TIME: Almanac 1995

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ TIME: Almanac 1995 / TIME Almanac 1995.iso / time / 042092 / 04209928.000 < prev next >

Wrap

Text File | 1994-03-25 | 6KB | 124 lines

<text id=92TT0862> <title> Apr. 20, 1992: The Political Interest </title> <history> TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1992 Apr. 20, 1992 Why Voters Don't Trust Clinton </history> <article> <source>Time Magazine</source> <hdr> COVER STORIES, Page 46 THE POLITICAL INTEREST It's Not Going to Be Pretty </hdr><body> A high-minded debate of the issues? No way. The roughing up of Bill Clinton has just begun. By Michael Kramer No less an expert than the leader of the free world has now pronounced 1992 "the ugliest political year I've ever seen." Not that he or his minions are the problem, said George Bush last week. It's the other guys: "I look across at the Democratic primary, and anything that happened in 1988 is pale in comparison to what's going on there." Has the President seen the light? He says he has issued written instructions ordering his operatives to "stay out of the sleaze business," but the definition thing persists. "I don't know what's negative and what's not these days," says the man who views the famous Willie Horton TV ad as a fair examination of prison-furlough abuse. Fuzzy markers delight the G.O.P., and a foretaste of the war to come was glimpsed clearly on the night before Bush's feigned distress. Minutes after Bill Clinton won the New York food fight last Tuesday, Republican Party chairman Rich Bond gleefully recalled Jerry Brown's characterization of Clinton as "the prince of sleaze." They've "got them all on tape,'' says Bond. "Paul Tsongas calling Clinton a `Pander Bear'; Ed Koch saying, `It happens that Bill Clinton has no credibility'; Mario Cuomo calling Clinton's middle-class tax cut `a joke.' We've got 'em, and you'll be seeing 'em. It ain't gonna be pretty." How unpretty will it get? "Character dominates in voters' minds," says Bush campaign manager Robert Teeter; our job, says Bond, is to "remind" voters that it does. For the most part, the "worst of Clinton" will be left for the press to reiterate and for the surrogate salons (the radio call-in shows) to elaborate. Such restraint does not preclude "man-in-the-street spots," cautions Republican consultant Roger Stone. "Ford almost won in '76 with a series of TV ads that had `regular people' saying, `There's just something about Carter that bothers me' and `He seems so wishy-washy' and `His smile strikes me as insincere.' Same thing this year, for sure." The truly rough stuff will rise, virgin-like, from the same "independent expenditure" group that produced the Willie Horton ad in 1988. Four years ago, these conservative ideologues called themselves "Americans for Bush"; this time they're the "Presidential Victory Committee." They have a $10 million budget, and "what they'll do," says Stone, "is kind of obvious." All they've said so far is what they won't do: they won't establish a 900 number so the curious can hear the Gennifer Flowers tapes. Beyond that, every mini-scandal and Clinton slickery is considered fair game. While all that is going on, the campaign will take the "high road," says Bond. "The first goal," explains Stone, "is to extend the doubts about Clinton to issues. You play to the pre-existing prejudice--that many people don't know if they can believe anything Clinton says. There'll be ads that say `Clinton talks about a middle-class tax cut, but he's raised over 100 taxes in Arkansas' and `He talks about improving education, but Arkansas' pupils rank near the bottom on test scores.' " According to Bond, we'll also see spots that "accentuate the stature gap," like, "In the next decade 10 Third World countries will have nuclear weapons. Who better can deal with a madman with nukes, George Bush or Bill Clinton?" "Foreign policy will be an issue if we make it an issue," says Stone, "and we will. You always play to your strength, and you play it over and over." Hillary Clinton will be targeted too. "Barbara Bush plays the piano so she doesn't drown out George's violin," says Richard Nixon. "Hillary pounds the piano so hard that Bill can't be heard. You want a wife who's intelligent, but not too intelligent." For Roger Ailes, who directed the Bush media effort four years ago, the logic is simple: "You couple them and go for a score on family values. You say that Bill and Hillary believe that children should have the right to sue their parents. I don't know if Bill believes that, but Hillary does, so you just assume. They themselves say they're a team, so it'll fly." Unless the polls dictate different tactics--or he just can't contain himself--Bush will be the soul of propriety. The President will aid the negative strategy only in debate or when responding to a Clinton charge, but in either case, the code words will be unmistakable. "If he gets a question about some supposed insensitivity, he'll say, `I don't need a lecture from Bill Clinton about personal responsibility,'" says Ailes. "Or if Clinton waffles during a debate," adds Bond, "I can hear the President saying, `There he goes again, dodging another question.'" Ailes advises that nothing will work for Clinton unless he gives as good as he gets. "He should run ads about George's kids' problems," says Ailes, and "spots on the foreign clients our campaign guys represent, and others about our contributors to allege that the President is controlled by powerful interests. He'll never prove that Bush is just as bad as him, but he's got to try and take character off the table by muddying the waters. If he doesn't, he'll be left trying to convince voters that he has integrity, and that's a rough road." To which an unsmiling and depressed senior Clinton aide says, "He's got that right." </body></article> </text>