| Money Can’t
Buy You Love
http://www.jewishworldreview.com --
AT THE END of September, the various candidates running for president
released their financial statements. Beneath the minutiae was a striking
fact: So far this year, Steve Forbes and George W. Bush have spent roughly
the same amount of money, about $20 million. But that number alone
doesn’t tell the most interesting story. Forbes has been running for
president more or less continuously since the fall of 1995. Since then he
has spent—depending on how you count it—anywhere from $60 to $75
million. The vast majority has been his own money—money that Forbes,
rich as he is, didn’t have sitting in his checking account. An
investigation by the New York Times found that Forbes has relatively few
liquid assets, and that in order to finance his career in politics he has
had to sell off part of his stake in his family-owned company. After four
years of campaigning, Steve Forbes is no longer the majority shareholder
of Forbes Inc.
What has Forbes received in return? In mid-October, USA Today released the
results of a poll that asked Republicans who they planned to vote for in
2000. George W. Bush had by far the most support, 60 percent. John McCain
had 8 percent. Steve Forbes came in at a mere 4 percent, in a statistical
dead heat with Alan Keyes and Orrin Hatch.
For Forbes, politics has been an expensive hobby. Except, as has become
abundantly clear, Forbes doesn’t consider it a hobby. In contrast to
Hatch and Keyes, Forbes isn’t running on a lark or as a form of protest.
He’s not attempting to prove a point, or make a statement, or drive up
his speaking fees after the election. Steve Forbes is running for
president so he can become president. That’s the only reason. And
perhaps the strangest reason.
You get the sense that Forbes isn’t kidding the moment you walk into his
campaign headquarters in Northern Virginia. The first thing you notice
about the place is how different it is from Forbes’s former, real-life
office in New York. The Forbes magazine building in Manhattan, where
Forbes spent his professional life until the last election, is grand but
surprisingly homey. Though the company maintains a large display of rare
documents and FabergÈ eggs on the first floor, there are no obvious
security cameras or armed guards. The bathrooms off the lobby are
wood-paneled, unlocked and open to the public. When he ran the magazine,
Forbes routinely walked down to the reception desk himself to escort
visitors back to his office. In person, he was charming in a
self-deprecating way. He laughed and grinned and giggled a lot, often at
himself. He talked enthusiastically about baseball. He returned his own
phone calls without the usual “please-hold-for-Mr.-Forbes” power
displays. He had a funny haircut. He did not, in short, seem like the kind
of guy who would blow his family fortune ego-tripping through a midlife
crisis.
His campaign headquarters, on the other hand, looks like something
designed by Ross Perot. A humorless uniformed guard with a buzz cut sits
at a table outside the door taking names and handing out electronic
passes, which visitors are instructed to wear around their necks. (“Sign
your name,” demands the guard, thrusting forward a log book; “do not
initial.”) Inside, the campaign office—which takes up an entire floor
of a sizable building, leased until November 2000—seems more like a
large corporation than the headquarters of a third-tier candidate. There
are divisions upon divisions, with weirdly bureaucratic labels: “Office
of Coalitions,” “Political Ops.,” “Polling Division,”
“Budgeting,” “Ballot Operations,” “Legal Office,”
“Finance,” “Candidate Operations.” (It’s difficult to imagine
that the Keyes campaign has a similar organizational chart.) On the walls
are dozens, maybe hundreds, of pictures of Steve Forbes.
Then there is the staff. Forbes 2000 may be doomed, but no one seems to
have told the people who work there. Forbes spokesmen churn out an amazing
amount of propaganda, much of it about as subtle as a head injury. The
campaign is famous for badgering television news producers (“I get to
work and I’ve already got three messages from them on my machine,”
sighs one) as well as for the relentlessly pedantic, overbearing spin. The
morning after Forbes gave a notably mediocre performance in a New
Hampshire forum with other second-string GOP candidates, campaign flack
Keith Appell sent an e-mail to reporters clumsily declaring victory.
“The inaugural debate of campaign 2000 showed why Steve Forbes is going
to win,” Appell wrote in a message dripping with the campaign’s
signature irony-free fervor. “The big loser: George Bush.”
Laughably ineffective as this is, there is nothing cut-rate or
unprofessional about most of Forbes’s staff. In 1995, Forbes hired
campaign manager Bill DalCol, who has subsequently brought on a number of
well-regarded Republican campaign operatives, many with experience in
previous presidential races: former Buchanan strategist Greg Mueller to
oversee communications, Reagan-Bush veteran Rick Ahearn to head the
advance office, longtime New York pollster John McLaughlin to do surveys,
and Gary Maloney, a notoriously hardball opposition researcher, to dig up
damaging stories about George W. Bush. As of last week, Forbes 2000 had 12
campaign offices around the country, staffed by 113 full-time employees,
not including consultants and paid advisers.
 |
| Forbes |
All of them seem to be working hard, though
none harder than the candidate himself. In contrast to Ross Perot, who
spent wildly but rarely left his compound in Dallas, Forbes has hit the
campaign trail like a man half his age and five tax brackets poorer. He
happily accepts any and all offers to talk to reporters. (For this story,
Forbes called me back, personally, four times.) His staff estimates he has
done 3,500 interviews since the latest campaign began. He tapes a daily
radio commentary, gives speeches constantly, spends virtually his entire
life on buses and commercial airplanes (he no longer has his own). Since
early spring he has traveled to more than 40 states. In the first three
weeks of October alone, Forbes made campaign appearances in Wyoming, New
Jersey, Missouri, Louisiana, Washington, South Carolina, Seattle, Atlanta,
Delaware, California, Alabama, and London. He made three separate trips to
Iowa and two to New Hampshire. At one point he flew from England to an
event in California in the space of a single day.
Forbes admits that he hasn’t taken a day off since sometime in August
(he can’t seem to remember exactly when) and doesn’t plan to again
until Thanksgiving, but claims he isn’t exhausted or even particularly
tired. Bill DalCol, who oversees his schedule, doesn’t seem to care if
he is. “He understands the mission at hand,” DalCol says with no hint
of a smile. “He only has to keep it up through April or May.”
The question is, Why would he want to? Despite his best efforts, his
campaign seems to be going nowhere at great expense. Why not hang it up
now and with dignity, take early retirement to a private island and spend
the next 30 years sipping fruity cocktails and making targeted campaign
donations? Or, better yet, why not use what has become a formidable
campaign organization to run for and win the open Senate seat in New
Jersey? Forbes won’t even dignify the question with an answer. “The
Bush people have been fanning that for weeks,” he says. “My feeling is
that if Hillary can run in New York, I’d be very supportive if Governor
Bush was to run in New Jersey.” Forbes has delivered the line countless
times, but he still snorts with what sounds like genuine laughter as he
says it.
His staff, however, doesn’t see the humor. Ask why Forbes is still in
the race and you’ll get blank stares followed by a patient lecture
explaining that everything is going precisely according to plan, down to
the 4 percent USA Today poll. “We’re right where we need to be,”
says DalCol. “I don’t know that we’d want to be in any stronger
position right now.” That’s right, says Greg Mueller. “The campaign,
we feel, is in a very good position.”
How can smart people say things like this? For starters, the Forbes people
dismiss national polls as meaningless in a Republican primary. “Who’s
actually pulling the levers?” asks Mueller. “It’s not the people
reflected in Newsweek polls.” Rather, they claim (with some
justification), that the only people who matter in a primary are the
Republican faithful, the fabled Base, who for the most part are
conservatives. And conservatives prefer Forbes—who, since the implosion
of the Quayle, Buchanan, and Bob Smith campaigns, is the only true
conservative left in the race.
That’s the idea. Never mind that it ignores the existence of Gary Bauer,
another true conservative whose presence poses a real threat to Forbes’s
performance in the Iowa caucus. (In public, Forbes staffers pretend to be
not quite sure who Bauer is. John McCain, meanwhile, is written off as
moderate and therefore irrelevant to the strategy.) The real problem with
the Forbes scenario is that it ends there. Forbes strategists can go on
for hours about the weaknesses of the Bush campaign—too liberal, wildly
bloated, insufferably arrogant, etc., etc.—but ask them how, exactly,
their candidate is going to win the nomination and they become notably
inarticulate.
They are particularly vague when it comes to individual primaries. All
point out that in past elections underdogs have frequently done better
than expected, while a long lists of front-runners have crashed and
burned. Pollster John McLaughlin likes to remind reporters that in the
fall of 1979, Sen. Ted Kennedy was far and away the favorite in the 1980
election, beating Ronald Reagan in surveys by two to one. Others resurrect
the memory of Pat Buchanan, who months before the 1996 New Hampshire
primary was trailing Bob Dole by 40 points. Buchanan, of course, wound up
winning.
You might assume that the moral of the story is that Steve Forbes has a
real chance to take New Hampshire. But no. Forbes staffers don’t seem to
expect a victory there. Or, for that matter, in Iowa, the state where
Forbes has spent the most time and money. In fact, it’s not clear what
state the Forbes campaign expects to win. At first, Bill DalCol seems to
suggest a Bush rout will come early. “We’ve got to take Bush out
within the first eight,” he says. Asked how and where this will take
place, DalCol hedges. “It would be helpful if we won one,” he
explains. Forbes himself indicates that losing the first eight primaries
would not necessarily be enough to force him from the race. “It depends
on the circumstances at the time,” he says.
After a while it becomes clear that Forbes plans to stay in the race for a
long, long time, regardless of how he fares in the early primaries. And,
in fact, staying in for a long time is at the heart of what passes for his
strategy. Even if Forbes were to lose eight primaries in a row, even if
John McCain were to win New Hampshire, thereby becoming the undisputed
alternative to Bush, the Forbes people argue that their candidate would
still be the only credible challenger, simply because he has the most
money. And once everyone but Bush drops out for lack of cash, Forbes will
still have the reserves to hammer the front-runner with negative ads (or
“engage him with our message,” as Greg Mueller puts it) and ultimately
topple him.
Just about every political professional outside the Forbes campaign
regards this scenario as borderline crackpot. In fact, early victories are
crucial. In 1996, Forbes’s surprisingly poor showing in Iowa (he was
expected to place second; he came in fourth) cost him 10 points in New
Hampshire overnight. He never recovered. Forbes strategists don’t seem
to understand that if McCain (or, for that matter, Bauer) actually won an
upset victory in an early primary state, his fund-raising would jump
accordingly. More important even, an upset winner gets so much free media
attention, it can catapult him ahead in other states. Winning primaries,
in other words, is the only way to win primaries. Which one do the Forbes
people think he can win? If they have one in mind, it’s a closely held
secret.
Instead of victories, they would rather talk about money, a subject on
which Forbes and his staff appear to have bought their own spin. “He’s
Lamar with money,” says Steve Schmidt, who, as the former communications
director of Alexander 2000, ought to know. “Steve Forbes is not going to
be president of the United States,” declares James Carville, a
connoisseur (despite his partisan hackery on television) of strategy and
technical skill in politics. “I think you or I would have a better
chance of winning. I know of no other political person—Republican or
Democrat—who doesn’t agree with me.”
The Forbes campaign, of course, doesn’t agree. Bill DalCol dismisses
doubts about Forbes as a symptom of insular, inside-the-Beltway thinking.
Or of something more sinister. The national media, DalCol says, are
members of the same “club”—a club from which Steve Forbes, as an
outsider, is excluded. “A lot of these [reporters] socialize with the
establishment players,” DalCol explains. “The establishment players
are all with Bush.” Moreover, he says, Forbes is a magazine publisher.
If you’re a journalist, “who is the enemy? The publisher, the company.
He happens to come out of the publishing industry. That’s something we
have to overcome.”
It’s easy to mock conspiracy theories like this. But they have been of
great use to the Forbes campaign. For one thing, they allow Forbes’s
staff to ignore the biting coverage their boss often receives. And they
allow Forbes himself to continue his bid for the presidency unhampered by
doubts that perhaps the critics are right. All of which may explain why
Forbes, at 4 percent in national polls, sometimes behaves like the
front-runner.
For instance, when he issues slightly pompous statements on matters of
concern to the International Community (the earthquake in Turkey, the
civil rights of Catholics in Northern Ireland). Or when he faxes out press
releases about subjects so trivial that it’s hard to believe a human
being actually sat down and typed them out (“FBI Veteran Named Forbes
Security Director”). Or when, as he does every day, he acts as if at
some point soon he will be president of the United
Tucker Carlson is a staff
writer at the Weekly Standard |