Evans & Novak

Presidential 2000-Democratic: Following their first debate, there is no doubt that there is a real horse race between Vice President Al Gore and former Sen. Bill Bradley for the nomination.

1) The Dartmouth "town meeting" continued the spectacle of Gore attacking and Bradley turning the other cheek. Journalists and political operatives, accustomed to political blood lust, thought Gore won the debate. But outsiders overwhelmingly preferred Bradley's performance, as indicated by a GallupCNN poll of New Hampshire Democratic primary voters who actually watched the quasi-debate.

2) The nearly two weeks since Dartmouth have repeated the same formula of Gore relentlessly on the attack, and Bradley for the most part declining to respond (though on Monday he hit back at Gore for the first time--on health care). The consensus of political operatives believes this is a formula for suicide by Bradley, but his contention that there is a different mood abroad in the land has served well so far.

3) The spin from the Gore camp is that the interest in Bradley by conservatives and independent Republicans is part of a dark GOP plot to nominate the weaker candidate so that he can be trashed for his unrestrained health care spending. In truth, it is Bradley whom the Republican insiders fear.

4) Gore has accelerated a lachrymose campaign, though at times-as in the Dartmouth debate-he seems out of control. But Bradley is a formidable candidate, far better than anybody had conceived short months ago.

5) Bradley, of course, must win New Hampshire-though this alone would only mean there is a fight ahead. Bradley must also win New York and at least come close to Gore in California, though indeed a California win may be necessary for the challenger. Bradley's biggest task ahead is to erase Gore's huge lead in the Golden State. Gore's firewall in the Southern states, with their heavy AfricanAmerican vote in the Democratic primaries, may not be enough if Bradley scores well in the Midwest.

6) From the beginning, this has been Gore's nomination to lose. It still is, considering his massive establishment and liberal special interest support. But it no longer can be taken for granted.

Presidential 2000-Republican: Texas Gov, George W. Bush is running into rough waters, but still has an immense advantage for the Republican nomination.

1) Bush's avoidance of the first two New Hampshire debates is conceded by his supporters there to be a big mistake that has cost him, though his managers in Austin do not agree. The advice from his gray-beard counselors in Washington that he defer debating until January reflected ignorance of the accelerated process for this election cycle. At any rate, Bush will engage in several debates before January, starting with December 2 in New Hampshire.

2) The problem with Bush's failure to name obscure foreign leaders was not his ignorance (shared by his presidential rivals and journalistic interlocutors) but his clumsy way of handling a bumptious "gotcha" TV journalist from Boston. The old question of whether he is ready for prime time is renewed.

3) Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) is clearly a challenger in New Hampshire (though he must battle Bradley for the crucial independent vote). He could win in N.H., which is at least a bump in the road for the Bush juggernaut.. But even if McCain wins New Hampshire, what's next? He has put a lot of marbles in South Carolina, but he does not have funds for a state-by-state donnybrook with Bush.

4) Thus, Bush's advantage is still overwhelming, as reflected by his continuing huge lead in the national polls against all GOP rivals. That's why he will face a multiple assault in his first debate in Manchester December 2.

5) At all levels of the Republican Party (leaders, office-holders, contributors, voters), we find little backing for either McCain or Steve Forbes, Bush's main rivals.

Foreign Affairs-Global Warming: At a 50-nation conference in Bonn last week, the United States clashed with the European Union over how and when to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, an international environmental treaty mandating that participants reduce their greenhouse gas emissions 7% below 1990 levels.

Europe, along with Japan, wants the accord implemented in 2002, but the United States declined to set a date. U.S. officials are worried that the treaty will stifle economic growth, and fear the Senate, which passed a harsh condemnation of Kyoto 95 to 0, won't ratify it.

The special report appears exclusively in HUMAN EVENTS. For subscription information on their Evans-Novak Political Report, call 800-789-5367

Copyright Human Events Publishing, Inc. Nov 19, 1999
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved