Worse than Clinton

THE best thing about a possible presidency of Albert Gore Jr. is that after eight years of Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore as First Lady would be a relief. But this about exhausts the upside of a Gore win, for along with Tipper comes Al. And while Tipper would be a relief after Hillary, he would not be a relief after Bill. In fact, he would make Clinton look better. Though volunteers and interns would be safe from presidential groping, the country at large would suffer. Below are five reasons why.

Gore as utopian and dogmatist. Clinton at heart believes in little beyond his self-interest, which, if a flaw, at least centers him. Thus his approach to government—after his drubbing in the ‘94 mid-term elections—tended to small, incremental, symbolic measures; too small, or too empty, to do too much damage. Gore, on the other hand, has large, sweeping theories. He shows every sign of utopian thinking, of the belief in vast, comprehensive, and definitive solutions in which, with the right words on the right kind of paper, the vagaries of life, law, and human nature can be ironed out, once and for all. So, while Gore may appear moderate on some issues—defense, entitlements—his approach to issues is anything but. As his biographer Bill Turque writes, “Earth in the Balance [Gore’s 1992 environmentalist tome] is the essential Gore: thoughtful, earnest, ambitious, crammed with facts, and breath-takingly grandiose.” It is “charged with the evangelistic fervor of a man who believes he can save the world.”

About the Author

Noemie Emery

Noemie Emery has also written for the Washington Examiner and The Weekly Standard.

Featured Tags

Presidential Election

THE best thing about a possible presidency of Albert Gore Jr. is that after eight years of Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore as First Lady would be a relief. But this about exhausts the upside of a Gore win, for along with Tipper comes Al. And while Tipper would be a relief after Hillary, he would not be a relief after Bill. In fact, he would make Clinton look better. Though volunteers and interns would be safe from presidential groping, the country at large would suffer. Below are five reasons why.

Gore as utopian and dogmatist. Clinton at heart believes in little beyond his self-interest, which, if a flaw, at least centers him. Thus his approach to government—after his drubbing in the ‘94 mid-term elections—tended to small, incremental, symbolic measures; too small, or too empty, to do too much damage. Gore, on the other hand, has large, sweeping theories. He shows every sign of utopian thinking, of the belief in vast, comprehensive, and definitive solutions in which, with the right words on the right kind of paper, the vagaries of life, law, and human nature can be ironed out, once and for all. So, while Gore may appear moderate on some issues—defense, entitlements—his approach to issues is anything but. As his biographer Bill Turque writes, “Earth in the Balance [Gore’s 1992 environmentalist tome] is the essential Gore: thoughtful, earnest, ambitious, crammed with facts, and breath-takingly grandiose.” It is “charged with the evangelistic fervor of a man who believes he can save the world.”