Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Wes Clark over Al Gore?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:18 PM
Original message
Why Wes Clark over Al Gore?
Yeah I know Gore isn't running, doesn't want to run, is a loser, is boring, is a liar, etc. - put that aside for a moment...

It seems Wesley is filling Al Gore's spot as an even divider.

Why a guy with little name recognition and no experience who can get about %50 of the country, when we already had a guy who was clearly the right choice last time?

With Clarks numbers he seems like a direct replacement for Al Gore - a guy who can get %49 but can't win against a corrupt system.

How is Clark going to WIN? Wouldn't Gore be a better choice because at least people can feel they are getting revenge against Bush by putting the real winner of Election 2000 in office?

Oh - and I'll even throw in the *sigh*, so you don't have to...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MIMStigator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Gore didn't have crappy economy and..
a guerilla war to run against
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
union_maid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Not running is a big disincentive to support a guy
I don't think you can discount that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. i'm not for clark
but you assume those who are for clark are supporting him over al gore. you don't know for sure that many of these people would have supported gore over clark had al gore ran again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diplomats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Clark would not be running if Gore were
I think that's why we have such a large, wide open field, because Gore, who polls show would be the overwhelming front-runner, is not a candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. Gore would lose again
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janekat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #17
29. AGAIN???? he never lost - get with the program.... LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janekat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
28. Yeppers - that's why I had to give up my Gore dream LOL n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janekat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. I would have if I thought he could beat Bush this time around...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. I'm Not Committed To Any Candidate
though I like Edwards, Clark, and Kerry...


I would support Gore out of loyalty if he ran but I am afraid the press would pillory him again...

Maybe he's too good for this country....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. If Vice President Gore had run for the nomination, he would have gotten it
Edited on Thu Sep-25-03 09:32 PM by w4rma
in a walk, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kodi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
26. damn right he would & is by far the most capable man to be president
i like al gore. for what he has done, endured, and can do.

the american press fucked al gore so bad that every time i even see a journalist i want to punch them in the face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. Gore vs. Bush in Florida and Tenn
Excuse me. Gore did win the election with more vote margin than any other Dem ever. He was cheated, just like America is every day that this idiot sits in the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Thank you!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
9. Why not Gore?
I don't understand why we don't support a Gore campaign? He has already shown proof that he can beat Bush*. If Clark can be drafted, why can't Gore? Are those who supported a Draft Clark movement vehemently opposed to a Draft Gore movement? If so, why? What makes Clark so special? Gore was and will always be my first choice. That said, I will vote for whomever secures the Dem Nomination. Anyone But Bush*!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. The FACT is, Gore is the strongest candidate
forget all that "I don't want a repeat of 2000"

We're getting a repeat of 2000 no matter what.

It's already started with Clark.

Plus, all of the baggage attributed to Gore was all lies.

Clark has many nice features, but Al Gore has a track record and experience, a progressive vision and no ties to the MI complex.

Gore is less of a risk than Clark and probably has a better shot of winning.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
union_maid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Um..fine, but first he's got to run
He kind of bailed on us, and maybe he was right. I don't know. If he runs, I'll certainly consider him. I think Clark potentially has a better shot, not so much at winning, but at crushing Bush. However, I'd have no problem with a Gore candidacy. OK, one problem. Tipper really gets on my last nerve, but that's because of the whole recording industry thing and the fact that she's called Tipper. Probably time to get over that. I voted for him once, would vote for him again, but he's gotta run first. In the meantime I think there's an excellent field to choose from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. He kinda bailed on Us?
I would pose the question, Who bailed on Gore? Short answer, We did! We, being the Democratic Party. We didn't stand and fight for him when he needed us. Most of us don't back him as a candidate now. Gore didn't bail on us, we bailed on him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. You will get no argument from me
I totally agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemPopulist Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. I have to admit
I'm mystified why there was such a big Draft Clark movement but Draft Gore was never taken seriously. I mean, I never participated because I'm a political realist but it seems like Gore is far more of a "grassroots" favorite than Clark. I guess it's because Gore took himself out so quickly and there was more support for Clark from the Establishment and liberal intelligentsia (lot of pro-Clark stuff from people like Robert Kuttner, Joe Conason, Gene Lyons, Michael Wolff, etc.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobinA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #11
31. Gore Ran a Crappy Campaign
and finished in a dead heat with a guy who ran a crappier campaign. It was Gore's election to lose and he lost it. It shouldn't have even been a horse race and it was. I like Gore. A lot But he's finished in politics. He isn't a good candidate.

Clark COULD be a good candidate, we don't know yet, Plus, he has war cred and it's wartime. I've got my fingers crossed he's not going to come out like a Stepford candidate who's mainlining poll results. I am so SICK of this word parsing, mealy-mouthed CRAP coming out of these guys
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaitykaity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. May all Democratic candidates
in the future run as 'crappy' of a campaign as
Gore in 2000.

