mainly for the vice presidency.