Despite Polls, Bush Vows to Run All-Out in California

Forget the polls and ignore all those who write him off: George W. Bush insists he plans to compete all-out in California between now and November, even if he faces some Texas-size hurdles along the way.

Any thoughts to the contrary are “wishful thinking” on the part of Al Gore and the Democrats, Bush declared in an interview, though it’s mainly Republicans who fret over the prospect of being orphaned by their presumptive presidential nominee.

“The Republican Party had been a little dormant, the party hadn’t been energized in a while,” Bush said, referring gently to the GOP’s 1998 election debacle in California, which capped a string of dispiriting statewide losses throughout the 1990s. “There’s a group of Republicans that are looking for somebody to come and energize and lead our party to victory, which means the party is easier to unite now than ever before. I think the ingredients are there.”

But a certain amount of wishful thinking seemed to inform Bush’s own lofty assessment, delivered at 30,000 feet Tuesday as he flew home to Austin after a campaign swing through Pennsylvania.

California has grown increasingly Democratic over the last dozen years, a trend nurtured by the near-constant attention of the Clinton-Gore administration. Moreover, in last month’s “blanket” primary--effectively a dry run of the November election--Vice President Gore outpolled Bush by more than 400,000 votes, despite a more Republican and conservative turnout than is likely in November.

About the most generous assessment was that of Mark Baldassare, an independent pollster who said of Bush’s prospects: “It isn’t hopeless.”

Still, Bush remains undaunted. He ignored the latest Field Institute survey that showed him trailing Gore by 10 percentage points. He minimized his differences with state voters on touchy issues such as abortion rights and gun control, which proved the undoing of Republican gubernatorial hopeful Dan Lungren in 1998.

He seemed to reach a bit, though, by claiming a cultural affinity with California based in part on a youth spent in Midland, Texas. Californians have “a healthy disrespect of Washington and its bureaucracies. There’s kind of an outsider feel to California,” Bush ventured. “I feel that way too. And I think people are going to sense that in me over time.”

Still, by pledging his determination to vigorously contest California--and arranging an interview for the express purpose of underlining that point--Bush signaled that, for now at least, the state is in play. “I’m going this week,” said the Texas governor, who opens a two-day California swing today in Sacramento, “and [in] a couple of weeks and a couple of weeks [later]. I’ll spend a lot of time out there.”

With 54 electoral votes, or 20% of the 270 needed to win the White House, California inevitably looms large in any November calculus. But the sheer size and scope of the state requires an enormous amount of a candidate’s time and treasure. Ultimately, presidential campaigns are a zero-sum game: Time and money spent in one place are necessarily taken away from others. Given California’s size, limited resources might go a lot further divvied among swing states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Missouri.

The Bush and Gore campaigns are months away from making final decisions on targeting and tactics. Until then, it behooves both candidates to leave all options open.

Gore may be attempting just such a strategy by focusing heavily now on Florida, which leans Republican and, by most accounts, is a must win for Bush. California, on the other hand, is the one state Gore almost certainly has to carry to have any shot at winning the White House.

Mindful that California is less critical for Bush, state Republicans are obsessive in their fear of abandonment. The governor’s father effectively ceded the state in his unsuccessful 1992 reelection bid, contributing to a depressed GOP turnout that hurt the rest of the ticket. With control of the House in the balance this November--and possibly hinging on a handful of California races--Republicans are counting more than ever on a strong Bush campaign to boost their prospects here in the fall.

The Texas governor will happily oblige, he said aboard his campaign charter. Busily working his way through a jumbo pack of spearmint gum, the candidate was diplomatic as he sought to differentiate his campaign from recent Republican efforts.

Bush suggested that independent Ross Perot was more responsible than his father for the Republican loss here in 1992. (Bill Clinton won California with 46% of the vote in the three-way contest.)

He blamed the GOP’s 1996 defeat at least partly on the backlash from then-Gov. Pete Wilson’s pugnacious stand on immigration--though he never mentioned Wilson by name--and what Bush delicately referred to as a “generational issue” when Clinton faced the septuagenarian Bob Dole.

“I’m from the West,” Bush said, touting a potential base among Central Valley farmers, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, proponents of free trade and the immigrants he describe as “new Americans.”

Furthermore, he touted his reform record on education, “which is a key issue in the state of California. These people know I’m willing to battle over the education issue. We didn’t do a very good job on it in ’96.”

But Bruce Cain, among others, was dubious. “On the issues, he’s got a huge disadvantage,” said Cain, director of UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies. He noted that most Californians favor abortion rights and gun control and are chary of the Christian Right.

“We’ve already fought an election where it was assumed Matt Fong, because of his nice-guy image, and Dan Lungren, because of his so-called charismatic nature, would win despite the fact they were wrong on the issues,” Cain said. Both lost badly to candidates who were arguably weaker than Gore.

“What [Bush] really needs is a massive collapse of the economy, dot-coms all sinking and Nasdaq falling apart,” Cain continued. “Or he needs a massive scandal to shake Californians away from Gore.”

The governor, however, would brook no discouraging words. What about Lungren’s landslide defeat, exacerbated by his stand on social issues--positions Bush shares? “Apples and oranges,” Bush replied, saying presidential contests are different from gubernatorial campaigns.

What about California polls showing the continued popularity of the Clinton-Gore administration? “They didn’t look that popular to me . . . when you combine Republican votes and Democrat votes” in the March 7 primary.

In fact, adding up the combined vote received by the major party candidates, Bush and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona outpolled Gore and Democrat Bill Bradley by more than 500,000 votes. Bush said he was “buoyed” by that fact, although the numbers are somewhat misleading.

Turnout in primaries is driven by a variety of things, including the competitive state of a race and, in California, other issues that may be on the ballot. Last month, both factors favored Republicans. The Democratic nominating fight was all but over by the time it reached here, and ballot measures involving taxes and gay marriage proved a strong draw for conservatives.

General elections tend to result in a much larger and broader turnout. At the same time, the different campaign dynamic in the fall and new issues on the November ballot make it unlikely that March’s turnout will be replicated.

In the primary, at least some of the Republican votes were crossover Democrats likely to return to the party fold in November.

Bush, though, clung fast to his promise to fight for California. “You can slice those numbers any way you want, I readily concede. I’m just telling you I’m optimistic about my chances to carry the state, and that’s what I’m going to battle for.”