But, on the theory that America would be well served by a competitive presidential contest this fall, let me just suggest to the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee that he ought to use U.S. Sen. Bill Bradley as something more than a campaign prop.

Indeed, Gore's only hope as a candidate this fall is to learn from Bradley's mistakes.

Gore aides are excited by the fact that Bradley has agreed to appear Thursday in Green Bay with the man he so viscerally derided during the late winter -- when the two contested the Democratic nod. But the Gore campaign would be wise to recognize that they did not beat Bradley, Bradley beat himself -- just as Gore may beat himself in the fall.

It was not long ago that Bradley was throwing a real scare into Gore, causing the Democratic front-runner to shake up his entire campaign and to high-tail it out of Washington and onto a Democratic primary vaudeville circuit that the veep thought he would never have to work again. Bradley upset the Gore juggernaut by suggesting again and again during appearances in Iowa, New Hampshire, New York and other states that Gore would be a weak Democratic nominee because the vice president's credibility had been strained by campaign finance abuses and ideological compromises of the worst order.

Bradley was, of course, right. But he never gained any real traction -- losing every single caucus and primary to a man who polls showed was vulnerable. Why did Bradley stumble? Because for all his talk of how he was different and better than Gore, he never really distinguished himself from the vice president.

Gore was for corporate-defined free trade, Bradley was for corporate-defined free trade. Gore was for the death penalty, Bradley was for the death penalty. Gore refused to endorse meaningful health care reform along the lines of a Canadian-style "single-payer'' system, Bradley refused to endorse meaningful health care reform along the lines of a Canadian-style "single-payer'' system. Gore talked a good line about the need to address poverty in America but never put any policy muscle behind the campaign trail rhetoric, Bradley talked an even better line about the need to address poverty in America but put even less policy muscle behind the campaign trail rhetoric. Gore showed a profound misunderstanding of the farm crisis that is destroying rural America, Bradley had a hard time finding rural America on a map.

Bradley's failure to distinguish himself from Gore left the voters who bothered to listen to debates between the two men asking: Is that all there is? And they were right to do so. When there is no debate over fundamental issues, voters turn off -- especially the sort of voters an insurgent needs to upset a front-runner.

Now that Gore has dispatched Bradley and positioned himself as the nominee, Gore finds himself trailing Republican George W. Bush in most polls. Gore has shaken up his campaign again. He has remade himself again. He launched television ad campaigns in key states and conducted an "I Invented Prosperity'' tour -- all to limited or even negative effect. This week, he will trot out Bradley in a display of grudging party unity not seen since John McCain gritted his teeth and endorsed Bush.

While it's fine to wheel Bradley around the country one more time, Gore would be wiser to recognize why Bradley isn't the nominee.

In politics, a failure on the part of the laggard to distinguish him or herself from the front-runner is deadly. If Gore actually wants to be elected president, he needs to recognize as much and begin to distinguish himself from Bush -- not with pokes at a few pharmaceutical companies, but with a fundamental shift of direction.

As the fall campaign takes shape, Gore must make it clear that electing him will mean something for workers whose jobs are threatened by "Blank Check for China'' trade legislation; he must stand with family farmers against agribusiness; he must side with the majority of Americans in endorsing a moratorium on the death penalty; he must support full public financing of campaigns -- as opposed to corrupt half steps; and he must recognize that tinkering with drug prices does not begin to address the health care crisis in America.

To win in November, Al Gore needs to jettison caution and begin running as a real alternative to George W. Bush.

After all, if Bradley had run as a real alternative to Gore, America would be looking at a different Democratic presidential nominee today, Ralph Nader would never have gained the momentum he clearly has achieved, and George W. Bush would be left to pick up the scraps that are left of the Republican Party.

John Nichols is the editorial page editor of The Capital Times.

© 2000 The Capital Times

###