t the moment, it's about character, not about ideology.
To beat George W. Bush, Vice President Gore must first beat the morality issue raised by Bill and Monica. That's why he picked Joseph Lieberman as his running mate. In August 1998, the Democratic senator from Connecticut used language everyone could understand to describe President Clinton's behavior. He called it ''immoral.''
As Democrats know far too well, Bill Clinton hugely disappointed those who actually believed he ''embodied the potential of a generation,'' as Bush put it in Philadelphia. Over the course of his presidency, voters forgave Clinton his repeated Mulligans in golf and in life. But he went too far when he squandered the dignity of the Oval Office on a very undignified sexual transaction.
The scandal turned off men; in Monica Lewinsky they saw their own daughters gone Beverly Hills dysfunctional. Women were more sympathetic, but they still saw the affair as something pitiful: a powerful man using a foolish young woman to fill some kind of pathetic emotional void.
Now Republicans see Monicagate as a way to make Bill Clinton's character the issue in Campaign 2000. Bush's speech in Philadephia was filled with indirect references that show a clear intent to hang Clinton's indiscretions around Gore's neck:
''Our generation has a chance to reclaim some essential values - to show we have grown up before we grow old.''
''Greatness is found when American character and American courage overcome American challenges.''
''We must give our children a spirit of moral courage, because their character is our destiny.''
''An era of tarnished ideals is giving way to a responsibility era.'' All vice presidents really have only one political obligation, and that is to remain loyal to the president. Indeed, the elder George Bush was so loyal to Ronald Reagan he was derided as a lap dog during his tenure as vice president.
Democrats, therefore, will argue it is unfair for Gore to pay for his loyalty to Clinton in the face of irrefutable irresponsibility. But in politics, fairness is never the point. A candidate needs an antidote, not an alibi. If Lieberman can inoculate the ticket against Republican attacks on Clinton's character, or at least deflect them, he will get Gore closer to where he needs to be - reminding voters of ideological differences between the Republicans and the Democrats and of ideological flaws in the Bush platform.
Post-Philadelphia, ''compassionate conservatism'' is still more of a mystery than a mantra that makes intellectual sense.
Tax cutbacks don't compute with lofty goals like renewing ''the promise of America's schools''; never mind with strengthening Social Security and repairing Medicare, as Bush is also pledging.
Bush equates ''the next bold step of welfare reform'' with supporting homeless shelters, hospices, food pantries, and crisis pregnancy centers. That sounds suspiciously like the starry-eyedvolunteerism urged by another Bush who ran for president. Instead of the ''thousand points of light'' discussed by his father, the younger Bush talks about 1,000 meals a week served by a woman running a homeless shelter, after - or maybe it's before - she washes the feet of the people who call the shelter home.
It also remains hard to sell a party of inclusion when it includes members of a Texas delegation who doff their ten-gallon hats and bow their heads to protest a gay congressman who is talking about trade, not his sexual preference.
But Gore will never get to any of that if he doesn't first defuse the character issue. Fairly or unfairly, the Republicans are ready to exploit what is at the heart of voters' unease about voting Democratic in November: their disappointment in Clinton.
Clinton could help his legacy and his vice president if he stated the obvious: Each one of us is responsible for our actions. It would also be nice if he admitted how much he dashed the hopes of those who voted for him. Unfortunately, he did stop thinking about tomorrow and thought only of himself.
The bottom line for Campaign 2000: If it's about character, Clinton-Gore loses. If it's about ideology, Gore-Lieberman has a chance to win.
Joan Vennochi is a Globe columnist.
