Printable Version Tell a friend

Practicing the Politics of Politeness

(The Harwood Institute for Public Innovation)

Practicing the Politics of Politeness

by Richard C. Harwood
Major-league blunders aside, this has been a clean, fair presidential race ó so far

- msnbc.com, September 19, 2000

Gov. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney take the stage Sept. 4. in Naperville, Ill. Bush used an expletive to describe a reporter in the crowd to Cheney, unaware an open microphone captured the remark.

Sept. 19 - The big choice is coming. Will Gov. George Bush and Vice President Al Gore stay the course of trying to raise our political discourse, or will they fall prey to the mongers of negativity?

While this campaign may leave a lot to be desired, we are starting to have real give-and-take, what Americans have been telling The Harwood Institute for over a dozen years they have been yearning for.
JUST LAST week I spent the evening with a group of Baltimore citizens who echoed what I have been hearing from many people about the presidential race. They sense a shift in tone this time around, something they find surprising and refreshing.

Bushís disparaging remark about New York Times reporter Adam Clymer probably doesnít take anything away from that. Those in Baltimore simply saw it as a human slip, something to be expected from someone under intense pressure. But the ìRATSî ad could be different; it smacks more of politics as usual. Yet looking at the campaign thus far these incidents appear to be aberrations.

So far this year the candidates have not made negative campaigning the norm, as in past years. Thatís a gigantic shift. Also, in their efforts to promote a different tone, they havenít embraced what might be called Ms. Manners politics ó avoiding differences and failing to speak up. In 1998 some candidates read polls about Americansí frustration with politics and, in response, said they would ìmake niceî with their political opponent.

Honest Efforts

This year holds the possibility to be different. First, Bush and Gore seem to be genuinely taking-on each other without biting acrimony and name-calling overwhelming their messages. Second, they are putting forth their own ideas and proposals, actively highlighting the substantive differences between themselves ó which furthers debate. Third, they are directly engaging Americans through so-called town halls, panel discussions, visits to peopleís homes and talking plainly about the future. Fourth, the candidates seem to be passionate about what they believe in, not simply what theyíre against. Fifth, they even seem to be enjoying themselves.

When I asked the Baltimore citizens what they think when they hear political candidates use campaign phrases such as ìchange the toneî of political discourse, the group gave an instant thumbs up. Now thatís news: Usually Americans respond to such political rhetoric with an unending sigh of disbelief and frowning faces. This time a small sample said the rhetoric rings true.

While this campaign may leave a lot to be desired, we are starting to have real give-and-take, what Americans have been telling The Harwood Institute for over a dozen years they have been yearning for. In the Instituteís five-year, national political conduct initiative we spent two solid years engaging Americans in nationwide citizen assemblies to identify key factors for candidatesí campaign conduct (as well as for the news media and citizens). Not since we began the initiative have I heard even an inkling from people that there is a presidential campaign they feel remotely good about, perhaps with the exceptions of Sen. John McCainís campaign and that of former Sen. Bill Bradley.

Temptations Ahead

So with this kind of success will Bush and Gore stay their course? Bush is being criticized in some Republican quarters for pulling a highly-charged Republican National Committee ad. Bush supporters thought the ad was a welcome aggressive move. It is only a matter of time before Gore feels similar pressures. And both these men have shown in the past they can get down and dirty.

Back during the New Hampshire primaries the first Democratic debate between Gore and Bradley offered a glimmer of hope, a sense of possibility about what politics could be. The initial Republican debate signaled a positive change too; and while it would be naÔve to think that a single debate would be the harbinger of change, why not hope for the best?

People often tell me itís a bit idealistic to believe that we Americans can ó indeed, should ó strive for better political discourse and conduct. But today the candidates have the chance to turn a glimmer of hope into something a bit stronger, brighter. The door of opportunity is now open. The mongers of negativity will try to close it. When the big choice comes, which course will the candidates take?

Powered by Orchid Suites
Orchid ver. 4.7.5.