President Kerry?
Gore looks unbeatable, and Gephardt attracts attention as the veep's most outspoken
opponent. How could John Kerry ever hope to win the Democratic nomination in 2000?
Here's how.
by Dan Kennedy
US Senator John Kerry was wrapping up the latest of his semi-regular
appearances on Imus in the Morning. For 20 minutes or so he'd absorbed
the I-man's barbs with good humor. He talked about the advice he'd given Bill
Weld on his battle for confirmation as ambassador to Mexico, and didn't object
strenuously when Imus paraphrased said counsel as "Shut up." He flogged his
just-published book, The New War. He even launched into an impressively
nuanced monologue on the internal politics of the Israeli cabinet.
Now it was time for the magic moment, when the guest is feeling loose and
stumbles into one of Imus's deceptively benign-sounding traps. "What would be
interesting in 2000 -- if Teresa lets you -- why, it could be you and Governor
Weld going at each other again, couldn't it?" Imus purred.
"Absolutely," Kerry replied, not missing a beat. "But obviously I'd have to
check with her first."
For a potential presidential candidate who would be the longest of long shots,
it was the perfect answer. Don't confirm it. Don't deny it. And for God's sake,
don't make it sound as if you stay awake nights thinking about it.
The conventional wisdom, of course, is that Al Gore's got the Democratic
nomination all but wrapped up, and that his only likely opponent is Dick
Gephardt, who'll appeal to organized labor and other traditional Democratic
constituencies.
"My sense of it is that Gore completely occupies the center and Gephardt
completely occupies the left," says political consultant Dick Morris, who
masterminded Bill Clinton's comeback after the disastrous midterm elections of
1994. "I personally think that Gephardt is God's gift to Gore, because he keeps
everybody else out, and he can't possibly win."
Not that others aren't thinking of trying. Among other potential candidates,
the one most frequently mentioned is Minnesota senator Paul Wellstone, a
liberal's liberal who'd play well with the party's granola-reformist wing.
Maybe Bill Bradley or Jesse Jackson or the other Kerr(e)y, Bob, might jump in
too.
But John Kerry? He didn't even show up in a recent presidential-contender poll
taken by the highly regarded Marist Institute for Public Opinion.
Still, Kerry's surprisingly strong re-election victory over Weld last year has
put him back on the national radar -- for the first time, really, since 1971,
when, as the head of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, he testified before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee and solemnly asked, "How do you ask a man to
be the last man to die for a mistake?"
If getting mentioned by the Great Mentioners is a sign, then Kerry's a 2000
contender already. Time magazine was predicting a Kerry-Weld rematch at
the presidential level practically before the polls closed last November.
U.S. News & World Report buzzed knowingly in February when Kerry and
his wife, Teresa Heinz, were spotted hanging out with New Hampshire governor
Jeanne Shaheen at the Democratic Governors Association dinner in Washington. In
June, New York Times columnist William Safire described Kerry as the
Democrats' only realistic alternative to Gore and Gephardt.
"John really helped himself when he beat Weld," says a nationally known
Democratic strategist who asked not to be identified. "He has increased his
respect among political professionals around the country. Several people have
said to me, `Jesus, I didn't know John was that tough.' "
Officially, the Kerry camp wants nothing to do with any talk about 2000. For
Kerry, last year's campaign was a near-death experience: his poor staff work,
fuzzy ideology, and seeming inattention to local issues nearly cost him his
Senate seat. Despite his large final margin of victory over Weld (52 to 45
percent), the two men ran in a virtual tie for most of 1996.