GORE08 has a buzz and has ruffled some feathers! Go GORE

[kid a]

All these Gore questions, paraphrases, slams and CORRECTIONS have me liking him even more!

Go GORE! 08

[John Q. Citizen]

1. Right now, he's my front runner! N/T

[blossomstar]

2. I'd hit the pavement for him.... again.

[GetTheRightVote]

3. I definitely want Gore in the race and to our President as is his right !!

It was stolen from him by the worst ever schrub in 2000, it would burn his butt if Gore final him into the White House yet Gore is the best choice as well, so it would be great.

:kick:

[Atman]

4. *sigh*

I...uh...oh well.

BushCo is going to steal 08 anyway, so I won't get stressed over the dems running the same old stale candidates. No sense in looking for a vibrant, exciting, charismatic (read: Clintonesque) candidate if BushCo is just going to waste him anyway. Short of a Neuremberg-type trial for the entire Bush Regime, I'm pretty certain they'll find a way to conjur a victory out of Diebold-purified thin air.

[jobycom]

8. Gore is that exciting, charismatic candidate for many people

Not to mention he's been so far ahead of the curve on most of the issues facing us now that many Dems are just now catching up.

[Atman]

21. Well, I'm not a Clarkie, or a Gorey, or anything yet. I'm just pissed.

I know a lot of people are behind Gore. I know a lot of us are flat-out desperate, and I count myself among that group. But those saying anyone else but Gore would lead to a "bloodbath," or any of that nonsense, are missing the point.

We need a saint. We need Bill Clinton again, and since we can't have him, we need someone just like he was when we "discovered" him what seems like eons ago; an unknown. A governor with leadership cred. But most importantly, I think we need a candidate virtually untouchable by the Rovian ridicule-and-attack machine.

Come on, you guys know what I'm talking about...the day Gore announces, Jay Leno, Dave Letterman and every pundit on earth will start with the "Wooden" jokes and the "I invented the internet" jokes, and the ridicule will begin. Americans are totally self-centered, and they project images onto candidates. When (not if) Gore is held up once again as some sort of lying caricature of a card-board cutout -- he WILL be, you know it -- we will have immediately lost a significant number of voters. People don't want the be the guy that backs the loser being ridiculed. That is just basic mob psychology.

I am NOT, in any way, shape or form, saying Gore would not make a good president. What I am saying is that he is damaged goods already, and the right wing media machine is not going to go away just because Bush will be exiting the office. We need the White Knight candidate Clinton was. New blood to invigorate the weary masses.

I do not ever, ever again want to have to cast my vote for someone just because he doesn't suck as bad as the other guy. I've done that for two elections now. Americans don't want to have another compromised leader. We need a LEADER. A real LEADER. As long as Gore is able to be held up as a caricature, we'll be stuck with a campaign full of the same old tired shit that will turn off voters -- the ridicule about his personality, his supposed lying, his beard, christ, you name it. Sit back and imagine the media in your mind...Gore will be destroyed, and it will pave the way for them to skate in the next crackpot righty to take advantage of the Diebold MOE fix. We cannot have another candidate that barely eeks out a MOE victory...we need a candidate who will energize and envigorate AMERICA, not just our own party.

I cannot possibly see how Al Gore, for all his positive aspects, or "right to the throne" arguments, is going to be that person. I just don't see it happening.

[drummo]

61. Clinton is a saint????

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Atman]

48. Bush isn't running. But BushCo will be, believe me

No republican will be allowed to run who hasn't signed on to BushCo's plan for world domination. Sounds James-Bondy, but it's just the truth. Call it what you want. BushCo, PNAC, whatever. They'll be running the same campaign no matter who the frontman is.

[drummo]

59. Clinton is as exciting as a porn movie

i.e. same ol same ol

Did you notice that he is all the same all the time?

[LittleClarkie]

5. Gore 08 no. Those pushing Gore 08 yes

And I might agree that it's an artificial buzz.

Sheeet, I don't even do this shit with Kerry. Not that I haven't been accused, mind you. But mostly I'll post when he does something: gives a speech, passes legislation, votes, etc.

As I've said a couple of times tonight, not fond of rah rah posts that don't have concrete news about the dude in question.

[NVMojo]

6. I'd rather have Gore than Clinton --- Hillary, that is!

[drummo]

60. I'd rather have Gore than Clinton --- any Clinton

Bush became president because Clinton didn't know what he was doing for two years in the Oval Office -- you know what I mean

Clinton was losing to Bush in 2000 in every hypothetical poll except one in Oct and even that was within the margin of error. He dragged down the Gore campaign AND the Democrats in general. He played right into the hands of culture war Reps.

