Skip to main content

View Diary: 1980 Redux (193 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, I meant unpopular. (0+ / 0-)

    Let's put it this way:

    Al Gore ran away from him.

    Whatever the WSJ/NBC poll may have said, and whatever "job approval" really means to the people who hear it, Al Gore, based on what his advisors and internal pollsters were telling him, ran as far and as fast from Clinton has he could.

    It's possible, I suppose, that Gore was and is dumb as a stone, but I don't believe that.

    Not brilliant, to be sure, but not that stupid.

    Free speech? Yeah, I've heard of that. Have you?

    by dinotrac on Sun Aug 03, 2008 at 04:01:57 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  heh (0+ / 0-)

      Let's put it this way:

      If Al Gore had a do-over...

      but no way was Clinton unpopular regardless of Gore's flawed strategy.

      People didn't understand what unpopular meant until the last two Bushes were in office.

      http://pollkatz.homestead.com/...

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Aug 03, 2008 at 04:21:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry, DFCT (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dinotrac

        We need to get you up to steam on just how bad the Clinton fatigue's impact on Gore's run was :)

        For starters, please see my comment below on WJC's personal unfavorables.

        Second, can you name one senate or house candidate that had WJC campaign for him in states that weren't put in Gore's column in 2000 (or for that matter, I doubt he was asked to campaign anywhere except deep blue state like NY and CA+AR.)

        Third, there were ton's of poll and other data (many of which I've compiled here which show that Clinton was radio-active in 1999 and 2000). Here are two for starters:

        1. Pew Center poll, Released: September 14, 2000

             Introduction and Summary

           Clinton fatigue, which first surfaced more than a year ago, has not diminished. In fact, more voters today completely agree with the statement "I am tired of all the problems associated with the Clinton administration," than did a year ago (48% vs. 36% in August 1999).

             Clinton fatigue is prevalent among all major demographic groups. Even 56% of Democrats say they have grown weary of Clinton, and fully 78% of independents agree. The percent of voters who wish Clinton could run for a third term has remained steady since last year. Just one-quarter wish Clinton could run again, while seven-in-ten disagree.

             -------------

             I wish Bill Clinton could run for a third term
                                             
             Sep'00: Agree (27%), Disagree (71%)
             Aug'99: Agree (28%), Disagree (71%)
             Mar'99: Agree (28%), Disagree (71%)

        1. Clinton campaign effort could hurt Gore more than help, poll suggests, CNN, From staff and wire reports, October 24, 2000

           Among independent voters, the net loss for Gore could be far greater: Gallup's survey indicated that 45 percent of independents would be less likely to vote for the vice president if Clinton were to campaign for him, while only 10 percent said they would be more likely to support Gore. Another 37 percent of independents said Clinton's efforts would make no difference.

        Fourth, Gore was forced to start with these sustained double digit deficits (by 18% in 3/99 and by 15% the day he announced his bid on 6/10/99). Here is a plot of Bush vs Gore beginning with one poll before the Lewinsky scandal surfaced and ending with 6/10/99. That (15-18% deficit) was the starting handicap for Gore mainly due to Clinton scandal. W/o the scandal/impeachment circus, Gore would've started no worse than even in polls. So, there's little doubt that Gore and disadvantaged at the starting line by 15% due to Clinton's reckless conduct.

        Compare that to last July when Obama and Edwards led McCain by about 8-10%, most of which wa due to Bush/Republican/war fatigue. Add the two together, and we get the difference between the two cycles to be about 25% against Gore, which is whopping, night and day kind of dichotomy.

        No analysis of the 2000 election that doesn't consider Clinton-Lewinsky scandal and impeachment's impact properly can be considered objective.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site