Psychohistorical Notes on Al Gore and President Clinton

Democratic Presidential nominee Al Gore has significantly influenced the policies of the United States during his past eight years as Vice President. If elected President, he will wield even more influence for the next four or eight years. Future psychohistorians will attempt to identify his socially acquired motivations and attitudes that result from early experiences.

Useful information for inferring Al Gore’s distinctive motivations and attitudes is contained in two recent biographies. Bob Zelnick expresses a predominantly hostile evaluation of his public actions and policies. Bill Turque evaluates him more favorably but includes embarrassing revelations. The books are not psychohistories, but they contribute useful information for the psychological interpretation of Al Gore’s early experiences and behavior. They also include valid inferences about his motivations. The psychological perspective of this essay may provide useful background for more thorough psychohistorical analyses in the future.

Zelnick and Turque both characterize Al Gore as a generally ethical and diligent Congressman, Senator, and Vice President. He is a conscientious, loyal subordinate of President Clinton; a loving, faithful husband; and an attentive father. His social motivations and attitudes include a desire to serve his country; the determination to warn the public about the dangers of global warming and cigarette smoking; and sympathy for poor and exploited people. Both authors also describe contradictory behavior by Al Gore. Although he is highly intelligent and introspective, his scholastic performance was inconsistent. Before he went to college, he fell in love with and subsequently married a woman of whom his parents disapproved because her family had inferior social status. Although Gore eventually chose a political career in accordance with the desires of his parents, he initially attended a theological seminary and then was a journalist for several years.

Turque and Zelnick both report several occasions when Al Gore exaggerated his achievements. The most widely known is his claim that he invented the Internet. On many occasions, Gore has been deceitful in trying to gain public approval. Turque emphasizes that Gore is complex and conflicted. With friends and family he is genial and affable, but in public contexts he inclines to be stiff and inhibited. Personally he is kind and gentle, but

Page 59

a nasty, aggressive political contestant. Turque declares the Vice President to be “…protective of his family’s privacy yet willing to exploit personal tragedies for political gain. His carefully tended Dudley Do-Right image obscures a keen and sometimes ruthlessly competitive nature.” The most spectacular revelation by Turque is evidence that Gore’s characterization of his youthful marijuana consumption as “extremely rare, extremely rare” was a gross understatement. He tried to prevent a former friend from revealing the frequency of their marijuana smoking together while he was a journalist.

Both biographies report several childhood experiences that are probably the origins of Al Gore’s distinctive motivations and attitudes. Although he was given the same name as his father, Albert Arnold Gore, the son was given the choice of whether to use the identifier, “Jr.” The father was called “Albert” and the son, “Al,” although Zelnick repeatedly identifies the son as “Al Gore, Jr.” Both parents were ambitious for his future political success. His sister Nancy, 10 years older than Al, undoubtedly resented the greater aspirations of the parents for their son than for her. Albert Gore, the father, was a member of the United States Congress (House and Senate), which necessitated that the family divide its time between the family farm in Tennessee and an apartment in Washington, DC. Their mother, Pauline, devoted more attention to her husband’s political career than to her children. Both parents were frequently absent. Al’s father was an admirable and loving parent but also severely demanding. He required young Al to do hard, prolonged labor on the family farm.

Older sister Nancy sister was overtly rebellious as well as a heavy drinker and smoker. Al partially emulated her by covert rebellion against parental demands and expectations. In common with many sons who are the father’s namesake, Al developed a strong but ambivalent identification with his father. The influence of his older sister and frequent parental absences helped him to develop social skills and a high degree of independence.

Senator Gore’s opposition to the Vietnam War was unpopular in Tennessee. In fact, it was the main reason for his defeat for re-election to the Senate in 1970. Upon graduation from Harvard, Al Gore tried to rescue his father’s political career by enlisting in the Army, volunteering for duty in Vietnam that same year. Afterward, he expressed his most conspicuous rebellion against parental wishes as he briefly attended divinity school followed by several years as a newspaper reporter.

In 1976, Al Gore competed for and won election to the U. S. House of Representatives. In 1984 he was elected to the U.S. Senate. During his legislative career, Al was enthusiastically supported by his father, but adamantly refused paternal help. In Al’s candidacy for President, he is enthusiastically supported by President Clinton, but will probably refuse most of Clinton’s efforts to help his campaign.

It is evident that President Clinton and Vice President Gore have a mutual relationship of cooperation and respect. Both books state that Gore has had a more prominent and active role in the Presidential administration than any previous Vice President. Nevertheless, there are also tensions between two different personalities and Gore has publicly expressed disapproval of Clinton’s sexual misbehavior.

Dead Center by James MacGregor Burns and Georgia J. Sorenson describes Clinton’s Presidency as a triumvirate with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Al Gore. Clinton is characterized as a weak and excessively cautious President. The title for the book refers to President Clinton’s strategy of occupying the center of the political spectrum, avoiding the stigma of being a liberal. The book repeatedly distinguishes between “tranformational” and “transactional” leadership. Transformational leadership is described as setting lofty goals and fighting to achieve them. Transactional leadership is described as brokerage and compromise, producing incremental changes. Clinton is characterized and disparaged as a transactional leader.

The book describes and evaluates the first five-and-a-half years of Bill Clinton’s Presidency from January, 1993, until autumn, 1998. The disapproval of Clinton’s policies seems unfair. His victory in two Presidential elections might be attributable to his centrist political ideology and to his preference for compromise and accommodation instead of confrontation and combat. Clinton’s principal transformational effort was the unsuccessful proposal for health care reform in the first two years of his term.

The prologue of Dead Center contains a brief conversation of the authors with Bill Clinton less than two months before the 1992 Presidential election. Clinton promised to become a “trans-forming leader.” The authors describe but do not

Page 60

fully appreciate the political realities imposed on Clinton. Transformational leadership might have caused him to lose the Presidential election in 1996.

Inferences about Bill Clinton’s motives in this book are simplistic and derogatory rather than psychohistorical. Clinton’s disappointing actions are usually attributed to excessive caution or craving for approval rather than to prudence or realism. Chapter 2 contains brief information on the personality development of Bill Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Al Gore. In contrast to Clinton’s early life, Al Gore’s was “a study in strong community and powerful concentration on values.” Burns and Sorenson comment that the Gore father and son occasionally sparred with one another. The book quotes a friend of “Al junior” as observing, “A powerful father and a strong-willed son is not always an easy relationship.”

There are a few brief references to the encounters of Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky, including the impeachment proceedings against the President by the House of Representatives. Since the book describes in detail other events in 1998, the authors choose to minimize their analyses of Clinton’s personal, erotic behavior. Psychohistorians can probably contribute satisfactory explanations for the concurrence of Clinton’s risky personal behavior with his cautious political decisions.

The book focuses on President Clinton, with brief and superficial comments about Vice President Al Gore. The Vice President is described as a close comrade and consistently loyal subordinate of President Clinton. The authors state that an important purpose of Clinton is to help Gore to be elected as the next President. There is no hint of discord or rivalry. Gore is portrayed as giving usually good advice and Clinton as always highly valuing the Vice President’s judgment. There is no mention of Gore’s publicized disapproval of Bill Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

The books by Zelnick, Turque, and Burns and Sorenson have several attributes in common. They all describe and discuss political leaders whose actions are in progress rather than completed. Modern technology makes it possible for a book to be published almost as fast as a monthly magazine. The biographers had limited or no contact with their subjects, but all the books include useful information obtained from interviews with other people. None of the books is psychohistorical. The interpretations offered by the authors may reveal more about themselves than about their biographical subjects. Future biographies and psychobiographies will supersede these books but will benefit from some of their facts and comments.

The most conspicuous difference among the three books is the political ideology of the authors. Zelnick is a conservative. He disparages Gore’s efforts to protect the world environment and to counteract the effects of racial prejudice. The preparation of the book was hurried and superficial. There is no scholarly documentation of the information. Careless errors include “Harrison” instead of “Harris Wofford” (Senator from Pennsylvania) and “Betsy” instead of “Betsey Wright” (Assistant to President Clinton). Turque does not display political bias. He describes but does not try to explain Gore’s contradictory characteristics. His book contains numerous endnotes and a collection of photographs. Burns and Sorenson repeatedly express disappointment with the centrist rather than liberal policies of Clinton and Gore. Their book is primarily a description and adverse evaluation of the Clinton Presidency.

Page 61