Back in the day, I was never an Al Gore guy, though I certainly saw him as preferable to either George Bush or Bill Clinton. Al was Al, a stolid, earnest “idealist”, whose every ideal required a costly, centralized government program to bring it into being. The fact that such “solutions” rarely did much more than create yet another minimally functional federal bureaucracy dedicated first and foremost to its own self-perpetuation never seemed to faze Al,1 or even indeed enter into his consciousness. Yet stolid, earnest Al did have some class in his soul, and it did have an impact, as told by former conservative partisan Mona Charon in remarks she made at the recent “Convention of Founding Principles”.2 As a (very) long-term Democrat, Mona’s Al story, which came in the middle of her remarks, touched me, and I’m going to reprint a large chunk of it here, hoping that she won’t mind too terribly.
In 2000, we had the closest presidential election in American history. George W. Bush and Al Gore were separated by just a little over 500 votes in the state of Florida to decide the election. The post-election legal wrangling, which dragged on for a month, was intense, and tempers were extremely frayed.
Though it embarrasses me to reflect on it now, at the time, I was a passionate, extremely partisan Republican. I despised Al Gore and thought his victory would represent a grave evil for the nation. I followed every twist and turn of the recount and the legal maneuvers with manic intensity—never for one second considering the possibility that the Democrat actually could have won. I interpreted every Democratic move as a sign of bad faith.
Finally, on December 12, just six days before the Electoral College would meet to decide the election, the Supreme Court issued its ruling: Florida’s recount violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause. George W. Bush would be the next president. I was thrilled and deeply relieved. But I was a bit worried about what the effect might be among Democrats. Would they feel cheated? Would they accept it? Would there be violence?
What happened next has stayed with me ever since.
Al Gore immediately accepted the decision. He instructed his staff that no one was to criticize the Supreme Court, and then he delivered the most elevating concession speech in recent American history. Here are his words:
“I say to President-elect Bush that what remains of partisan rancor must now be put aside, and may God bless his stewardship of this country. Neither he nor I anticipated this long and difficult road. Certainly, neither of us wanted it to happen. Yet it came, and now it has ended, resolved, as it must be resolved, through the honored institutions of our democracy.
“Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the Court’s decision, I accept it. . . .And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession. . . .
“While we yet hold and do not yield our opposing beliefs, there is a higher duty than the one we owe to a political party. This is America and we put country before party; we will stand together behind our new president.”
Gore’s speech was a revelation to me. It helped me to see how much partisanship had warped my perceptions. Gore had different policy priorities, but he believed in the same principles I did. He was loyal to the rule of law and to the Constitution. And that’s what matters most.
President Trump, and those who view the world as he does, probably think of Al Gore as a pathetic loser. Well, he did lose an election, but he gained an honored place in history by his graciousness. Besides, it isn’t losing that’s pathetic—it’s being unable to accept a fair loss that’s pathetic.
That’s one for you, Al.
Afterwords
Al got a huge splash several cultural eons ago with his 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth, which I’m afraid I found not so truthful, followed up by An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power in 2017. If you want to know what I think about both films, check out enviro-skeptic Bjorn Lomborg’s take here. Also read about Bjorn’s latest book here.
1. I, and, I think, absolutely no one else, remember the “Goremobile”, a fantastically fuel-efficient car that General Motors was going to build, thanks to a billion-dollar grant from the Clinton Administration.
2. The Convention, which just concluded, seemed to be largely a gathering of bewildered, exiled Republican moderates. Well, as an aging, neoliberal, noninterventionist Democrat, I’m probably closer to them in spirit, if not in doctrine, than I’d like to admit. So good luck to them! I hope something works!
I always loved Gore. I found him intelligent, steady, gentle (& handsome). He was a good choice by Clinton. Perhaps people people viewed him as boring but he was just a nerd.