Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A gentle reminder to all those discussing a Gore run for the presidency...

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:27 PM
Original message
A gentle reminder to all those discussing a Gore run for the presidency...
I have seen posts on DU remarking that Gore shouldn't run again because "he lost".

From DU's About page:

Democratic Underground (DU) was founded on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2001, to protest the illegitimate presidency of George W. Bush and to provide a resource for the exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas. Since then, DU has become one of the premier left-wing websites on the Internet, publishing original content six days a week, and hosting one of the Web's most active left-wing discussion boards.

If you're here, you should understand the fact upon which this website was founded: GORE. DID. NOT. LOSE.

Thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for this reminder.
I know Gore didn't lose. Sadly, he also doesn't occupy the White House.

Despite the fact he won the election, he did not win the battle for the spoils that ensued afterward.

And his pick and choose recount strategy was a big factor in that. If he had fought for a fair, statewide recount, he might well be in the White House today.

He did not, and I think he bears some responsibility for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. You are correct
BUT I personally think he is the strongest of the Dem candidates.

Nixon lost in 60 and then won in 68.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I like Clark, but I still have a great deal of respect for Gore.
I was disappointed in the way things panned out for him, and there were a few moments in the debates where I could have throttled him were it possible. I think he was great at governing, but not the best campaigner, despite a lot of effort and some definite moments of greatness.

He has shown his true colors over the five years since he won in 2000, and I know he would have made a great president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
35. How does Gore/Clark sound?
Hmmm...just thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. I think so too
He hasn't been in the political arena in a while and he's definitley better at everything I think with the public. I don't think he himself has changed just his presence in the media and everything. Look at him from 2000 and compare it to 2003 or now. I think if he was to run in 2008 it'd be a very powerful and uniting and we would see the new Al Gore. I also think he's probably learned a lot more about campaigning, who to hire and not, the media, etc. from watching other campaigns etc. I hope he does run in 2008 but if not then that's fine and he'll still have all my support and respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. I doubt if Al is going to run, so the discussion is probably moot
...but y'all have fun anyway!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-01-05 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
55. Is your belief based on sources?
My belief for Gore's possible candidacy is based on the fact that he has stated twice that he won't rule out a run in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-02-05 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #55
60. I saw an article a few weeks ago that was linked from DU
The way that Al Gore answered a question about running again sounded like a negatory, good buddy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-02-05 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. I have seen several background quotes.
Most of them indicate that Gore is thinking seriously about running. I've listed a couple of examples at the bottom.

It's true Chris Matthews cited an unnamed source saying Gore wouldn't run. I find it incredible that Gore would leak to Matthews because Matthews hates Gore and completely trashed him in 2000. It's also not the way Gore has operated when he chose not to run in 1992 and 2004. Both times he made a public announcement when he made his decision.

So I'm fairly confident that the status quo remains. Al Gore reserves the right to run.

http://algore-08.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=...

http://algore-08.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-02-05 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #61
63. I think we need some real, solid information here
I recall Al announced he would not run in early or mid 2003 and hence the primary battle began. If Al was sure he was not going to run, he would have said such already, so my hunch is he is being catty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-04-05 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #63
65. That's probably true.
The axiom in prez politics is that the later you get in, the better. Partly, because it keeps the heat on someone like HRC. Also, it lessens the chance of peaking too soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Irrelevant. Sorry, but it doesn't matter. The public perception
is that he lost.

Therefore, "he lost".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. The truth is important.
I intend to continue to remind people of that truth, "irrelevant" or not (IMHO, not).

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. I believe Al Gore actually won the electoral college and the Presidency
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 05:47 PM by Uncle Joe
in 2000, we just had a coup to keep him out of office. However if you insist he lost so have Andrew Jackson, Grover Cleveland and Richard Nixon before they were elected.Abraham Lincoln lost about every race he ever ran for before he was elected President. The Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs among others lost before they won the Super Bowl. The Boston Red Sox lost before they won the World Series among others. I would wager everyone has lost at one time or another. The real losers of 2000 was not Al Gore, it was the American People, does this mean we can never win again?

P.S. Thanks for the history lesson, I did not know D.U. was founded on that date for that reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. That's the valid point; perception becomes reality
If a team loses the Super Bowl by 1 point via four TDs called back due to outrageous bogus penalities, they still go into the history books and memory banks as the loser. Sorry, but as tragic and unfair as it is, that's Al Gore.

Six months after election 2000 a poll of voters indicated a significant percentage of Gore voters wouldn't even admit they had voted for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barad Simith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
19. Because of this public perception...
I think Gore would have to make election reform a major part of his campaign. Otherwise, he would be seen as a loser who was going to give it another shot, instead of a winner who was cheated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
40. Good POints!
I think we have to Get Rid of all the fucking media and start over fresh..and then we would be getting somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-01-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
56. Public perception is malleable.
Remember when the public believed that security guard at the Atlanta Olympic bombing was a villain rather than a hero? Remember when the public thought Bush was doing a good job on Iraq?

Every campaign is different. If Gore runs in 2008, it will not be with an "I was robbed" motif. Rather, IMO, Gore will run on restoring America and the planet. Climate change, Iraq and terrorism will be front and center, IMO. Gore is spreading a gospel of hope that we can yet save the planet. I believe he is our last, best hope for saving civilization.

The campaign of 2008 will be radically different from 2000. The bloggers had no effect on 2000, but in 2004 thay had a real effect. In 2008 they will be much, much stronger than they were in 2004. MSM will not be able to change the outcome in the way they did in 2000.

Also in 2008, Gore would have the advantage of the Bush legacy, as opposed to the disadvantage of the Clinton legacy. Major differences. The similarities between 1968 and 2008 are striking. Nixon and Gore, indeed.

I don't have a crystal ball but I know that Gore is inspiring audiences around the globe. He is not perceived as he was in the Democratic Party in the aftermath of the election, especially post-Katrina as more people pay attention on climate change. He is the most charismatic figure in the party, IMO. That reality of charisma and change will make it into MSM by the blogger echo effect. Things change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. The important thing to remember...
...is that Gore lost Tennessee - his home state. If he had just taken TN, we might not be talking about 9/11, Iraq, and FEMA right now.

If Gore wants to run again, let him try. But his message will need some serious retooling. At least he's taken some cues from Dean and the grassroots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top