Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, March 11, 1991 TAG: 9103110270
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A/9 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Warren Fiske
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The question needs to be explored, now that public-opinion polls show President Bush, basking in the glory of an overwhelming military victory in the Persian Gulf, has an unprecedented 91 percent approval rating from American voters.
Bush's popularity doubtless will decline somewhat during the next 18 months, as he confronts thorny domestic issues. But unless there's an economic collapse, everything points to another easy Republican victory in the 1992 presidential race.
Democratic contenders seem like a circus crowd contemplating a step in the ring with a wrestling bear. There's a lot of talk but no one - including Mario Cuomo, Lloyd Bensten, Sam Nunn, Al Gore and Richard Gephardt - has stepped forward. (Paul Tsongas, a liberal Democrat from Massachusetts, has come closest - saying he's thinking about becoming a candidate and will decide later this month.)
Clearly, there's potential in the vacuum for a second-tier candidate like Wilder.He would gain attention and a national bully pulpit by becoming the first Democrat to roll up his sleeves. And if other leading Democrats remain on the sidelines next year, Wilder could ensure himself a place in history as the first black to receive a major party's presidential nomination.
But the betting is that Doug Wilder will remain pressed against the ring but never cross the ropes. This is not because he has abandoned hope of becoming president. It's because Wilder has never run for show; he runs to win.
Why can't Wilder win in 1992? First, he's a Democrat and his party's candidates have lost five of the last six presidential contests. Considering Bush's popularity, it's not hard to imagine a 50-state Republican sweep next year, no matter which Democrat steps forward. Also, Wilder seems a particularly poor match for Bush. The governor has no experience in foreign affairs, while Bush is being lauded for his international policies. Public opinion polls show overwhelming approval for Bush's use of force in the Middle East. Wilder went on record last December opposing combat, saying sanctions against Iraq needed more time to work.
Bush may be more vulnerable on budget issues at home, including his willingness to raise taxes last fall. But if Virginia's financial condition gets much worse,Wilder acknowledges that he, like Bush, may have to abandon his pledge to oppose new taxes.
Anyway, is the Democratic party ready to nominate a black standard-bearer who by next year will not have even served a complete term as governor? Possibly not, and that's another reason to bet that Wilder won't become a candidate.
The guessing is that Wilder is really looking to 1996 to test the presidential waters. There won't be a Republican incumbent to worry about that year. And Wilder, who cannot succeed himself when his gubernatorial term expires in 1994, would be free to campaign much like Jimmy Carter did in the mid-1970s.
That doesn't mean Wilder will abandon all efforts for national office in 1992. To the contrary, the prize he may have in mind is his party's nomination for vice president. By running second on the ticket, he would gain national prominence while avoiding being stigmatized as a loser, should Bush sweep to re-election. Win or lose, Wilder would gain credibility as a presidential contender for 1996.
Many Democrats already believe Wilder is a natural for the No. 2 spot. He has sound conservative credentials, is an able campaigner, and his emergence would all but end Jesse Jackson's reign as the nation's pre-eminent black politician. Wilder, of course, dismisses such speculation. He says no one can run for the vice-presidential nomination because the choice is solely up to the presidential nominee.
But there are ways to angle for the vice presidency: You encourage speculation about your presidential prospects without quite announcing your candidacy. You travel widely across the country and take a lead in forming a national Democratic agenda. You cultivate media attention. You point out deficiencies in potential Democratic rivals. And, of course, you deny having any immediate national aspirations.
Does this sound like any governor you know?
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB