The Gambler's Edge It's the risk-takers who get ahead in American politics. by Jackson Baker e have had an all-too-recent reminder that the fates, when tempted by a public figure, can be not only capricious, but cruel as well. Nevertheless, it is timely to point out that we inhabit a political system that rewards those who gamble, not those who play it safe. In our own state, there is a case in point: the ongoing argument among Democratic pols as to whether U.S. Representative Harold Ford Jr., a second-termer, should give up his safe congressional seat next year and challenge Bill Frist, the state's junior U.S. senator and an engaging man who, while by no means invulnerable, has both money and a residue of popularity -- or at least good will -- at his disposal. The state Democratic Party chairman, Doug Horne, is hot for a Ford candidacy. So, evidently, is the congressman's father and predecessor, Harold Ford Sr. (although the Fords, father and son, are masters of manipulating expectations and can both dissemble and play the shot clock with the best of them). Perhaps most importantly, both the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Washington and Vice President Al Gore have reportedly started pumping for a senatorial bid by young Ford. (A skeptic or two insist that the Fords are the ones actually working the pump.) But many of the Democratic Party's leading lights demur. The theory is that it's too early for the 29-year-old Ford to make a major statewide race. Or that Frist has too much money and is invulnerable. Or that Ford's forfeiture of his House seat (even if it should go, temporarily perhaps, to brother Jake) would be an unreasonable sacrifice. Or all of the above and more. The bottom line: Such a race would simply be too chancy. It would be better to wait for better odds, a cleaner shot later on. And that's the rub. That kind of sure-thing future-tense race never comes. Just ask Governor Bob Clement, Senator John Tanner, or President Mario Cuomo -- all notorious biders of their time. Don't ask President Bill Clinton, Governor Jesse Ventura, or -- for that matter -- Senator Bill Frist, all of whom jumped into unwinnable races against established, invincible opponents. The case can be made, in fact, that almost everybody who ends up exercising a little bit of crazy nerve comes out ahead in our political process. Hubris, chutzpah: Ironically enough, these foreign words best express the simple truth behind the American system -- that it, perhaps uniquely in the world, rewards gamblers. Crazy, reckless, bet-the-pot gamblers. That is our system's great paradox, one characteristic of a frontier nation. Consider the aforesaid Senate race for 2000. The careful and calculating ones, the play-it-safers, all say that Harold Ford Jr. has no business running against Bill Frist next year. Right. Just like Bill Frist had no business running against Jim Sasser in 1994. Just like Jim Sasser had no business running against Bill Brock in 1976. Just like Bill Brock had no business running against Albert Gore Sr. in 1970. Just like Albert Gore Sr. had no business running against Kenneth McKellar in 1952 See how it goes? Every one of the incumbents in that chronological daisy-chain was considered unbeatable. Every one was beaten. The first law of politics: You don't win these things unless you get in them. This is not a brief for Harold Ford Jr. He is a remarkable public figure with enormous prospects. But Bill Frist -- wishful-thinking Democrats to the contrary -- ain't no slouch, either. Next year, New York will have its glamour Senate race in Clinton-Giuliani. Aren't we entitled to ours as well? Roll them dice, boys! May the best (i.e., luckiest, most venturesome) man win. (Jackson Baker is a senior editor of the Flyer.)