The Dem party absolutely needed a Casanova like Clinton in the 90s. Yep.
I just couldn't imagine anything better than that.

[wiley]

7. Running Interference

These posts are beggining to annoy me. We are not amused, y'all. Anything that takes focus off the 06 races that Democrats should be living and breathing only helps the Republicans. I ain't waiting till 08 to rectify the horrible disgrace in the Congress, supporters of the thug regime in power.


Stop breaking down, ooh stop breaking down.

[bowens43]

9. Gore couldn't beat bush.

How do you expect him to beat a real candidate like McCain or Pataki?

[laylah]

10. You forgot the

:sarcasm: indicator...or did you?

Jenn

[bowens43]

17. No, I didn't forget anything.

Gore lost what should have been an easy win. He was a horrible campaigner.

[AtomicKitten]

16. Gore Did Beat Bush

And IMO a McCain candidacy is riddled with problems from the get-go.

Jeeeeez. I can hardly wait for the primaries. Not.

[bowens43]

18. Gore beat Bush?

Thank God, I've been suffering from this weird delusion that Bush has been living in the white house for the last 5 years!!

[AtomicKitten]

35. You are familiar with Diebold?

and the Supreme Court 5:4 decision that installed Bush?

By all accounts after the fact, Gore DID win.

If you don't like him, fine. But don't impugn the fact that he got 500,000+ more votes than Bush in 2000 and that Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris orchestrated a massive theft in Florida.

Selective memory is so very Republican.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JNelson6563]

12. Longing for primary bloodbath

Horrifying isn't it?

[LandOLincoln]

20. What's horrifying, my good, good friend,

is the hypocrisy on such proud display in this thread.

[JNelson6563]

22. I don't see it

Yesterday I commented on one of the threads mentioned. I found the tone of the OP to be a bit confrontational to achieve the stated purpose of meaningful dialogue. The other thread mentioned in this thread's OP was a very blatant copy of the sort of crap we slogged through daily in the primary season.

Personally I have been greatly enjoying all the posts on the leadership many of our Dems have shown. The "Let's run XXX in '08" stuff is apparently unavoidable here at DU. Easy enough to ignore. But no. Now we are moving on to the next step and that is a step in the wrong direction. The Rethugs have not been so vulnerable in a very long time. If anything we should be supporting each other and voicing our approval for the Dems standing up and stating the truth. Not pulling up old quotes that don't reflect so well on the Dems that are out there carrying the water for all of us.

Julie

[LandOLincoln]

26. I see nothing wrong with either of those posts--and they weren't

in the OP but in Indiana Green's message in response to the OP.

Seems like some folk around here are mighty tetchy this time of day (I can relate) but that doesn't mean I'm going to put up with the usual snark and accusations that I belong to the "militarist" wing of the Democratic party. That's a load of steaming, stinking bull puckey and I think most of you know it.

As to Al Gore, I love the man, voted for him in 2000, and if he were actually to run in 2008 and won the nomination I'd run myself ragged for him.

But would I vote for him in the primary? Only if Wes decides not to run, and maybe not even then.

I fell in love with Al Gore in 1998, when he came to Albuquerque to campaign for local Dems in the midterms. He was loose, funny, snarky (and as a Clarkie and therefore and by definition easily swayed by such things, I must say he was pretty easy on the eyes as well). :eyes:

The Al Gore I saw in 2000 bore only a passing resemblance to the Al Gore of 1998. I cringed for him during the debates, and suspected that the problem was, in 1998 he was campaigning for others, in 2000 he had to campaign for himself. Big difference.

I was not too surprised to see quotes from some friends of his, after the debacle in 2000, saying that very thing: that he just wasn't comfortable tooting his own horn. That's probably the reason for the "transformation" he's undergone since then. He's gone back to campaigning for the Democratic Party, and for our issues, rather than for himself.

So--if he were to be persuaded to run again, which Al Gore do you think we'd see this time? And do you really think the press is going to repent of their outright hostility in 2000 and fall into his arms with glad cries?

Sorry. I think Wes is at least as Liberal as Al, but tougher and a better leader. Plus, as someone who's already held Head of State status as SACEUR, for Wes the Presidency would be a lateral hire.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Let the flames begin. <Yawn>

[JNelson6563]

28. Hey, great!

You support Wes, I have no problem with that. Then again, you aren't coming out with both barrels against anyone you think may compete with Wes for the nom so I don't see that IG's post applies to you. I do wonder why you can't see her point though, I thought it was clear.

I hope you will join the effort to keep things positive and keep us working toward unity. Personally I have no horse in this race yet but it's discouraging to see some of the players from the primaries trying to kick off the same, counterproductive plays from those dark days.

Only when we can see things clearly when looking outside of ourselves AND within will we be able to porgress. This applies to looking at our "allies" in any cause as well.

Julie

[Crunchy Frog]

37. It certainly is discouraging.

I completely agree with you on that.:hi:

[drummo]

52. Actually, Clark was not particularly effective promoting himself, either.

In fact he was a very poor campaigner. Just like for Gore, the silly roadshow we call campaign in this country, was not invented for him.
But unlike Gore Clark really lost.
Just like John McCain. Interestingly noone calls him a loser -- except Michael Moore.

[Skwmom]

58. The phony Clark meme courtesy of the corporate media and Democratic

political hacks. Funny, they're the same people who said Kerry could win because he was a seasoned politician.

[drummo]

62. Actually I said that because I watched Clark myself.

I don't listen to the fucking liars in the MSM except if what they say and write is not disproven.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IndianaGreen]

14. Clarkies would do us all a favor if they joined in a common front to stop

HRC before she buys the nomination outright.

[ladylibertee]

15. LOL...After all the bashing, I almost pity the fool who runs,I pity da foo

[FrenchieCat]

31. Just wanted to know this?

Do I have a right to have any thoughs or feelings not associated to other Clark supporters? or has a new law passed?

I have my own feelings, my own mind, and I take my own actions.

In other words, I don't "do" Clarkie class actions.

For you to insinuate that I do is an insult!

It's unfortunate how some folks like to gang up on Clark supporters...and if they see two or more having something to say about anything....somehow constitutes a group action.

Makes me want to wonder who is truly acting in "concert" here? Seems like Clark supporter bashing is high on the "to do" list for some crowds.

[Crunchy Frog]

40. No you do not FrenchieCat.

Anything and everything that you say can be automatically dismissed because you are a Clark supporter. It's just time you got used to it.

Anyway, it's not like you really have any thoughts or opinions of your own. Everyone knows it all comes from that little implanted chip that you've got.:sarcasm:

[Crunchy Frog]

39. Last time I looked, you claimed you were supporting Hillary.

:shrug:

Believe me, I don't want her any more than anyone else does. Where do I sign up for this common front?

[drummo]

53. If Gore doesn't run but Clark does

I will support him. Hillary has to be stopped.

[FrenchieCat]

29. Sorry ladylibertee, but I can only admire your nerves here!

Has Russ Feingold ruined his Presidential chances?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2116870

[Crunchy Frog]

41. Yes, the absolute epitome of respectful discourse in that thread.

SHAME on the Clark supporters!!!

[ladylibertee]

50. Your point?

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. Let me know if you want me to start a DU clipping service for you

I can send you hundreds of positive DU statements made about other Democrats by supporters of Wesley Clark. Honest I really can do that, it would be very very easy, although time consuming for me to send and you to read.

While these pro Gore threads have spawned a series of anti Clark statements, inside these pro Gore threads you will find a lot of pro Gore sentiments expressed by Clark supporters. I can start with sending you those if you want.

I can also easily locate many dozens of pro Boxer and pro Conyers posts, along with probably thousands of pro Dean posts, all made by active Clark supporters. Then I can send you quite a few pro Feingold posts by Clark supporters also while I am at it, along with quite a few pro Kerry and even a few pro Edwards posts.

Clark supporters are not divisive, they are pro Clark. It isn't a complex concept to understand. But as much as some try to argue otherwise, we think about the issues and have opinions about them, do you recommend any other way for Democrats to behave? However some people on DU seem to get greater satisfaction out of attacking Clark supporters than they do from attacking Bush and company, or so it seems from the amount of energy they put into it..

[ladylibertee]

49. I can read ...No Thanks.Besides I was mainly speaking of

certain obsessed individuals who was particularly interested in "chasing" my post all throughout badgering anyone and everyone who mention any support of another Democrat.It so happened,that all three kept mentioning Clark as if they were campaigning.I simply expressed how I felt.Until John Roberts is confirmed, this is a free country.

[Crunchy Frog]

38. Oh, you mean like this Clarkie (me)

jumping in to defend Feingold against your attacks, and to defend a new poster who's a Feingold supporter from your insinuations that he was engaged in some sort of conspiracy just for not joining your campaign to crucify Feingold.

Sorry. People who live in glass houses and all.

[ladylibertee]

51. No, but it could be

[MoonRiver]

19. Hey, you forgot about me!

And, I've been posting good stuff about Gore for awhile now, btw.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2113651&mesg_id=2114693

[Ufour20]

23. Gore isn't a bad candidate

I prefer Clark. I wouldn't mind seeing Al as Wes' running mate as VP. Let's get to '06 first though.

[MoonRiver]

27. No argument here.

I'm with Clark all the way if he decides to run. But I would support a Gore candidacy in the absence of Clark.

[Crunchy Frog]

44. Nope, doesn't matter. You're still a Clark supporter.

Guilt by association you know. To the back of the bus with you. We all know you're being divisive, even if you're pretending not to, it's all just a plot.:sarcasm:

[Adelante]

30. "The militarist wing of the Democratic Party"

What a perfectly idiotic thing to say.

My post is from myself and reflects my own opinion. Wes Clark has nothing to do with it. I have no reason to think Wes Clark has anything but respect for Al Gore.

I am the one with some doubts and I'm no more of a militarist than Wes Clark is a militarist or Al Gore is a militarist. If I think Al Gore ran a piss poor campaign in 2000, I will goddamned say so, with nobody's permission.

My post is about VOTING RIGHTS. My post is about RACE. My post is about voting rights and race in this country. My post is about ending up in Ohio 2004 no better off than we were in Florida 2000, because nobody, including Al Gore, had the guts to formally object to the Florida electoral vote. There were consequences to that day in the United States Senate. Al Gore owes us an explanation of why he asked Barbara Boxer not to join in the Florida objection. Al Gore owes a fucking explanation for his lack of leadership in protecting voting rights for black Americans and for protecting the election come in 2004. You are welcome to give him a pass, but it doesn't mean I have to. Nobody tells me what to say, not you, not Wes Clark.

Finally, and perhaps you will be the one to answer my other questions, Indiana Green, what are Al Gore's views on ending the war in Iraq? How does he see an exit evolving? What does he think of timelines and end dates? What is his analysis? Does he have a plan? If not, does he prefer one or another of the plans widely discussed by Democrats right now. Is Gore "Out Now"? Or is Gore something else? What is the 2005 Al Gore saying about 2005 Iraq?

These are not smears; these are questions. Questions, many questions, are asked about possible 2008 candidates every day of the week. I doubt you will be able to answer my questions, as nobody knows the answers, because Al Gore seems not to be saying. His backers here selling an Al Gore presidency in 2008 have an obligation to hear questions about Al Gore and we have an obligation to ask them.

Yet DU is convinced Al Gore is the anti-war candidate for 2008? Unexamined candidacies have never been what we do here at DU. I think it's a bad idea to start now. Why would you join in stopping debate? What are your motives? What are anyone's motives in stopping debate on Al Gore for 2008? I've answered many hundreds of questions about Wesley Clark and willingly. I rarely raise criticisms of other Democrats; anybody can go look through past posts and see if I am one to smear Democrats, but they will be disappointed.

Anyone on DU boosting Gore '08 who would try to turn the questions I raised yesterday into smears and turn them against the questioner has shit for brains.

I never thought that of you, IG...

[Tom Rinaldo]

33. I replied to you on another thread but you are spreading this one widely

So I will reply to you here also Indiana. The post I wrote below was on the first thread you note, and the content of it pertains directly to that thread but I believe is relevant here also.

First let me note that while you complain about an organized smear, it is actually your post that is making a smear, one not surprisingly directed at Clark and Clark supporters. I think your choice of wording establishes my point though I am sure you will disagree.

Second I really have to laugh at your not tongue in cheek reference to "a campaign" when this is like the , what, 15th Pro Gore thread started on DU in the last three days? Gore hasn't been making any news so this sudden slew of Pro Gore threads is almost comical in the brazenness being employed. And then after a coordinated effort is made resulting in a dozen Gore threads, then comes the talk of a mighty "buzz" sweeping the internet.

I'm sorry for being cynical, it has nothing to do with any negative feelings toward Al Gore who I actually like a lot, but c'mon. When ever three pro Clark threads are running on DU there is the predictable accusation made that Clarkies are trying to over run the joint. I have no problem with any number of pro any Democrat threads being posted on DU. That has been my consistent position. Go for Gore till your fingers bleed if that is what makes you happy. But don't cry "Smear Smear!" when anyone raises a point in reply that is anything short of flat our praise.

