GORE'S CHANCES

	November 6, 2000
	Shields and Gigot discuss the vice president's chances.

JIM LEHRER: And to Shields and Gigot; syndicated columnist Mark Shields, and "Wall Street Journal" columnist Paul Gigot. Mark, Vice President Gore, how is he finishing his campaign in your opinion? How well? MARK SHIELDS: Well, he's finishing it. Jim, it's a strategy born of necessity. He's got - Saturday he was in West Virginia, before Ray picked him up - there, with Robert Byrd, dean of the U.S. Senate, Jay Rockefeller, the other Senator, campaigning his heart out, trying to come up from behind in a state which Michael Dukakis did - carried in 1988 - which every Democrat, save Fritz Mondale in 1984, has covered - carried in the past 30 years. So he's - it's a strategy that's born, as Ray pointed out, of six or eight states where he's concentrating all his effort, all his energy. There is a sense of urgency about it, contrasted with Governor Bush's campaign, some would say desperation and exhortation. JIM LEHRER: Desperation? PAUL GIGOT: I agree with, Mark. It's certainly not an uplifting vision. It's a turnout argument, Jim. It's scare people about Governor Bush - the things - awful things are going to happen; you're going to lose your Social Security benefits; he said at one point this week, Jim, if he wins, George Bush wins and appoints Supreme Court nominees, they're going to bring us back to the days when African-Americans were only 3/5 people. Now, you know, that's not exactly inspiring visionary stuff, but it is designed to scare people, get them to the polls, and basically run the inside straight in the electoral college that he needs to win this. JIM LEHRER: What kind of marks would you give Al Gore as a candidate for President during this campaign in terms of how he began and how he's ending? PAUL GIGOT: Not very good, Jim. I don't think he ever felt comfortable running. He never decided what he was going to do with President Clinton, never got comfortable how he was going to run with him or without him, against him, and so he never got on message, it seemed to me; never really got comfortable even making the case for prosperity, that you could continue it, because it was almost as if wanted to distance himself from Bill Clinton personally, but then couldn't make the argument for what has happened to the country under the Clinton watch economically. It's been awkward, strained. JIM LEHRER: "Awkward, strained," Mark? MARK SHIELDS: Well, if he does lose on Tuesday, and I'm not sure that he will by any means, but if he does, he will be blamed. It's unprecedented. He's broken every political scientist's heart, because with 3.9% unemployment, with a period of unmatched prosperity, 110 months I think the last time, on economic growth the last time I checked, of peace in the world, with a President with a 63% favorable job rating, "Wall Street Journal" poll today, Bill Clinton's higher, that Al Gore could lose with no-- this is not an electorate, Jim, of 1994 with the angry white male. I mean, this is an electorate that isn't angry, this is an electorate that is not one that's upset over some unmet national need. So Al Gore -- the last week has been a psychodrama on the last page of the paper-- how he's dealing with Bill Clinton, how Bill Clinton is giving interviews to "Esquire," whether or not he posed for the picture, didn't know whether it was coming out, whether it was going to be used. And if I'm not mistaken, Ray Suarez' piece, that's the first time I have heard Al Gore mentioned Newt Gingrich. I mean, George Bush has used that very effectively. The past eight years have been this time of consternation and friction and tension, and never once has Gore given what's the obvious answer to most Democrats, that, you know, it was Newt Gingrich who brought this politics of polarization. JIM LEHRER: We'll pick this up in a minute. Don't go away. Now let's look at Governor Bush and his last campaigning. And Gwen Ifill has that report.