"There's not a dime's worth of difference between Gore and Bush!"

[pnorman]

As an unreconstructed "Nader voter in 2000", I and my fellow "whacked out Naderites" have had that quote hurled in our faces at frequent intervals these past 8 years. My own excuse was that it was a perfectly safe way of sending a message to the "centrists" of the DLC in a state like Washington, but something I'd never do in swing state. I'm sure that the vast majority of my fellow Naderites felt the same way. However, I'll still accept, at lest partially, the validity of that condemnation.

So here we are in the 11th month of the Obama administration. He's up to his armpits in the Augean Stables of EIGHT LONG YEARS of Bush43, and a corruption that really began with Reagan. So what do I hear all over this DU? "There's not a dime's worth of difference between Obama and Lieberman!" HELP! I seem to be trapped in a Time Loop! So I ask for about the 5th or 6th time in recent weeks: "Are these "purists of 2009", the same "hard-headed pragmatists of 2000"? Hmmm?

[bigmonkey]

1. That's a really good point to make.

Really. Congrats!

[pnorman]

2. Thanks, bro.!

That's the first encouraging word I've gotten to date, on that recurrent theme of mine!

[AllentownJake]

3. Al Gore would have been better than George W. Bush

But to be fair to the Nader people, I think everyone has this dream world vision of a Gore Presidency that isn't reality either.

[pnorman]

4. I'll count that as a partial approval of my posting..

The level of "political sophistication" NOW, is FAR higher than it was in 2000. I (we) made the "best" choice we could, with what info was generally available at the time.

And like I said: "It was only to send a message to the DLC", rather than defeat Liebenan & Gore. And in the end, Gore WON, but was screwed out of his victory by Karl Rove, Catherine Harris, Jeb Bush, and the Felonious Five of the SCOTUS. DON'T blame Nader for that! And that rather than "Eisenhower Republicans" are what we'll be facing next year as well as in 2012. Bear that in mind, before tossing Obama under the bus.

[aquart]

8. I have no desire to be "fair" to the Nader people.

Still trying to justify their actions. Meanwhile Nader has become the nonentity he so richly deserves to be.

[pnorman]

16. Few here on DU have your gift of looking into the future with such uncanny accuracy!

Most certainly, not I! So please exert your miraculous powers in behalf of this DU community, and and foretell this: Assuming that we all feel that "There's not a dime's worth of difference between Obama and Lieberman!", WHAT will be the outcome for the next several election cycles?

[VOX]

11. Living in in a mansion in Hawaii would be better than being shut in Leavenworth State Penitentiary.

That makes as much obvious sense as a nugget like, "Al Gore would have been better than George W. Bush." Really? There's no way in hell that a Gore presidency would have traveled the same insane paths that BushCo took. As for your comment about a "dream world vision of a Gore Presidency that isn't reality," more's the pity it wasn't reality. Had Gore been elected, it's a distinct possibility that 9/11 wouldn't have occurred, and even if it had, there certainly would not have been a criminal invasion of Iraq. I base this not on some fantasy, but on Gore's actual opinions at the time these events were occurring.

If nothing else, a Gore presidency would not have resulted in eight year's worth of appointing countless right-wing judges to various courts across the land -- many of them lifetime appointments -- as did occur in BushWorld. These biased judges will be interpreting the law for decades.

As for the Nader people, they have much to answer for -- even in 2000, anyone who couldn't smell a big Cheney/Rove rat -- the same thuggish element left over from the Nixon era, well, they were **very** naive. Forget Florida -- please look up the 2000 national election voting results for New Hampshire, and see what Nader voters did there, and in what number. Had they voted for Gore instead, Gore would have taken New Hampshire, and the presidency, regardless of the outcome in Florida.

[provis99]

5. its the Democratic voters' fault that Nader didn't win

If they had voted for Nader, rather than Gore, we wouldn't have gotten Bush. Its a democracy; vote for the best person for the job, not what some Machiavellian DLC lickspittle tells you to vote for!

[pnorman]

7. Was that supposed to be "ironic"?

It would have been a RESOUNDING victory for Bush43! but as I tried to explain, this is the classic dilemma of a "leftist", in a Two Party system (actually, closer to one point two party system). That is: How to build for the future, without causing GRAVE damage for the next few election cycles.

[walldude]

9. I voted for Nader that year too...

Took a wall of shit for it when I admitted it on DU and that was years later. However I actually met Al Gore when I was doing audio at a lecture he was giving. He's a really nice guy and I was honest and told him I voted for Nader. Told him had he spoken in public like he was to me then he would have gotten my vote. He told me he held himself to blame for losing, not for his policys but for listening to his "handlers" instead of just being himself.

[bobbolink]

10. Very interesting statement from Gore, and I can believe that.

He has spoken much differently since that ill-begotten election, and he probably DID learn that important lesson.

Maybe he can now share that lesson with O?

[walldude]

13. I believe he has made that same statement publicly since then

or maybe even before it. It's funny, I was really annoyed with him during that election and I could almost see that the guy they were selling me wasn't the guy who was running. But when Clinton reneged on his promise to pardon Leonard Peltier I was just sour on the whole administration and certainly couldn't bring myself to vote repuke, so Nader was it.

[laughingliberal]

14. I actually met him and heard him speak quite a few times when he ran for the nomination in 1988

My parents tell me I met him back when we were both kids a few times but I don't remember (must point out, he was an older kid than me, lol).

I remember him as a very dynamic and inspiring speaker. It was confusing to me to watch him once he emerged in the campaign with Clinton in '92. Guess I just thought he was one of those who didn't come across well on television. I always supported him but I always knew he was not the guy the media made him out to be. I'm still unhappy he didn't get the nomination in 1988. And, truth be told, I wish he had run in '92. I supported Clinton but really thought that ticket was upside down. We will never know, now, how he would have governed but I believe he was much more a man of the people than Clinton. IMO, Al Gore was, likely, the most qualified person who has run for the Presidency since, maybe, Kennedy.

[charlie]

6. Lol

Funny that, innit? Don't let anyone give you any shit for your vote.

[Hekate]

12. My meme for tonight is: DUers are fickle. As you say, Obama is up to his armpits in Bushit....

... which I, too, have referred to as the Augean Stables. Great minds, and all that.

As for the fickleness, there's another thread here excoriating Grayson, the hero of last month.

Hekate

[pnorman]

15. I must have missed that Grayson thread, but here's a Wiener one tht's probably close:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7263154 One of my postings there, contained the gist of my OP here. Here's one of a few quotes I found there: "Obama and Lieberman might as well switch places now"

[Meldread]

17. Nader is actually the one who brought me into the political process.

"Turn onto politics before politics turn on you." - Nader

Yeah, that quote right there woke me up, and then I got a front row seat on just how true it was under eight years of Bush.

I had just turned 18 years old the summer before the election of 2000. I was a political neophyte, but I was angry at Bill Clinton. Then I watched Gore do things like make Joe Lieberman his VP... and... well... had Gore spoke and acted the way he does now, he would have had my support unconditionally.

In the end, I voted for Nader in my first election ever. It was in Virginia, and I knew for certain that the state was going to Bush anyway. So my vote was ultimately irrelevant, and meant entirely as a protest vote against some of Clinton's policies. Since that time I supported Dean in the 2004 primary, then Kerry in the General Election. After that I supported Obama in the primary, and then Obama again in the General Election.

My feeling about Obama is somewhat of a wash. If I had a crystal ball that allowed me to see Obama's first year as President, I don't know if I would have supported him in the Primaries. I wouldn't have supported Hilary either, though, due to her support of the Iraq War and more hawkish nature. I likely would have thrown a protest vote behind someone like Denis.

The area where Obama has pleased me the most is foreign policy. I think he's striking a decent balance for what is possible in the current United States political climate. If I could change one thing, I'd ask for him to be a more forceful leader. I like the fact that he seems to listen to everyone in the room, get lots of different opinions... but ultimately, I want him to make a damn decision and then demand everyone else follow it. If he could do that then my approval of Obama would increase.