In This Election, It’s Who You Aren’t That Really Counts

Let me see if I’ve got this straight.

Lloyd Bentsen said Dan Quayle is no John Kennedy.

Ronald Reagan says Bill Clinton is no Thomas Jefferson.

Bill Clinton says George Bush is no Harry Truman.

On the other hand, everybody said when Truman became president that he was no Franklin Roosevelt. Therefore, applying the elementary principles of logic, Clinton must think that George Bush is no Franklin Roosevelt, either.

Why Clinton is afraid to come right out and say so is anybody’s guess. Maybe he’s saving that bombshell for late in the campaign, in case his lead in the polls begins to dwindle.

You have to feel sorry for Al Gore. He must be feeling pretty inconsequential; so far, he’s the only one of the four major players who hasn’t been identified as not being someone else.

Just the other day, Vice President Quayle said, “Al Gore, you’re no . . . ,” but he had to stop himself because he couldn’t think of anybody that Gore wasn’t.

Let’s correct that oversight right now.

Al Gore, you’re no . . . Johnny Appleseed.

If nothing else, all these revelations about identity beg a question of Jesse Jackson (who, by the way, is no Martin Luther King). When Jackson exhorts crowds with one of his favorite inspirational lines--’YOU ARE . . . SOME BODY!’--who’s he talking about?

Clearly, it’s not who you are in politics that counts, but who you’re not.

The Bush-Quayle advertising campaign hasn’t hit full stride yet, but it seems clear that it isn’t going to follow up on Reagan’s reference to Clinton. Somehow, a commercial that says, “Bill Clinton--he’s no Thomas Jefferson,” just wouldn’t play this election season.

But that doesn’t mean the Bush braintrusters don’t like the concept. Their advertising strategy probably will be to portray Clinton as a cross between Jimmy Carter and Ted Kennedy. Sort of an ineffectual party boy.

That’s going to be a tough sell, because even the 1992 version of Ted Kennedy doesn’t want to be Ted Kennedy. The Massachusetts senator went on “Nightline” some time back and apologized for certain behavior of his and pledged to do better. He was, in effect saying, “I’m no Ted Kennedy.”

Carter has the tougher road to political redemption, but it’s his own fault. He spent the whole campaign season of 1976 traipsing around the country telling everybody, “I’m Jimmy Carter, and I’m running for President.”

After nearly a year of telling people he was Jimmy Carter, it’s kind of hard now to convince people he’s no Jimmy Carter.

But Clinton is no dummy. You notice he’s never said, “Hi, I’m Bill Clinton.”

No, ma’am.

Anyway, to review: Bush-Quayle will subliminally remind people who Clinton is not (Jefferson) and then hammer home in their commercials who he is (Carter-Kennedy).

Clinton’s response ad will be lightning swift, because he will have anticipated the Bush-Quayle attack (after all, who better than Clinton knows who he is not?).

Clinton will take to the airwaves and effectively undercut the Bush effort by turning the attack on its head. He will say nothing about not being Thomas Jefferson but will instead say, “I’m no Gary Hart. . . . And I’m not Mike Dukakis, either. . . or George McGovern . . . or any of those other guys you didn’t vote for.”

Learning that he’s no Dukakis or any of those other guys will set well with the public, who may begin reconsidering Clinton.

That is his essential task in these remaining weeks because the public has already had four years to study George Bush and they know full well who he is not.

And that will take us up to Election Day as America goes to the polls.

They’ll be allowed to take crib sheets with them into the booth to remind them who each candidate is not. Clearly, the candidate who does the best job of convincing voters who the other candidate is not will win the election.

My vision of things is one of people pulling the lever for Bill Clinton, even as they say to themselves, “Well, I know he’s no Thomas Jefferson, but . . . “