Wishing for Inspiration

A local cable station over the weekend aired “The Best Man,” the 1964 film version of the Gore Vidal classic about hardball presidential politics. Seeing the film so close to this election was a potent reminder that the stakes now are both too big--the next president will have a huge impact on the U.S. Supreme Court for decades to come, among other things--and too small--the candidates have promised much to the American people and asked very little for the nation in return.

The film goes behind the scenes of a titanic struggle between a candidate wrestling with demands to compromise his principles to win and another who’s all too willing to exploit any piece of information that will secure the nomination. The drama, gloriously aided by Vidal’s words, makes it easy to root for Henry Fonda’s man of principle. (That man, we should note, in the film walks away from the chance to be president.)

In real life, clear principle has been more elusive. Republican nominee George W. Bush a few days ago admitted to a drunk driving arrest/conviction in 1976 after news reports revealed it; Bush, who has based much of his campaign on returning honor to the White House, has been almost Clintonesque in his responses about past lapses in behavior. His campaign temporarily dropped its attacks on the integrity of Democratic opponent Al Gore. Gore, a man who has shifted personas as often as he changed from olive to navy jackets, this weekend made a general reference to “good versus evil.” Gore supporters had to later explain that the vice president didn’t mean to suggest that Bush personally was evil.

Certainly neither Bush nor Gore is evil, but neither has been inspirational. They have pandered to narrow groups--senior citizens, “working families”--without asking them to look beyond their own interests. Americans respond most strongly to leaders who provide a vision of something bigger than any one of us, bigger even than all of us. The increasing, consultant-driven sectioning off of the electorate may explain why so many voters have remained on the fence even until now.

Commentators have all too readily dismissed these undecided voters as ill-informed lumpen. But witness the agonizing of a group of Washington state voters, all Ralph Nader supporters, who told The Times they will wait until the last possible minute to vote and, if the result is still in question, hold their noses and vote for Gore. That’s a well-thought-out calculation, and sadder for it.

Certainly not all Gore and Bush supporters are holding their noses to vote, but the lack of passion on behalf of either man has been striking. It’s not likely that either will use these last 24 hours to lift the campaign to a unifying level that the country has been aching for.

Complicating the vote in the West is the unanimous decision by major broadcasters to release their projections of the presidential winner as soon as they believe it’s conclusive. This could suppress voting in critical states where polls are still open, as California Secretary of State Bill Jones has noted, but between technology and competitive forces, there’s no reversing the tide of early winner predictions. Voters should at least remember that the projections have a margin of error.

Vidal’s drama ended at a political convention, where the actual drama started in this year’s campaign. In the end, voters will envision Gore or Bush as the new president next January--heady from a long day of inaugural festivities--stepping into a silent Oval Office in the White House. What happens from that moment on is what counts in real life.