Michigander4Dean
(588 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:16 PM
Original message |
Politics1 says Gore will NOT run. |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 12:17 PM by Michigander4Dean
|
MADem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:18 PM
Response to Original message |
1. He'll do something, then |
|
Secretary of State? Ambassador to the UN? We cannot let that talent go to waste...
|
Michigander4Dean
(588 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
oldtime dfl_er
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:18 PM
Response to Original message |
2. At least he had the decency to tell us |
onehandle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:20 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Yes. He said this many, many months ago. nt |
NYCGirl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Politics1 is wrong about that "liberal television network" thing |
|
(CurrentTV is not a liberal network), so perhaps they're wrong about the rest of it, too. ;)
|
Larkspur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message |
6. If true, then it looks like I won't be voting Dem for Prez in 2008 for the |
|
first time in my life.
I'm not enthralled with the crop of potential candidates touted for 2008.
|
janx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. A lot can happen in three years. |
William769
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
11. So lets keep the status quo then. |
Bernardo de La Paz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
12. What a load of crap. You don't know who is running in 2008. First 2006! |
Larkspur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
13. I have a pretty good idea who is |
|
I won't be voting for any of the pro-war Dems, that's for sure.
|
renie408
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
28. So you will make a defacto vote for the really REALLY pro-war GOP. |
Larkspur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
34. No, I won't vote Repuke |
|
I'll either write in a name or vote Green Party.
I live in a blue state anyway, so my non-Dem vote is not a defacto vote for a Repuke.
BTW, I'm not voting for Repuke favored Sen. Lieberman in 2006. I'll probably write in a name.
|
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:23 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
47. And Gore was pro-war, right? |
|
He was against it long before it was cool.
|
Clarkie1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
jfern
(394 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 04:36 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
Any Democrat is better than President Allen.
|
CTyankee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
45. Hey, Lark, don't give up! |
|
Lotsa time between now and 2008. We have got to hope for a better world. This is a bad time, I know. But we'll come back (if the war, Avian flu, global warming, whatever) doesn't kill us all.
I'm pretty depressed now. But I hope that a new, bright leader will emerge and we can come back stronger than ever before and will have an era of prosperity, peace, and prochoice.
|
rateyes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:24 PM
Response to Original message |
8. The two that we need most out of that list, |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 12:25 PM by rateyes
are listed as not running--Dean and Gore. I still hope we can persuade at least one of them to change his mind. The best of the rest, and someone I could support whole-heartedly is Clark. I think a Gore/Clark ticket would be fantastic. Absent that, a Clark/Cleland ticket or a Clark/Boxer ticket sounds good to me.
|
election_2004
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
14. How about Clark/Feingold? |
rateyes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
31. Yeah, that works, too... |
|
I didn't like Feingold's vote for Roberts, but I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
|
TallahasseeGrannie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:24 PM
Response to Original message |
ms liberty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:27 PM
Response to Original message |
10. It says Tweety said Gore told him he wouldn't run... |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 12:31 PM by ms liberty
But I don't see a link to Tweety there. This would not be the first time people were wrong. There is a lot of jockeying going on already, and this could be disinformation. It could also be just plain old wrong. Until I hear Al Gore say it definitively, like he did for the 04 race, I will keep an open mind. He's who we need, he's who I really want.
edited to add: It says he said it in March 05...that's a little early to take anyone at their word on a presidential race. In March 05 he was promoting his new network. Naturally he wanted to talk about it, not about a race that was about 3 1/2 years away!
|
OneBlueSky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:46 PM
Response to Original message |
15. all old news . . . and it doesn't mean he can't change his mind . . . |
|
or be convinced that his country needs him . . .
|
election_2004
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:47 PM
Response to Original message |
16. Gore should start an ICGCC |
|
Gore should take a proactive role by starting an International Coalition on Global Climate Change...because there's nothing currently in existence that has any real teeth.
Why wait around for 2008?
|
Catchawave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
Much like Edwards' work with the Poverty Center?
|
davidinalameda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:52 PM
Response to Original message |
17. Gore's campaign was horrible |
|
he should have beat Bush, and yes, I know if it wasn't for Florida, blah blah blah
you know what--he shouldn't have needed Florida--he should have been able to carry at least one of the southern states that Clinton did without too much trouble
he picked what had to be the worst VP candidate in modern history
he ran one of the worst campaigns in recent memory
|
NYCGirl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
22. Psssttt...he did beat Bush by half a million votes!! NT |
davidinalameda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
23. and remember since we have the Electorial College |
|
how many votes one gets for president doesn't mean anything
he lost where it counted
|
bunny planet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. psssst,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Gore won Florida too. |
|
Remember that whole SCOTUS selecting the President thing.
|
davidinalameda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
|
what about Arkansas, West Virginia, his home state of Tennessee, Louisiana?
those were states, may not Tennessee, that Clinton had won and Gore lost
no Republican had won West Virginia since 1980.
Dukakis won West Virginia! If he could do it, why couldn't Gore
|
bunny planet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
32. That was then, this is now. Gore may not have run the most successful |
|
campaign that's true, part of the fault lies squarely with the media's portrayal of him. Since the coup took place however, Gore has emerged as a strong, clear, progressive voice, not afraid to call out the criminals on their actions. I think he could go a long way to reversing some of the destructive policies this corrupt Bush administration has inflicted on the American people. This is a tired arguement, saying that the Gore of 2000 was a loser. HE WON, regardless of whether or not he carried West Virginia. It's my understanding that this website was founded as a response to the outcry over the presidency being stolen from Al Gore. Not sure why you assume people don't change and that they should be judged forever for mistakes they've made in the past if they clearly have shown their efforts to do things differently.
|
jfern
(394 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 04:38 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
42. So if home states are so important |
|
Did you know that President Humphrey and Vice President Muskie won all 4 of their and Nixon / Agnew's home states. Good thing that Humphrey / Muskie won.
|
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
48. Where were you in 2000? |
|
Any state in the South?? Clinton had a 30% or worse favorable rating in red states. He lost in every poll to Bush except in one in Oct, taken by ABC, Even that was within the margin of error. Clinton would have ended up in a close race just as Gore did. Every poll showed in 2000 that swing-voters were fed up with Clinton and his administration. But you say that Gore, who was JUST vice-president, should have won easily?
Then explain to me why was Clinton behind Bush in 2000 as an incumbent president after 8 years of economic boom?
Blowjob and lies. Those are the answers. And you cannot blame Gore for that.
He ran a very reasonable campaign, considering the circumstances. There's no evidence that any Democrat, let alone someone linked to Clinton, could have done better.
Moreover, if just 1000 of Palm Beach voters hadn't been blind Gore would be in the White House today and your claim that he ran a bad campaign wouldn't hold any water.
You say Clinton won some states in the South. Yes in 1992 and 1996. But it was 2000! After Monica, after the lies, after impeachment. And based in the polls and exit polls Clinton would have lost the South in 2000 even more than Gore did. There are quite a few cultural conservative over there, you know?
|
Larkspur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
26. Kerry's was worse. Gore won the popular vote. Kerry did not |
|
And as Jimmy Carter recently said, Gore won the 2000 election and should have been our president.
|
BlueIris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
43. You might want to read the Election 2004 Results and Discussion forum |
|
before you post that anymore.
How many times am I going to have to remind DUers to do that? How? Many? Times?
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
shance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
37. Gore had other Democrats sabatoging his campaign. |
|
With Dems like Lieberman (and others).....who needs enemies?
|
cassiepriam
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 12:57 PM
Response to Original message |
|
No one said a word when he was cheated out of the presidency. Why should he put his neck out yet one more time? Our loss. We do not deserve him.
|
Guaranteed
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:06 PM
Response to Original message |
19. This doesn't look like the most credible source. |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 01:09 PM by BullGooseLoony
It's second-hand reporting with an opinion worked in. And it's poorly written.
It's the kind of thing one would see on a message board. I wouldn't take it too seriously.
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:15 PM
Response to Original message |
20. Gore himself has said that he will not run |
|
I do not understand why some of his supporters believe that the is a liar.
|
Kingofalldems
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
35. Huh? No one said he was a liar |
|
Candidates change their mind all the time---you know that. Or is this another one of your posts that damn dems with faint praise?
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
44. He was pretty empathic that he was not going to run |
|
If you remember when he launched Current TV, he stated that he enjoyed being a non-politician because he could speak his mind without fear of political repercussions.
|
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:40 AM
Response to Reply #44 |
53. Yeah and how do those statements prove that he will not run in 2008? |
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
49. Wrong. He never said that. |
ProudDad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
21. And I should believe this site why??? |
Larkspur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:28 PM
Response to Original message |
24. On the Sept 26 Morning Sedition show, Mark Martin asked Rob Reich |
|
if Gore would run in 2008. Mark was referring to Ostroy's report Al Gore could be our Next Presidenthttp://ostroyreport.blogspot.com/2005/09/al-gore-could-be-our-next-president.html Reich did not validate or deny that Gore could be in the 2008 Prez mix.
|
janx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
27. No one but Gore can do that. |
|
So we'll just have to wait. :shrug:
|
goodhue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 02:39 PM
Response to Original message |
33. This is what he has said all along. |
|
Doesn't mean there are not folks hoping he will change his mind.
|
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #33 |
50. False, he never said it. |
|
Gimme a quote from a reliable source where Gore says in black-white terms I will no run for president in 2008.
|
Uncle Joe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 05:20 PM
Response to Original message |
36. Chirs Matthews is a liar, Gore never made a definitive statement |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 05:22 PM by Uncle Joe
to that effect and if he did, it would not be to Chris Matthews.
|
leesa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-30-05 08:56 PM
Response to Original message |
39. I would like to have Gore. He does need acting lessons though. |
|
Smart man with a level head.
|
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #39 |
51. Oh please no!!! No more actor! |
|
We had that with Reagan and Clinton and now with Bush. Phonies!
|
TankLV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 01:03 AM
Response to Original message |
40. Just 2 words: Richard Nixon. |
|
A few more: "You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore."
8 years is not a long time - in fact it's just about right.
|
leanin_green
(823 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-01-05 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
46. Yep, it could possibly be history repeating itself in Democratic garb. |
drummo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:39 AM
Response to Original message |
52. Bullshit. Chris Matthews' unnamed source |
|
is not a source. Second, Current it not a liberal TV network.
|
win_in_06
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:41 AM
Response to Original message |
54. At this stage in the game doesn't no really mean yes? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 11:12 PM
Response to Original message |