Like John Kerry in 2004, Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Green is in a difficult but potentially winnable race against an incumbent. His results, however, might be the same as the former Democratic presidential nominee. He has persistently trailed Democratic Governor Jim Doyle in the polls by about five points. Why hasn't he closed the gap?

To be sure, Green's task was a challenging, uphill climb. Most residents of Wisconsin do not perceive the state to be in the midst of any staggering crises, so Green was unlikely to ride these concerns to the governor's office. The state's economy is in reasonably good shape. Those are huge advantages for an incumbent.

But certainly, Doyle has not been an especially popular governor. And even many of his base groups have grumbled at his policies and his administration's political heavy-handedness. He has not been able to get substantially or consistently over 50 percent approval and favorability.

To the Green campaign, the governor's Achilles heel would be questionable ethics in his administration and controversies swirling around his campaign finances. The plan was to ride these issues to the governor's mansion, but the road proved rocky. Neither issue has become the lethal weapon the Green campaign hoped for. Like many campaign finance issues, they can be complicated and complex. "Where's the outrage?" Bob Dole famously complained in 1996 about Bill Clinton's fundraising. Apparently it's right over there, next to a second-place finish in the election.

Green then got bogged down in his own issues regarding campaign finances. And even if one believes, as I do, that the Election Board's decision disallowing Green to transfer some of his federal campaign funds was wrong, the tactical problem was that it allowed Doyle to inoculate himself against one of Green's primary charges. "I'm rubber, you're glue" might not be sophisticated campaign discourse, but the governor has been able to use it against Green. And he has done so successfully.

Without its key issue, the Green campaign has had to fall back on a muddled campaign message. Issues and policies gushed out from the campaign. Green promised a 100-stop tour around the state, and one feared he might introduce a new policy or campaign theme at each stop. He has trotted out the standard tax-and-spend-liberal arguments, but these have limited bite when Green's own party controls the Legislature. And most Wisconsin residents don't seem to think these problems have gotten markedly worse on Doyle's watch. Yes, Wisconsin is a high tax state. And yes, the sun rose in the east this morning. Again.

As with the candidacy of John Kerry, you'd be hard-pressed to find a hundred normal, everyday, non-political-junkie Wisconsin voters who could tell you what three or four things Mark Green would absolutely do as governor. Like Kerry, the campaign message has been jumbled and feels stitched together. Passion is absent. Priorities are unclear. With President Bush, love him or hate him, you knew the core issues he cared about. Same with Bill Clinton, same with Tommy Thompson. Jim Doyle is not dramatically better on this than Green, but he has wrapped the mantles of public education and scientific research around him, and those can go a long way in Wisconsin.

Has the Green campaign conveyed in any direct, simple way, how it would have made any difference if he had been governor the past four years? To those highly knowledgeable about politics and government, it is abundantly clear that a Green governorship would have enacted very different public policies than did Doyle's. But that message has not gotten out to the public, with the possible exception that Green would have supported a different tax limitation plan than Doyle. The campaign could do better than that.

Green's team has made other Kerry-like errors also. Both allowed the opposition to define them, and then, after a long pause, tried to challenge that definition. Green's campaign lagged behind Doyle's in advertising, much like Kerry's infamous advertising black hole in August 2004 that contributed to his defeat. On the other hand, spending gobs of money on ads won't be effective without a clear message.

The effect of other factors is difficult to predict. The disarray of the Republican Party in Washington may dispirit some Republican voters and perhaps keep them from the polls, which would hurt Green. The ballot referenda on same-sex marriage and capital punishment might, though, pull some of those disillusioned Republicans back to the voting booth at the last minute, providing a boost for Green.

Time is growing very short for a Green resurgence. At the end of the day, Wisconsin voters should be able to clearly and easily answer the following question: What, precisely, is the point of the Green candidacy? That's what the campaign needs to communicate better over the next two weeks if it wants to have a chance to avoid John Kerry's fate.

John Coleman ([email protected]) is a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin.