Al Gore, the coward.
First Al Gore declines a Bush/Gore rematch vowing not to run in 2004 — not wanting to lose to Bush twice, then Gore has decided to endorse a candidate that has very little chance to beat Bush in the 2004 election, ensuring an easier time for himself in 2008. Nice commitment to your party and your country.
Sure Dean has a grassroots movement but if any idealistic liberals out there feel Dean has a chance in hell to beat Bush and his corporate $ponsored campaign, they'll surely get a wakeup call in the form of 4 more years of Bush II. Dean has great Internet support, that's nice but when it comes to voting he doesn't have the mass to get people to the polls and overthrow the powers that be. He is too outspoken about the war and that will kill him, the economy is coming back and that will kill him, Bush s going to try to claim victory on Medicare reform (which is a joke - unless reform means making it easier for drug companies and HMO's to make money) which will kill him, and he simply does not have the personal attributes (charisma, looks, stature etc. — the intangibles) to be elected to the highest office in the U.S.
I personally hope something happens in the coming weeks and months to unseat Dean as the front-runner for the Democratic nomination. I don't think it will happen — in fact, in a perfect world, it shouldn't happen, but in the world of U.S. politics it is far too often that I find myself voting against one person rather than for another. Unfortunate really.
comments
It's looking good for Hilary next election despite what she says to the contrary. The second Clinton to topple a Bush? They can try again with Jeb.
Posted by: on 12/09/03 at 06:11 PMBush will win again, it doesn't matter who the Dem's put out there.
Looks like Hillary in '08 to me.
Posted by: on 12/09/03 at 06:41 PMHoly Shit! I haven't seen such a flaming post in a long time.
I totally disagree with your assessment of Al Gore as a coward for not running and for backing Dean. I think his decision to not run was a solid choice. And whether or not it was so that he didn't "lose" again is irrelevant to me. A rehash of 2000 would not do any good.
I think it's irresponsible for anyone to blast Gore for backing any candidate - that includes the other candidates whining about it. Any one of them would have killed for Gore's backing.
Ben, who do you want Gore to back? Dick Gephardt? Will he beat bush? Why would he, just because he's of the old school Democratic party?
I'm not saying that Howard Dean can beat Bush. I'm not even saying that he can win an election vs. any other Republican, but to count him out because of his non-main-streamism and his somewhat new-school thinking is unwise. Yes, he has a grassroots movement, but I keep hearing that mentioned almost as a downside or as an afterthought. It's not the nail in the coffin, but it can't be taken quite so lightly. It could prove to bring out more voters, add that to the backing he is likely to get after the first couple caucuses and he's got quite a following.
Pair him with somebody who has Wesley Clark's diverse (and currently-appropriate) background and you have a force to be reckoned with.
Also, you mention that Dean does not have many of the intangibles necessary to be President. Do you feel that Lieberman, Clark, or others have a lot of charsima? Do you think Sharpton has the looks or perceived truthfulness?
Finally (which brings us back to the original point), is this an attack on Gore or Dean? I think it was intended to be a poke at Gore (which I already disagree with), but you finish by pointing out reasons that Dean cannot be President. I don't disagree with many of your points, but I do disagree with some of their implications.
With love, vlaminck.com is back in the house.
Posted by: on 12/10/03 at 10:18 AMScott:
Would I have ran again if I was Gore — probably not. Gore knows another loss and his political career is done.
Gore has never impressed me with his ability to stand up to adversity and conflict — I blame his mishandling of his 1st presidential campaign for the current state of the U.S. and "leader" we have now.
Gore thinks he will have a better time getting to the whitehouse in 2008 but his window may be closed anyway as Brent points out Hilary may run (though I think she should run this year just to legitimize herself a bit and add some diversity to the field). Of course, she can't win, the Republican's hate her more than they hate her husband, and that's a lot. They would do anything they could to assassinate her character at any expense.
On Dean:
I don't mean to bash Dean, its just that I don't like him, personally. He rubs me the wrong way — seems shifty and insincere. He doesn't have a presidential air about him and I think that is important to have for this office. These things, to me, make anything he says that I may agree with, nearly meaningless.
I was just thinking the other day that Americans never have elected anyone on the issues (or at least in the TV age), choosing instead to base their decision for the candidate they "like better" — however vague and immeasurable that may be. I simply don't like Dean from what I have seen so far.
On a Dean/Clark ticket:
Certainly better than a Dean/Sharpton ticket! :) Clark does seem more presidential to me, a little too much like a Republican president but presidential nonetheless. He holds himself well and is every bit as smart (if not smarter) than Dean.
I think Clark has the best chance to win the next election. What's my biggest fear however? That nominating Dean is a sure prescription for 4 more years of Bushit.
"Even some who agree with Mr Dean's politics concede he could be a disaster waiting to happen - popular enough among the party faithful to win enough party primaries to take the Democratic nomination; but too left wing to be electable against President Bush in the national election in November 2004."
Who else would I like to see? Clark, John Edwards (cause he is a relative), and Clinton because I see them as having the most realist chances of any in the field.
Give up your idealism (for now), this election is about beating Bush, plain and simple.
Posted by: on 12/10/03 at 10:50 AMThe economy is on fire now and no one can beat me! Certainly not Dean!
Posted by: on 12/10/03 at 11:58 AMYou just don't like Gore because he's on the board of Apple now. I bet he sold you that IIgs didn't he?! It's all becoming clear now. ;P
Posted by: on 12/10/03 at 04:22 PMYou know what's interesting about Washington? It's the kind of place where second-guessing has become second nature.
Posted by: on 01/25/04 at 08:45 PM