Who decides this election—you or Al Gore?

[robbedvoter]

Stop This Train
Who decides this election—you or Al Gore?
http://slate.msn.com/id/2092275/
By William Saletan
Updated Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2003, at 10:42 AM PT
Listen to this story on NPR's Day to Day.
What was that again about counting every vote?
snip
That will must be expressed "without any intervening interference," Gore insisted. Elections should be determined "by the votes cast by the people, not by politicians."
That was then. This is now.
Now the presidential candidate Gore prefers is ahead. Not in the vote count—the first votes haven't been cast yet—but in Democratic polls and money. In Iowa, Howard Dean leads his nearest competitor by eight points. In New Hampshire, he leads by 14 points to 25 points. Financially, he's blowing the field away. He has already renounced matching funds, allowing him to ignore the customary spending caps and outspend his opponents with impunity in the early primaries.
Should Democrats fight it out and see who wins? Not if Gore has his way. "Democracy is a team sport," he declared as he endorsed Dean in Harlem this morning. "All of us need to get behind the strongest candidate."
Who decided Dean was the strongest candidate? Not the voters: They haven't voted. Not the polls, either: They've shown Dick Gephardt, John Kerry, and Wesley Clark scoring better than Dean in hypothetical match-ups with President Bush. The person who anointed Dean the strongest candidate is the same intervening politician who complained three years ago about intervening politicians.
snip
No ordinary person would presume to tell other presidential candidates to stop criticizing Dean. But Gore did. He instructed Democrats to "speak no ill" of anyone in their party. "We can't afford to be divided," he said. Why did Gore deliver that message this morning? Because tonight Dean's rivals will get their last chance to confront him in a debate until nearly a month from now, at which point the Iowa caucuses will be just two weeks away. Gore is trying to stop anyone from stopping Dean.
snip
It's one thing to endorse a candidate. It's another to suggest that criticism of that candidate undermines your party—particularly when you've got such stature, as the party's most recent presidential nominee, that no other candidate can afford to rebuke you.
"This campaign is not about Howard Dean going to the White House. This campaign is about us going to the White House, all of us," Dean told the crowd. "We will open the doors to the White House and let the American people back in." That's great, Howard. We'd love to go to the White House. We'd just like to go to the polls first.

[Forkboy]

1. Nice to see

that the whining isn't confined to just DU :eyes:

[robsul82]

5. Amen, brotha.

:nopity:

Later.

RJS

[LuminousX]

2. Interesting but Flawed

The timing ensures that the other campaigns will do nothing but focus on Dean, trying to torpedo him all night. I think that was the intention. The more Dean is seen as the man to beat, the more attention he gets from the other campaigns, the more it solidifies his support.

[dpbrown]

3. Me!!! Oh, and 52,999,999 other progressive voters...

Who may or may not want a "centrist" telling us to get in line for the corporations.

[eileen_d]

4. Oh, for crying out loud...

Dean was already ahead BEFORE Gore endorsed him. That's one in a long list of misleading interpretations in this article. I don't think I can roll my eyes any further back in his head.

All of this energy would best be channeled into supporting Clark!

[Parche]

6. NEVER GIVE UP

I am still supporting John Kerry in his bid
because I know he is the only one that can beat Smirk Bush

WE WILL NEVER GIVE UP



JOHN KERRY PRESIDENT 2004

[stickdog]

7. Both (nm)

[stickdog]

8. Saletan is a huge hypocrite here.

My God, the guy earns his living as a political critic!