Al Gore got more votes than any other Democratic
candidate in the past 50 years. More than
Bill Clinton both times.

The BFEE stole that election. It's only b/c of
the concerted efforts of the media whores to
minimize Bush's faults (DUII, AWOL, drugs, abortion)
that Bush was able to get close enough to steal
the thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
einsteins stein Donating Member (398 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #31
39. You are unbelievable
To still spout the rhetoric that Gore ran a lousy campaign. It was a great campaign. Could it have been better? Sure! Everything can be improved, but...

You ignore so much about 2000 when you say it shouldn't have been a horse race. You ignore the Clinton scandles, you ignore the impeachment trials, you ignore the media attacks, you ignore the Repukes bald face lies! Most of all, you seem to ignore the fact that in spite of all these setbacks, Gore took in more votes than any Dem, ever, and any Repuke but Reagan. AND, if there were no vote fraud issues, and the true votes for Gore were counted in EVERY state, I am sure that Gore would have been elected with the most votes of ANY candidate, and Reagan would hold the #2 spot.

Yet, you cling to the outdated notion that Gore neither won, nor deserved to win (based on your perception of his campaigning skills) the 2000 election.

I know nothing about you, other than this opinion of yours, but it is enough to make me doubt the credibility of the rest of your political views.

That's sad. I bet you may have had a lot to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. He isn't running!!!
He hasn't shown proof that he can beat bush. Gore lost in 2000. Maybe not fair, maybe not square, but he lost. Florida should have been irrelevant. Gore lost when he had everything going for him and when bush was a much weaker candidate. Gore was a poor campaigner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
16. There are people who'd vote for Clark who'd never vote for Gore
I think Clark's personal appeal and his military record could attact support from many voters who'd never support Al Gore. Hell, you could give Clark and Gore the exact same speech to read, and I have no doubt that people would respond more favorably to Clark's speech than to Gore's. That's just the way it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemPopulist Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. I don't think we know that yet
I think they'd do about as well under the same set of circumstances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #16
33. That is the bottom line about the difference between Clark and Gore
Even the fact that Clark once voted Repub will play in his favor. Dems , at least the more rational ones, won't mind, because a lot of us have made similar mistakes in judgement, until we saw the light. And, Repubs who have grave doubts about * but won't vote for a tradational Dem, will go for Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
18. Gore lost me when he
made a few populist remarks ("the people vs. the powerful") that were well received, and then ran away from them when the presstitutes accused him of "class warfare."

I lost a lot of respect for him then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemPopulist Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Don't just say that...
Show some evidence, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Did you watch the 2000 convention?
Gore made a great speech--sounded like an old time Democrat. The crowd loved it and he got a bounce out of the convention.

Then the chorus of disapproval started, and rather than make an issue of how yes, Virginia, there is class warfare in this country, Gore seemed to back off.

Things might be different now, but I don't think Gore ever quite disabused himself of the notion that he could make the press like him. They had it in for him from the beginning, and I think that backing off from his rather tentative populism is just another example of Gore trying to ingratiate himself with people who were going to attack him no matter what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemPopulist Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Yes, I watched the convention
I just don't remember him backing off from populism. That link doesn't even say that, it just shows how lots of pundits and right-wingers (redundant) criticised Gore as too populist after his convention speech.

Btw, here's a New York Times editorial from last year where Gore defended his 2000 message:

http://www.westfieldnetwork.com/misc/broken_promises_an...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. That's a great editorial.
I wish he had hammered relentlessly at that theme throughout the campaign. If he had, then it would not have been close enough for Bush to steal. After all, Bush is so obviously a child of privilege--that's his great vulnerability, and it's one that Democrats are still reluctant to talk about.

And yes, I'm aware that the link doesn't claim that Gore backed off. I used it as an example of what a remarkably ugly shitstorm resulted from some fairly tame "populism."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemPopulist Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Agreed
I was pretty shocked by that myself. It seems like a lot of people, including some Democrats, can't even accept the most basic of populist rhetoric. It's ridiculous considering some of the stuff the Republicans get away with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
21. Cuz Gore is not running...
Really. This is it. Gore did have the majority in all polls. Clark is building it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
24. I'm with you 'Free, but apparently
a lot of democrats have bought the bullshit about Gore. It's really sad but there it is. Democrats are scared. The republicans said "BOO!" and the democrats cower.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobinA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #24
34. Agree Absolutely
Dems are spending far too much time reading their critics. "Liberal a bad word? OK, we won't call ourselves liberals anymore." I put it down to PSTD over the Clinton impeachment. It scared the SHIT out of them, and they're still skaking in thie boots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Actually, I thought the turning point on the word "liberal" occurred
when Michael Dukakis ran from the label instead of poking out his chest and saying how proud he was of being a liberal and then bragging about the achievements of liberals. Instead he took the other route and ran from the label. From that moment on, "liberal" became a bad word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaitykaity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
32. The well-worn troughs of slander, lies, and gore.
Edited on Thu Sep-25-03 10:54 PM by kaitykaity
I don't have to hear my (un)favorite right-wing
wacko whine about what a "horrible" candidate Al
Gore is.

I'm a bona fine Al Gore fan. I bought his book,
Earth in the Balance. I sent him a birthday card
in April 2001. (Got a response back, too.) I had
Al Gore on my desktop for nearly two years. And I
am still angry about Bush v. Gore, and know beyond
a shadow of a doubt that if all of the legal and valid
votes cast in Florida had been counted, Gore won.
Period. End of sentence. End of argument. Gore won.

I will never move on, I will never get over it.

Okay, now that my bona fides are established, I am
glad Al decided to forego a run at the WH this time.
NO flames please, but Howard Dean is a Big Dog in
the making. Wesley Clark is a proven leader, another
Big Dog in the making. Al Gore is a fantastic second,
a trusted advisor who will tell the #1 guy the truth,
no matter what.

But he's not a Big Dog. And I can't take the pain of
him being lied about by media whores like Katherine
Seeyle, Dickie Berke, Ceci Connolly, Howard Fineman,
and all of the rest of the Kool Kid Washington
Presstitutes. And we all know that despite the work
that we have all done re: media reform and rapid response,
the media whores will lazily fall back on the RW talking
points, knowing they will not be punished for it.

With this new crop of candidates, the wingnuts have to
do new work. They're scrambling like mad to try to find
something, anything, to hang on Dean and Clark. It's
thrill to watch how the sleaze machine works.

That sleaze machine was hidden prior to 2001 because the
ReThugs could always point to the "stained dress" and the
"cigars" to excuse their jihad against Democrats. Now
the jihad is exposed.

So that's why Wes Clark instead of Al Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. No new work for wingnuts
Edited on Thu Sep-25-03 11:23 PM by Must_B_Free
They've already trashed Clark as a phony from what I can tell. The things I have read knocking Clark have been disturbing to me. I don't like that he is a Military Industrial man.

They can say most of the stuff they said about Gore about anybody.

I just think that if you made a weighted decision matrix of the top candidates, Gore would be the strongest choice.

America loves a comeback story. If Gore were smart, he would be listening to the theme from Rocky and limbering up. In my opinion, if he doesn't run, then he really is a loser and doesn't deserve the office. If he has decided that that is who he is, then so be it.
If he can throw away the best chance to get the country going in the right direction again, (which he is doing) then I guess he really is not presidential material. As much as I love Al Gore, I am inclined to believe that statement.

I just have to say it because I believe that he is the best choice among the current players in the field.

THINK ABOUT IT: If Gore ran the natural implication is "going back" - undoing the damage of Bush; going back to the good old days and policies.

"Back to better days" - noone can sell this theme with the clout of Al Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaitykaity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. America also loves to build up
heroes so that we can knock them back down to size
again.

I think I have Al Gore fatigue. It's a psychological
condition of trying to explain the likeability of a
man who can go on Saturday Night Live and be absolutely
hilarious to people who think him a stiff policy wonk
who always thinks he's the smartest guy in the room.

I like Al Gore. I always have. He let us down,
we let him down. Let Dean/Clark, Clark/Dean, or
whomever, take down a hemorraging Dubya, then give
Al Gore his place at the table as an elder statesman,
a man who was disrespected by everyone, not just his
political enemies.

I want Al Gore to stay above the partisan fray. I want
him dignified, a man finally given his due.

That will be the sweetest revenge.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
einsteins stein Donating Member (398 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-26-03 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. I hear where you are coming from, but..
walk a mile in Al Gore's shoes...then tell us that he must not be Presidential material.

I really wanmted Gore to run, 1% for revenge against the Bush clan, and 1% for the political drama of the rematch, but 98% because I think that he would have made the very finest President this country has ever seen--ever.

You think Gore showed himself a loser for not running, and I think that stepping back from a 2004 run must of been the hardest thing Gore ever did. I take him on his word for his reasons. I honestly think that Gore believes it would have caused a split in the Dem party if he ran, and as we so often repeat on DU, we can not afford a split party this election cycle.

I think that Gore made a tough and courageous decision. I wish things were different for him, but they are not.

In the mean time, the best revenge we can get for the 2000 theft is a 2004 Democratic landslide, taking back control of the American Democracy, putting our Constitution in a lockbox, and bring the Bush clan up on criminal charges.

If we can do all that, I'll consider the score evened, and then i'll get over it. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 28th 2014, 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC