Would a Gore/Clark ticket be the strongest possible?

[Jackson4Gore]

I am looking at all the polls and it looks as though Gore is still the favorite and Clark is pretty popular starting out. If it is a split at the convention or something, would Gore come back to be the candidate and Clark his VP? Both vets, and both with great resumes.

What do you guys thinks?

[bowens43]

1. Gore isn't running

[Jackson4Gore]

2. No shit, did you not read what I said?

[RichV]

3. No

I don't think Gore would come back just b/c there's a split at the convention. I think he's done running for president.

[newsguyatl]

4. ...

i highly doubt gore would select clark as his running mate...


gore's a real, tried and true democrat who 'gets it' and who i have tons of respect for...


with that said, if he DID run, he'd select someone else. i feel confident in that.

[Renew Deal]

7. Not sure what you're implying but...

he selected lieberman. Also, don't be suprised if Gore supports Clark.

[newsguyatl]

8. he won't

period.

[wuushew]

14. Who actually picked Lieberman for VP?

I am serious, was it Gore himself, the evil DLC or some larger consensus within the DNC. I want a thread on this topic and I want a name of who is responsible. Perhaps Lieberman himself was pulling the strings I really don't know.






WASHINGTON -- The spotlight intensified Sunday on six political figures thought to be on Vice President Al Gore's short-list of presidential running mate choices.

Gore aides have said the top contenders are House Minority Leader Rep. Dick Gephardt, New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, Sens. John Edwards of North Carolina, Evan Bayh of Indiana, John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.


Presidential candidates Al Gore and George W. Bush.

"As part of probably the strongest working team that's existed in decades as president and vice president --Al Gore has not been a ceremonial vice president-- and I think he's going to pick a working partner," said Democratic pollster Celinda Lake on "CNN Sunday Morning." "And I think that'll be a real strong part of his selection."

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/08/06/gore.bush.01/

[Booberdawg]

5. NO. Clark is not running for VP and Gore isn't running at all.

[Renew Deal]

6. Gore's not running.

Get over it. :nopity:

[Jackson4Gore]

9. No

[kodi]

10. hard to say, dean has carried the torch now for months

he appears to be a pretty good guy, and i doubt his followers will go gently into the night, in fact i think if he does not get the nomination an appreciable number of his supporters will not support any other candidateand will stay home in november 2004. i say this after watching this site for months where some vocal, albeit a minority of dean supporters, have shown many of the same traits that the nadar greens showed in 2000, viz., evidence of a cult of personality, and a dogmatism in their beliefs and positions that would sacrifice good on the altar of perfect.

that's unfortunate, but that seems to be the way things are.

and i do in fact believe that the democratic party leaders pushed clark to enter the race to nullify dean, and the recent visceral attacks on clark here on DU are a reflection of the dean supporters recognizing this.

what i think could well happen is that dean will get a plurality of delegates with the rest being split amongst the other, more "moderate" candidates (and i do realize that dean is actually a moderate too) with no one getting the requisite delegates to win the democratic nomination on the first ballot in SF next year. and that a compromise candidate will rise unless dean makes dramatic consessions to the moderate wing of the party.

if so, i hope it is al gore. it has been shown repeatedly over the last 2 years that what was done to him in 2000 by the media was an abomination, and that he, better than the current candidates has both the policies that will work and the grass roots support to defeat bush.

i think that if gore got into the race he would galvanize the democratic party and excite it more than anyone could imagine. but that's just my feeling after talking to a lot of democrats who are not really enthusiastic about the current folks running right now.

gore did not have the support of the democratic leaders two years ago, but with the rise of howard dean, these leaders realize that they would be able to have more control over the democratic party with gore in the white house than if howard dean is sitting in the oval office. in this way, these DLC types were too cute by half and now have to combat a person in dean who is doing what al gore would have done, viz., building a grass roots movement in the democratic party which would compete for control of the party. the DLC types were able to prevent gore from entering the race, but wound up with someone they could control even less in howard dean.

regardless, what gore initially, and now dean have shown is that local, grass roots democracy is a potential force in the democratic party and this is a direct threat to those who have run this party for generations.

and it is a very good thing, this local activism and "libertarian socialism" breaking out in the party. its the only way to counter the opposition that can't be beat by money alone.

i call it political guerilla warfare at the local level, and i also call it democracy.

[newsguyatl]

11. hey

while i disagree with your labeling dean supporters a "cult" i think you make some GREAT points... you should post this as its own thread... some frighteningly true comments.

[kodi]

12. clearly, i didn't call all or most deanies cultists, please dont say i did

i was lambasted last night and had ugly threatening private email sent to me for standing up to nonsensical thrusts against clark by some over-the-top deanies and returned fire with fire. i was accused of some ugly things and i do not even support clark (actually i am a john hegelin fan, who is farther to the left than dennis kucinch and one whole helluva'lot farther to the left of dean) but i do support cogent analysis devoid of emotionalism.

if my one vote decides the election, i will vote for any democratic candidate, but i will probably support the natural law party unless al gore gets into the race.

my most heavy concern about SOME dean supporters is the way they attach their own aspirations to dean, the man, instead of the policies he espouses, because eventually the man, like all men, will be found to have flaws and i fear that his suporters will feel betrayed and ignore that it is the policies he espouses and the avenue to political power for the masses that dean's campaign has shown to be effective that are the more important.

i am sceptical of any hero on that white house who comes in to save the day and would prefer the people to do what is necessary themselves and not have them rely on a leader to follow.

and i really do think that al gore is a true leader, because he is willing to point the way and let others take up the torch so that the pople realize that they need no leader, that they can do it themselves..

its why when asked my political preferences, i say that i am a libertarian socialist who believes in people, not simply a person.

BNTW i am not a "newbie," i was on this site nearly from day 1 and walked away from it because of the nonsense i was seeing from the partisans here who were devoid of historical perspective and attacked those of us who demanded clear thinking instead of towing some ideological line.

so i put this question to you, and answer candidly, whose candidate has the most supporters who vociferiously demand ideological purity?

[bigendian]

13. No doubt about it.

Dean.

[Padraig18]

15. Over the top critics

The only two candidates' supporters who seem to react to virtually any criticism of their candidate with vicious, ad hominem personal attacks are Dean's and Kucinich's; no, not ALL of them, but they do seem to produce virtually the entire crop of these shrill creatures.

I personally support Dean at this point, but i would never savage any other candidate or their partisans the way some some of my fellow Deanites do.

[Kahuna]

16. Without a doubt. Gore would be strong even without Clark...

Gore would have been a superb president. But alas, he was slandered by the Greens and now we have pResident Awol.

[Bossy Monkey]

17. No, Superman/Spiderman would be, and markedly more likely to happen (n/t)

[Cheswick2.0]

18. I wouldn't mind

But I think a Gore ticket with a minority VP would be stronger (well at least to me). It is well past time after all.