AVID
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 02:45 PM
Original message |
| Give Gore the Job in '08 - he earned (and won) it in '00 |
|
He earned it, deserves it and has been right on target lately: http://www.algore-08.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=78my 2 cents today :hi:
|
Brianboru
(226 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 02:53 PM
Response to Original message |
wtbymark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
Brianboru
(226 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Clark took Oklahoma. Could help in the Red states.
|
demnan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
|
a more talented human being rejected for a more witless idiot. It really hurt me when they stole that election from us. I knew that Al Gore was the best person for that job. He was qualified. He was a good man. He was determined. So if he wasn't a masterful politian like Clinton, well, who was? He made some mistakes in his campaign distancing himself from Clinton and he paid a price for that.
That being said, it's difficult to go back and try to recreate the momentum he had as a Vice President. He was almost an incumbent in the presidency. People in the government loved him! His program to reinvent government was revered and his books were cherished. He had a spotless reputation for integrity and thoughtful leadership. Now he is an outsider, a lone voice in the woods. And the way the election was stolen from him ironically makes him look weak.
Let's just see about 2008. I want to see us tackle the voting problems first. If we don't do that we won't have a chance in hell no matter which fine men or women we put up to run for President and Vice President.
|
Eliot Spitzer 2006
(63 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 7. I agree that we need to move on from Gore.... |
|
...although he still is one of the best qualified candidates we could have.
|
LittleClarkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
| 10. I will not "move on" from either Gore nor Kerry for just that reason |
|
both are infinitely qualified for the job. I'm sick of trying to find the most "marketable" guy.
|
rniel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:02 PM
Response to Original message |
| 5. Maybe people will finally get it |
|
We need a guy with more than a few functioning brain cells to run this country
|
LittleClarkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:03 PM
Response to Original message |
| 6. Help me! I have a Gore stuck in my throat! |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-28-05 03:03 PM by LittleClarkie
That's said, mighty fine speech yesterday, Mr. Gore. Mighty fine.
BUT: Watch the heavy-handedness guys. The hard-sell has a tendancy to backfire, no matter the merits of your candidate. Don't chase people away from what could be a good candidate.
Meanwhile, we still get to vote. Nobody is going to be given anything. I don't care how much you think he earned or deserved it. He must take it. It will not be given to him.
Let's see who also steps up to the plate between then and now, shall we?
|
smokeyjoe
(39 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
It'll have to be Gore,and Clark to help with the military mind-set that these gun totin', bible wavin' repugs have. Trying to put a woman up, even though I am a woman and think Hillary and Barbara have more brain in their little finger than * has in his entire staff. We're just asking for a loss by trying to push that. IMHO
|
AP
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:08 PM
Response to Original message |
| 9. I have a hard time liking Gore. |
|
I read Stiglitz's Roaring Nineties, and the impression I get of Gore is that he was all for media deregulation even though it was obvious it would lead to monopolization and a shift of wealth out of the pockets of the people and into the hands of big corporations. I ask myself, why the hell did Clinton put Gore in charge of media deregulation. But he did. And what Gore did wasn't pretty.
I also read Clinton's SEC Chairman's book, and his characterization of Lieberman sticking up for the accounting industry as early as 92-94 is disheartening. Clearly, Gore was aware of what he was bringing onto the ticket. Joe isn't the worst Dem, but he does stand for a set of principles that I am happier seeing as minority position on the left.
The big picture of Gore is that he's not really on the side of the working American or even on the side of a level playing field in the marketplace.
Also, Jeffrey Toobin's book on the recount was not very encouraging. Gore made all the wrong choices in the recount. So many, in fact, that they defy the law of averages.
I supported Gore in 2000, but in a world where we have candidates which have much clearer committments to fixing the problems that confront American, a lot of people would have to drop out of politics before I got interested in Gore again.
You know, if Kerry ran in the primaries in 2000, he'd probably be on his second term right now and America would be a much better place. I'd love to know what Kerry's thoughts were about running in 2000.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:42 PM
Response to Original message |
| 11. He earned the nomination in 00... and also won the election... but... |
|
..he didn't run the best campaign.
I would have no problem with him running again, but he wouldn't get my vote automatically.
|
ProgressiveFool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:44 PM
Response to Original message |
|
would have shown the sort of courage he grew after 2000 during the election he would have swamped Bush. Kerry too, for that matter, would have tipped the scale by showing a bit more courage of his convictions.
I am not voting for either of them again unless they decide to actually play the game and give people a real reason to vote FOR them.
|
Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
| 15. To be fair to Gore, there wasn't too much to be courageous about |
|
The country was coming off of 8 years of peace and prosperity. Gore's conviction came in his opposition to *'s foreign policy and attempts to shred the constitution.
|
Dave Sund
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 03:50 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Well, I won't have to pledge a vote, because as a Nebraskan the primary means shit... But I'd strongly consider campaigning for him. I'm a Clark supporter, but I think Gore would deserve it more than anyone if he ran.
|
Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 04:11 PM
Response to Original message |
| 14. I might if he used Clinton's campaign team |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-28-05 04:12 PM by Hippo_Tron
I'm still in the camp that Gore should've at least squeaked by if not won in a landslide in 2000, with or without Florida.
BUT, since then Gore has become a much more passionate speaker and I would imagine that he would be a much more entergetic campaigner as well.
The problem that I have with him, which is the same problem that I have with Kerry, is that he used crappy strategists in 2000.
|
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-28-05 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
| 16. Clinton's campaign team will be working for Clinton |
|
in 2008, Hillary that is.
I'm sure among the best of them their loyalty goes to Bill and Hill before Gore.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Feb 26th 2026, 11:26 AM
Response to Original message |