Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

merrily

(45,251 posts)
94. Thank you so much, karynnj.
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 06:02 PM
Mar 2016

Was Gore serious in 1988, or was that part of the plan for 1992 and beyond, to begin to get Gore known nationally and perceived nationally as Presidential timber?

With Bubba, Hillary, Lieberman and others, Gore had been a founding member of the DLC. This anecdote may (or may not) have been about something that happened in 1989, but I believe that Bubba was always supposed to be the first DLC POTUS. Gore, with a famous political and liberal surname, and a Senator from Tennessee in his own right, was a near perfect running mate for the Governor of Arkansas, including from the standpoint of a Southern Strategy, which Democrats desperately needed by then.


A little after four o’clock on the afternoon of April 6, 1989, I walked into the office of Governor Bill Clinton on the second floor of the Arkansas State Capitol in Little Rock.

“I’ve got a deal for you,” I told Clinton after a few minutes of political chitchat. “If you agree to become chairman of the DLC, we’ll pay for your travel around the country, we’ll work together on an agenda, and I think you’ll be president one day and we’ll both be important.” With that proposition, Clinton agreed to become chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council, and our partnership was born. With Clinton as its leader, the New Democrat movement that sprung from the DLC over the next decade would change the course of the Democratic Party in the United States and of progressive center-left parties around the world.



http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/12/recruiting-bill-clinton/281946/

My personal opinion is that this is spin, at least as to timing, if nothing else The DLC, which was founded in 1985 as a conservadem organization, did not just have an epiphany after the 1988 election to decide that being a conservadem was the way to go. Bill Clinton, a founding member of the DLC, hardly needed to be recruited in 1989, whether it was to head any political organization of which he had been a member since about 1985, or to be President, which his own words tell us he wanted to be since he went to Washington as a high schooler and shook JFK's hand.

Then again, I don't trust Al From as far as I can throw him.

Anyway, my point is, I don't know how seriously Gore was running for POTUS in 1988. I think the agenda all along was for Clinton to be the first DLC President. After all, being Senator Fulbright's mentee since high school and working in the Democratic Party for decades, it was his turn.

I don't like to speculate about what imaginary or dead Presidents would have done. Ironically, Democrats who were in office at the start of World War I, World War II, the Korean "Police Action," the Bay of Pigs, and the Vietnam "Era," have, since at least the anti-Vietnam movement, been defensive about being weak on defense. They have taken measures to counter that, including appointing Republicans as Secretaries of Defense, as did both Bubba and Obama.

After having been drawn into the Bay of Pigs, JFK became leery of the CIA and the Pentagon and had his brother to weave him through potentially mutually assured destruction during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Democrats, starting with Johnson seemed to have forgotten all those lessons and, thanks to some turd, we lost RFK and no one has replaced him.

Anyway, the inexplicable defensiveness of Democrats on the (snort) "defense" issue may have led Gore to do something precipitous after 911, rather than avoiding war, nas most seem to assume he would have. Heck, even Sanders voted for the Afghanistan War. That'll teach those tribal farmers to go into Pakistan and turn Ben Laden over to the US!

Anyway, we'll never know. And, as nice as it is to imagine that Gore would most certainly done better after 911, I also think it's potentially dangerous to America to assume that we know exactly how imaginary (even real) will behave. Inasmuch as it's moot anyway, I don't see a reason to engage in a way of daydreaming that I consider potentially dangerous.

Sorry. As must be obvious, the imaginary President thing is a pet issue of mine. That's my only excuse, such as it is, for rambling about it. Come to think of it, the DLC is also a pet issue, so you were smack between Scylla and Charybdis, you poor thing.
With this congress almost anything is grounds for impeachment. Agschmid Mar 2016 #1
Last I checked they haven't impeached anybody. n/t PoliticAverse Mar 2016 #2
They didn't try it with Pres. Obama Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #4
Maybe Obama will pardon her as one of his last acts and render the whole matter moot. n/t PoliticAverse Mar 2016 #3
Umm.... Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #11
I don't think the President can pardon away an impeachment anyways. NobodyHere Mar 2016 #19
not necessarily FreedomRain Mar 2016 #20
You're wrong leftynyc Mar 2016 #23
Caspar Weinberger SFnomad Mar 2016 #55
What Burdick v US actually established was the right to reject a pardon PoliticAverse Mar 2016 #62
Probably the biggest stretch yet SCantiGOP Mar 2016 #5
Actually she could be impeached before she ever takes office tularetom Mar 2016 #6
Impeach Obama because Hillary had a private server and wiped it? merrily Mar 2016 #7
No, Impeach a President H. Clinton as soon as she takes office. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #21
Oh, sorry! I completely missed what you were getting at. merrily Mar 2016 #29
Yes, the last time they impeached a Clinton we got Shrub right afterwards. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #31
Very different issues, IMO. merrily Mar 2016 #36
Gore distanced himself from Clinton because of the damage Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #48
Clinton did not take damage. His ratings went up, he could not seek re-election and he is still merrily Mar 2016 #53
I agree it hurt Gore - remember Bush had a slogan to bring back honor and decency karynnj Mar 2016 #69
That was my point in mentioning that I first saw Bush announce on the Trinity Broadcasting Network. merrily Mar 2016 #91
Your last sentence is fantastic! karynnj Mar 2016 #92
Thank you so much, karynnj. merrily Mar 2016 #94
I wouldn't put anything past the right wing morons. NCTraveler Mar 2016 #8
Technical point: EmperorHasNoClothes Mar 2016 #9
My point exactly Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #17
And in both cases, Le Taz Hot Mar 2016 #25
Bill claimed he "compartmentalized." The CIA and Pentagon might say he was not merrily Mar 2016 #32
They tried to impeach Bill on charges that seemed to be less serious than ladjf Mar 2016 #10
They did impeach him. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #14
Apparently, I misused-used the word impeached. Thanks for the correction. nt ladjf Mar 2016 #18
A sitting President lying under oath to a grand jury is relatively serious, IMO. merrily Mar 2016 #38
You are very correct. But, I was the considering email security to be a ladjf Mar 2016 #42
I also very much mind the lies and half truths around the email issue, such as merrily Mar 2016 #50
Agreed. nt ladjf Mar 2016 #52
How are they going to impeach leftynyc Mar 2016 #58
Well, that's a killer good point. I don't know the answer. nt ladjf Mar 2016 #60
Where is it required the act had to occur while in office as president? Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #70
First line in the wikipedia entry for impeachment leftynyc Mar 2016 #71
Well, according to that article cabinet secretaries can and have been impeached. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #73
So what? leftynyc Mar 2016 #74
The email scandal is very much a matter of when she was in the cabinet. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #75
Knock yourselves out leftynyc Mar 2016 #76
In Post #58 you wrote, "You can't impeach a SOS." Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #80
And I was wrong leftynyc Mar 2016 #81
Facts be damned, it's all about "how much can we get away with?" Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #83
Like I said leftynyc Mar 2016 #84
Ah, patriotism. The last refuge of scoundrels. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #85
Ah - fascism leftynyc Mar 2016 #87
Fascism? lol Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #88
LOL - no security? leftynyc Mar 2016 #89
"They did it too!" is just an admission Hillary did it too. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #90
Impeachment is the mechanism for removing someone from office because of high crimes & misdemeanors EffieBlack Mar 2016 #105
Where is it written that your point are even valid? Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #107
The investigation will likely be complete by then which will probably exonerate her. DCBob Mar 2016 #12
If those top secret emails are still top secret Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #16
Once the investigation is over and she is cleared of any nefarious activities.. DCBob Mar 2016 #22
They will argue that the Obama administration covered for her. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #27
You really are grasping now. DCBob Mar 2016 #37
Smart enough to call for a no fly zone in Syria. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #41
"Likely" and "probably" are your speculation. I wouldn't bet an election on either of them. merrily Mar 2016 #40
Just hedging a bit but I would give her a 95% chance of being cleared. DCBob Mar 2016 #49
Not surprising that your sheer speculation and a % you pulled out of your ear are good enough for merrily Mar 2016 #54
If so, the GOP will be desperate to delay the FBI investigation. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #13
The 'revolution' seems a little frayed. randome Mar 2016 #15
The Republicans made oral sex Le Taz Hot Mar 2016 #24
They didn't make a sitting President lie under oath to a grand jury. merrily Mar 2016 #44
I'm no lawyer leftynyc Mar 2016 #26
That is an interesting point. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #28
That's a good question as it appears the consensus is the official's action... PoliticAverse Mar 2016 #65
I would guess the state leftynyc Mar 2016 #66
It's widely believe that a President can't be criminally prosecuted while in office. That is why PoliticAverse Mar 2016 #67
But that was a crime done leftynyc Mar 2016 #68
LOL! So the premise of your OP is that she's already been elected! cwydro Mar 2016 #30
It is a hypothetical best case scenario for Clinton. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #34
Aha. cwydro Mar 2016 #47
the republians will certainly try; but Hillary will NEVER get elected president amborin Mar 2016 #33
To be determined. mmonk Mar 2016 #35
you need 2/3 of the Senate to convict Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #39
I believe the term impeached does not require conviction. mmonk Mar 2016 #43
Sorry, "Remove from office" is the correct term, not "convict" Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #45
No problem. Many of us had the same discussions here mmonk Mar 2016 #51
Convict is the correct term. SFnomad Mar 2016 #57
If Hillary is elected, toenail fungus will be a cause for impeachment. Vinca Mar 2016 #46
Congress will not impeach a newly elected first term president. LonePirate Mar 2016 #56
Only in your dreams. Bleacher Creature Mar 2016 #59
We hace considered that nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #61
No, if you want to go so far as to call this a crime (at this stage of the game) Samantha Mar 2016 #63
No if I were going to fantasize, I'd imagine her being impeached for BENGHAZI! brooklynite Mar 2016 #64
I'm waiting for someone to start shooting melons in their backyard, and breathlessly msanthrope Mar 2016 #72
no n/t chillfactor Mar 2016 #77
Hillary could always "buy" her way out of impeachment with support for the TPP, fracking, etc. Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2016 #78
Of course they will begin impeqchment hearings on day one, were she ever elected. peacebird Mar 2016 #79
How bad would this look for the people of the U.S. monicaangela Mar 2016 #82
It doesn't matter. The simple fact is that with a Clinton in the WH, scandals and impeachment will magical thyme Mar 2016 #86
Don't put anything past republican congress. pat_k Mar 2016 #93
I think this misses the point. The "scandal" is right-wing bullshit. But the content of the emails Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #95
It isn't bullshit. She never should have done it. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #96
I agree it was an error, and I agree that she was godawful about admitting her error, but it is an Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #97
Not true. Nobody else had 22 top secret emails on a private server. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #98
We're on the same side here so don't take this as an attack, but didn't Colin Powell do this, too? Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #99
A couple classified emails. None top secret Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #103
And Bill Clinton runs as the VP itsrobert Mar 2016 #100
yes, but she won't be elected so it won't matter amborin Mar 2016 #101
was hillary president when the email and servers were an issue? beachbum bob Mar 2016 #102
No. EffieBlack Mar 2016 #104
Three years from now, in the middle of Clinton's first term as President... randome Mar 2016 #106
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Might the emails be groun...»Reply #94