OK, here is my post from the other thread. It was in reply to a post that you made titled "You are a Clark Supporter" which explains the title gave to my post:

"You Are Not a Clark Supporter

That explains just about as much or as little as the fact that Frenchiecat and Wesdem are. Wesdem started her thread long after many pro Gore threads had been launched on DU, that isn't exactly nipping anything in the bud. It is a thoughtful and even emotional post about an issue, stolen elections, that is of high concern to many if not most DUers. The scene she referenced from F9/11 is not an obscure memo being dug up to discredit someone. It is also highly relevant today in light of the 2004 Presidential Election. It is not fair nor reasonable to expect a slew of positive threads about any Democrat on DU not to elicit some discussion that is less gushing in perspective. That certainly has been the case when several Clark positive threads have run on DU, or Kerry positive, or fill in the blank positive.

Aside from that straight out explanation made by a DU member about her reservations about enthusiastically supporting Gore (you did note I am sure that she also said that she would support Gore if he became our nominee), the only real questioning of Gore that I have seen has been asking if anyone knows what Gore's current position is regarding how the United States should handle our involvement in Iraq. I have seen a lot of Clark supporters, myself included, saying positive things about Gore on these threads also. No Clark supporter that I know has said anything remotely as negative about Gore as several Gore supporters have said about Clark, just to keep things in perspective.

This particular thread is reactive in nature, which I think any fair observant person can see. Once again, there have been posters using their support of another Democrat, in this case Gore, to drag in Wesley Clark while making a series of accusations about him. In this instance it has been direct accusations that Clark was pro Iraq invasion. Those accusations have been made on threads that boasted about how Gore was anti Iraq invasion. Given that dynamic, the topic of this thread is appropriate, and it has led to some genuine detailed discussion, which overall I think is a good thing.

I am not "worried" about Al Gore. Gore is actually high up on a list of Democrats who I could actively work for in 2008 should he run, though for me Clark is higher on that list. It is 2006 for Christ's sake. I am not interested in stopping anyone for 2008 at this point, but I do care about what is being discussed on DU and how."

[Bernardo de La Paz]

24. Let him lead 2006 if he wants 2008. Any 2008 speculation is nonsense now.

[Gold Metal Flake]

25. Now THERE is a good idea.

I'm tired of speaches and policy papers. The airlift thing was a bold move. Let's see more action. And, of c ourse, don't anyone forget that the next Dem administration will have to basically go to war against the Pentagon, the various spook agencies, the various Federal law enforcement agencies, the military and rebuild all the other agencies from the ground up to root out corruption and traitors. The justice department had better be staffed with the best and brightest. Otherwise, we will see these bastards rise again in 4 to 8 years as they have been doing since 1933. Oh, and, of course, the media.

No possible candidate has even touched on how that will happen. But, to be fair, if it were my job, I'd keep those cards close to the vest. So, I'm hoping to see some action.

So, some real good politikin' that gets the Dems a crapload of votes and a bunch of new officeholders in '06 would at least indicate some spunk. Not sure I have seen that yet. Just looks like more appeasment across the board. Repuke neck has been exposed for weeks now, and I don't see near as much bite marks as there could be.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

45. I was just going to respond to you but you went bye bye.

:hi:

[WA98296]

36. I'm SICK of seeing his campaign HERE -- Still a boring "has been" --Sorry

[LittleClarkie]

43. As with Kerry, I dont' see the point of discarding used candidates

who have prior experience with running a national campaign. Why try and reinvent the wheel each time when either one of these men may just have learned from their mistakes.

We'll see in a couple of years. Just not now.

[drummo]

54. If he was a "has-been" we wouldn't talk about him so much 5 years

after he left office. And by the same token you could say that Kerry is a has-been, Clark is a has-been, Dean is a has-been (he holds no elected office), Edwards is a has-been, Bill CLinton is a has-been.


Beside Gore is not boring but even if he was a president is not there to entertain you but to govern.

[Uncle Joe]

42. Prometheus Gore in 08!! n/t

[Neshanic]

46. I would give Gore a look more than Kerry. Handlers off Gore though.

[drummo]

55. I hear a lot about those mysterious "handlers" all the time.

But so far noone has proven that Gore said or did anything during the campaign just because those handlers told him to say or do those things.

Any examples?
And who were those handlers?
Does anyone have a complete list of their names?

[Texas_Kat]

63. So the 2000 campaign bumbles were all Gore's personal responsibility?

I don't have any particular 'behind the scenes' knowledge, but are you telling me that the mis-cues and slow response of the 2000 campaign to Bush attacks should all be laid at Gore's feet?

I think most posters would rather give Gore the 'cover' to blame a poor campaign on unidentified 'handlers', but you'd rather make it his fault?

I thought you were a Gore supporter! Odd, doesn't sound like it.....

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MadJohnShaft]

57. hide Obama in a box til 07, then trot him out