CONVENTION '96: SITTING PRETTY

(3 of 5)

Some Clinton opponents have an even darker psychological explanation, which is that Americans have become so cynical about politics that they expect their elected officials to be morally compromised--liars, unprincipled political opportunists, financial finaglers--and no longer hold egregious vices against the politicians they vote for. A variation on this theory blames the press and the political system for scandal overload. Overdosing on exposes and special prosecutors, the public--while amiably willing to believe in general that politicians are corrupt--has lost its capacity for outrage at any particular new disclosure. A Clinton-friendly version of this theory holds that the mud doesn't stick because it shouldn't stick.

A more sophisticated pro-Clinton version goes like this: Americans are no more cynical than they have always been. Sure, Clinton is a slick politician and a morally flawed human being--but so is Dole, and so were other Republican presidential candidates of recent years. It's just that in the years between Lyndon Johnson and Clinton, the Democrats got in the habit of nominating high-minded, too-good-for-this-world types like George McGovern, Jimmy Carter and Michael Dukakis. Not coincidentally, they also got in the habit of losing elections. So finally in 1992 the Democrats nominated somebody who was not too fastidious to win. Unsurprisingly, he is not so fastidious in his private affairs either. It may seem like cheating for the Democrats to behave so professionally. But it works.

3. IT REALLY IS THE ECONOMY, STUPID

Leave the fancy psychological theorizing aside. Times are good. Growth is steady, unemployment and inflation are low, the deficit is way down. Elections in peacetime are always a referendum on the economy. Voters may not be certain whether Clinton deserves the credit, but they may not care. They won't dislodge the incumbent under these sunny circumstances.

Somewhat comically, in our political culture of grievance, almost no one is willing to admit that times actually are pretty good. Polls show the citizenry fairly gloomy about general economic prospects even while conceding that their own prospects are O.K. Republicans are reduced to grumbling that modest, steady growth is not good enough and that Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Board, rather than Clinton, deserve the credit in any event. (There's an inherent contradiction here: If the Fed sets the rate of growth, how can Clinton be blamed that it's not faster?) Clinton, meanwhile, has the happier but still tricky task of taking credit for our wonderful economic condition without seeming complacent about our terrible economic grievances.

4. THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS