Should The Kerry-Edwards Campaign Use President Gore More?

[Jackson4Gore]

Repubs have been saying lately that we have abandoned Gore since the 2000 election and that we are embarrassed of him. I am begining to feel that way too. This man won the 2000 election and has been one of the best democrats in the past 20 years. Should we use him more in our 2004 campaign, via events, ads, stumping, ect?

[w13rd0]

1. I like what Gore and Dean are doing...

...they are supporting the nominee. Everyone that has paid any attention at all knows that they've been right about SO MUCH of what they said, things said they were ridiculed for. I don't think Kerry-Edwards needs to use Gore or Clinton or anyone more. They need to make their own case. Others can stump for them and support them, but the ticket needs to stand on its own.

[Jackson4Gore]

2. Then why was everyone on Al's case for not using Clinton in 2000?

[w13rd0]

4. Because Clinton and Gore were on a ticket together....

...Kerry and Edwards have not been on a ticket, or served in the administration of, Gore or Clinton. That's just my guess and gut feeling.

[patricia92243]

3. Standing alone does not mean that they should not have surrogates to help

spread their message. The more the better. We just might get a tiny bit of news coverage then.

[w13rd0]

6. Who said they don't have surrogates?

Have you read or heard or watched any of these surrogates recent statements? But waiting for the corpowhore media to give us the breadcrumbs of a "tiny bit of news coverage"...well, we'll be waiting a LONG time. Doesn't matter if they are or are not serving the Kerry-Edwards campaign in an official capacity. Only way they'd get corpowhore news coverage is if they provided footage for a "wild-eyed liberal" newsreel.

[unfrigginreal]

5. They'd be fools not to.

Al Gore has found a voice that speaks for a significant part of the party.

[WI_DEM]

7. of course they should

he is a great surrogate. He should also have a prime time speaking slot at the convention.