Rerun: Gore in 2004

CNSNews.com ^ | 1/07/02 | Susan Jones

[Joe Brower]

The Gorebot, Dasshole, Hitlery... who cares?

Bring 'em on.

[wny]

This is great news. Bush will crush Gore next time.

[johnny7]

Gore, Lieberman and Daschle will not be backed by the DNC.

It will come down to Kerry, Edwards and Clinton.

Kerry is not very bright. Edwards is the one they want.

But don't bet against Clinton.

[Dog Gone]

Oh, please run Al Gore again. He never will have a better chance of winning than he did in 2000. He's stiff, boring, and he worked hard to exclude ballots cast by the military.

Yes, yes. I still have my Sore Loserman signs in my garage. I'd love to dust them off.

[glc1173@aol.com]

"If algore runs in '04', it's because the democrats know he is a loser, and this will leave it open for hitlery in '08'."

Hitlery's only way of ever being the Democreep nominee will be the Mondale way - as a throwaway.

The Democreeps saw that - with region having replaced race as the defining chasm of American politics - Algore was unmarketable to European-Americans outside of the Northeast and urban Midwest; would Hitlery even imaginably be marketable to nonminority voters in the South or non-urban Midwest or Mountain States?

[ken5050]

If the consensus among dems is that W. can't be beat...then Gore may get the nomnation by default....a modern day Adlai Stevenson..

[Zoey]

Al Gore, the man who didn't want our military to vote. He better not start to campaign while we're still at war.

[Great Wombat]

You are correct. The Democrats are unlikely to run someone who has already lost to Bush again. Even if Bush commits some catastrophic error and ruins the country somehow, there is NO advantage to the Dems to put Gore up against him. The obligation to run the VP as if he were a reasonable person to be president (out of party loyalty) is no longer there. There is no way a non-flaky candidate would have lost to Bush--Bush was marginalised by the press as a moron and Gore was championed the media as the obvious winner.

Gore, had he been a half-normal candidate, should have won two to one over Bush. Though Gore seems to have had more popular votes, there is NO WAY he would have covered a reasonable point spread. He had EVERY advantage, his sole weak spot was himself. A large number of people voted for Ralph Nader INSTEAD of Gore. What kind of person loses significant numbers votes to NADER?

The democrats have other candidates that, come next year, are going to be much more viable than Gore, even if they can't win either. I worry that Hillary may be one of them.

[SUSSA]

As long as Bush's positives are over 65%, these stories will float out. Hillary will not run in 2004 if she thinks she can't beat Bush. If his favorables drop below 65% she will be the nominee. If not she will run in 2008.

The Clinton machine was preparing for her run before the last election was over. The only question is will she run in 2004 or 2008.

She prefers 2004 because she wants to have a Bush - Clinton - Clinton - Bush - Clinton - Clinton legacy of succession. There is no way Gore will get the nomination again. Edwards wants to be Hillary's VP. Daschle and Kerry are throwaways incase Hillary doesn't run in 2004. They can run and still hold their Senate seats, pocketing millions in unspent campaign money and pushing their agenda.

Hillary can have the nomination any time she wants it. She is just waiting to see which year is best for her.

[Mr. Buzzcut]

Rerun

[a_witness]

Democrat Al Gore "has let it be known around town" that he'll run for president again in 2004,

Good, it will be better this way as President Bush easily defeats Gore/Lieberman for a second term.

[rejoicing]

Oh, my gosh! This could be really fun to watch. The primary might be verrrrrrrrrrrrrry interesting. It might be interesting to see cannibalism practiced by the democrats.

[Florie]

I hope and pray that by the time the election of 2004 comes they have state of the art voting machines.

Heck, I'm just hoping for state-of-the-art voters...

LOL. -

[rintense]

Bring it on, Algore!

[jalisco555]

a modern day Adlai Stevenson..

You nailed it. I think the Stevenson comparison is very apt. Remember what happened the election after Adlai's second attempt. The choice of Bush's running mate in '04 will be crucial (I doubt it will be Cheney).

[Florie]

Yours and the others' comments are Comforting Words. My thought was that the only way Gore COULD win was by chicanery and lies. He has expertise in that field only. GO BUSH -

[jalisco555]

Daschle and Kerry are throwaways incase Hillary doesn't run in 2004. They can run and still hold their Senate seats,

Daschle is up for reelection in '04. I don't think SD law allows simultaneously running for two offices (unlike CT and TX) but I could be wrong about that.

[butter pecan fan]

I hope Gore and Daschle chew each other up.

[SUSSA]

You may be right. I thought it did, but I'm not sure. If he can't run for both, he won't run for president. He might run with Hillary and take a chance on being VP.

[cynicom]

The backroom dems got burned with that type of affair long ago with Stevenson, he was a born loser both times and dem power brokers are not foolish enough to try it twice.

The only way it might happen is that if they consider Bush to be a shoo in, they will pay lip service and let hapless Gore stumble thru another one.