Skip to main content

View Diary: Al Gore's Last Chance (285 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Gore not getting into race. Deal with Clintons. (0+ / 0-)

    My guess is that in return for Clintons' support in Democratic primary in 2000, Gore is not going to compete with Hillary in 2008.

    With Hillary the front runner, Gore's getting in now is an attack on HRC's candidacy, signaling he thinks the front runner, Clinton, is not up to the job.

    Ironically Hillary's position in 2008 is very similar to Gore's in 2000, not the best candidate but the one with the most money, organization and lead time lining up support.  That is the risk of a Clinton candidacy, that like Gore in 2000 be seen in light of Clinton/Gore fatigue, and voters will go with a change vs. another round of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton.

    Hillary's high negatives contribute to the risk.

    •  I thought Gore was much better than Bradley (0+ / 0-)
      •  Kerry should have run in 2000. (0+ / 0-)

        He and others never got in because Clintons backed Gore and Gore had built up huge war chest and favors.

        Gore should just not have run in 2000.  When he did he made too many basic mistakes.  Not employing Bill Clinton.  Not being himself such as his passion for global warming.

        Looked at recent polls and at least HRC is gaining on Giuliani and has lead him consistently for a month by 5% points.

        If it's HRC vs. Giuliani, I just hope Clinton plays total hardball about Giuliani's 911 mistake with Civil Defense HQ in trade tower costing fire and policemen their lives.  His attempt to put Saudi business partner and convicted crook Kerik as head of US Homeland Security.  His lobbying business selling his expertise on making bad civil defense decisions in NY.

        •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kimberlyweldon

          "Not employing Bill Clinton."

          Didn't you just say "Clinton/Gore fatigue" in the preceding comment. In reality, it was Clinton fatigue, that handicapped Gore, big time, and complicated his campaign every step of the way.

          "Not being himself such as his passion for global warming."

          This is another false myth, debunked here: Gore repeatedly talked about global warming, as eg in his convention speech, debates, and even ads.

          I don't recall Kerry mentioning global warming at either the convention  or in the debates making Gore likely the only Presidential nominee prior to 2008 to run on global warming as an issue. Thanks to his efforts, all Democrats today have made it some part of their platforms. Even one or two republicans give serious heed under the label of "energy independence."

          Roy Neel about Gore and 2008: "He's not ruled it out in the future." Asked what "the future" meant, Neel said, "Sometime later than today."

          by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 08:08:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  For Gore to run without Clinton was the mistake (0+ / 0-)

            No way Gore was going to avoid Clinton/Gore fatigue so he had to embrace it and squeeze every last vote out of Bill.

            Instead Gore ran an hermaphroditic campaign as Clinton's heir but without Clinton. It just didn't work.

            •  well, we need to go with the facts (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kimberlyweldon, plembo

              "No way Gore was going to avoid Clinton/Gore fatigue so he had to embrace it and squeeze every last vote out of Bill."

              Gore out-polled Clinton'96 among Democrats and Independents. He lost votes among (moderate cross-over) Repulicans, who were not pleased with Clinton's conduct. This fact counters your point.

              "Instead Gore ran an hermaphroditic campaign as Clinton's heir but without Clinton. It just didn't work."

              Clinton being front and center would have hurt Gore even beyond the handicap that existed and played out as it was. You should see my synopsis compilation here at length (the 10/24/2000 poll that says "Clinton campaign effort could hurt Gore more than help, poll suggests" in particular).

              Using Clinton would have likely been huge disaster as then the discussion revolved around Clinton's deeds and the blue dress.

              Don't forget that Clinton was on tape lying about his affair to the public, and the GOP would have made sure that everyone remembered that graphically before voting, had Clinton been too visible. In fact, we do know that that was their plan, should Gore employ Clinton much; there was even BBC documentary days before the election about thier game plan (which was not aired in the US).

              Roy Neel about Gore and 2008: "He's not ruled it out in the future." Asked what "the future" meant, Neel said, "Sometime later than today."

              by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 09:46:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  You forget Bradley. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kimberlyweldon

          Based on some things I have observed, I would not rule out HRC having had some role in pushing the Bradley campaign in the first place.

          Roy Neel about Gore and 2008: "He's not ruled it out in the future." Asked what "the future" meant, Neel said, "Sometime later than today."

          by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 08:10:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site