A Defining Moment

The differences between Democrat Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush were clearly and vigorously defined Tuesday night in the last of the three presidential debates. If any one debate had a real impact on how television viewers--especially the undecided--would vote, this one was it.

Gore made a strong showing Tuesday with the proper mix of assertiveness and attention to detail, but Bush wound up with the edge in the three meetings taken as a whole. Bush often spoke more plainly than Gore and stressed his “outside” Washington credentials--more than a touch ironic for the eldest son of a former U.S. president. And on Tuesday Bush offered his most compelling argument for change: The Clinton-Gore administration broke too many promises in the last eight years. “It’s time for a fresh start,” he said.

Vice President Gore from the beginning of the debates suffered from high expectations because of his extensive debating experience. Gore was too aggressive in the first debate and not aggressive enough in the second but reached a balance Tuesday. And he finally presented a coherent defense of the Clinton-Gore record, reminding voters that they are better off than they were eight years ago.

Gore, fielding questions from the audience, exuded confidence as he roamed the stage at Washington University in St. Louis and spelled out detailed programs to improve health care, education and other matters. He was forceful without being belligerent as he accused Bush of wanting to help the nation’s wealthy. Gore challenged Bush’s claim that Gore would be “a big spender” who would bloat government. And Gore was at his most effective yet in portraying Bush’s income tax cut as a giveaway to the rich.

About the issue of affirmative action, he called Bush on his support of “affirmative access,” a meaningless euphemism. “I don’t know what ‘affirmative access’ means. I do know what ‘affirmative action’ means,” Gore said. “I know that the governor is against it, and I know that I’m for it.” That may not help Gore get all the votes he wants, but the statement was refreshingly free of the doublespeak that’s been so prevalent in these debates.

Texas Gov. Bush projected himself as the Washington outsider who wants to clean up the stables along the Potomac. His folksy, almost-populist talk reminded one at times of Ronald Reagan and Ross Perot. Bush would set aside partisan bickering, he said, and get Republicans and Democrats to work together to help people. After Gore argued that the health care bill he supports is better than the one Bush backs, Bush looked at Gore quizzically and said, “The difference is I can get it done.”

Bush’s idea of Washington throwing partisanship to the winds of goodwill is naive and overlooks the fact that leaders of his own party often are the obstructionists to compromise. But it is certain to have some appeal. And Bush drew gasps from among the audience when he said that people who are turned off by contentious politics “need somebody in office who will tell the truth.” Bush did not directly refer to Gore, but there was no question he was speaking of the vice president.

It’s hard to imagine how any voter, having witnessed these debates, can remain undecided. The differences between Gore and Bush have never been clearer.