Gore's Puzzling Intervention by David Broder, Washington Post

[flpoljunkie]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A54827-2003Dec10?language=printer

Gore's Puzzling Intervention


By David S. Broder

Thursday, December 11, 2003; Page A39

On Monday, just about the time word was spreading that Al Gore was going to endorse Howard Dean for the Democratic presidential nomination, Andrew Kohut, the respected pollster who runs Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, released a survey showing that "voter opinion is still fluid in the early Democratic primary states."

<> Kohut's national poll of Democrats showed four candidates bunched within the margin of error -- Dean, Clark, Lieberman and Gephardt -- with none having more than 15 percent support; 23 percent said they were undecided. In the light of that survey and others like it, Gore's decision to intervene early -- and especially his call on Dean's rivals to "close ranks" behind the governor -- is one of the more eccentric developments in modern political history.

As a private citizen, Gore has as much right as anybody to express his preference. But as the former vice president and most recent presidential nominee, he has different obligations. Since he waged his valiant campaign and conceded with remarkable grace after the 36-day Florida recount ended in the Supreme Court, Gore has largely abandoned his role as titular leader of the Democratic Party. He played a minimal role in the 2002 midterm campaign and his scattered but well-crafted policy speeches have been made in non-party forums.

For him now to intervene in a dramatic way in the choice of the next nominee is, at the least, a reversal of form -- done with no consultation with other key players and with the same combination of secrecy and surprise as his decisions in his own campaign to change managers, to move headquarters and to pick Lieberman as his running mate.

...more...

The 2000 election debacle in Florida alone ought to make Gore aware of how angry voters get when they feel their votes do not count or matter. I am still angry about how our democracy was shredded. An endorsement from Gore may well prove to be a hindrance for Dr. Dean. Time will tell.

[demnan]

1. Oh he wishes

Broder and the rest of the right wing press are all upset about this endorsement. Let them whine the little wet diapers!

[helleborient]

2. He ignores the fact that Pew was out of line with other national polls...

That showed a 7 or 8 percent lead nationally for Dean...why pick the outlying poll to make your point other than cherry-picking the one that backs you up.

[polpilot]

3. Denying Gore's right to participate in the political process is a Red Flag

that Dean's making 'em poop their pants!!!

Dean '04...

[Romberry]

4. Oh goody! Another talking head!

Gore explicitly announced his intentions to make an endorsement "in time to make a difference" in his last MoveOn.Org speech. Just because Broder can't be bothered to be informed about intentions announced months ago doesn't mean that he can't write up yet another clueless column.

If Gore had endorsed a certain other candidate I'm sure that Broder and the supporters of certain other candidates would all be singing a different tune.

Never forget, sour grapes make for bad whine.

[cigarstore]

6. Yeah, he made a difference alright

A BAD difference. Why not let the votes be cast and see who the clear winner is? By endorsing now he adds even MORE rancor to the process and he looks less like a leader and more like a party hack.

[LuminousX]

5. You know, there isn't anything that can be done about it

If it hurt Dean, it hurt him and he won't win the nomination.
If it helped Dean, it helped him and he will win the nomination.