dean or al gore, i don't get it

i don't get this whole thing about people trying to get al gore in the race because of howard dean. is it because they think gore is more liberal, or conservative, or just more electable ? or something else ? also, do they feel most dean supporters are those who are also part of the draft gore campaign or supportive of it ? i know there are some who just want gore in no matter what and has nothing to do with the other candidates, but i see some posts that mention how this has something to do with stopping dean. so anyone who agrees with their theory, please explain .

eom

NT

Polls show that most people don't like any of the Democratic candidates but it's early and most don't know about them. Remember that most people don't follow this and fewer follow the race this early. Gore is a name that people know and obviously he polls better now because people know him. Evan Byah said it best when he said "do you want to vent or do you want to win?".

People know Gore, and love Gore. Alot of Democrats do not want Dean. Most people want Gore no matter who else is running. That is just the way it is. If Gore comes back he beats Dean 2-1.

Deans "unfamiliar" percentage is 61% nationally. Only John Edwards (67%) and Dennis Kucinich (75%) have a higher unkown rating.

Others
----------

Liebernam: 18%
Gephardt: 25%
Kerry: 41%
Sharpton: 29%
Graham: 56%
Mosely Braun: 56%
Kucinich: 75%

The theory is that the lower the unfamiliar percentage, the harder a candidate has to work to improve his poll numbers. Supposedly because it is a matter of changing minds, not just getting your name out. Conversely, a candidate who is low in the polls but has a high unfamiliar rating has an opporunity to increase his poll numbers just by increasing his exposure.

source: http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=724

Deans "unfamiliar" percentage is 61% nationally. Only John Edwards (67%) and Dennis Kucinich (75%) have a higher unkown rating.

Others
----------

Liebernam: 18%
Gephardt: 25%
Kerry: 41%
Sharpton: 29%
Graham: 56%
Mosely Braun: 56%
Kucinich: 75%

The theory is that the lower the unfamiliar percentage, the harder a candidate has to work to improve his poll numbers. Supposedly because it is a matter of changing minds, not just getting your name out. Conversely, a candidate who is low in the polls but has a high unfamiliar rating has an opporunity to increase his poll numbers just by increasing his exposure.

source: http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=724

They really are. Both were against the Iraq war. They have the same economic views. So my guess is name recognition. Everybody knows who Al Gore is.

We'd hate to flush all of that talent at the Dean campaign down the shitter. Plus all of the blogs, Dean Defense Forces, Meetups, et cetera.

All for what? The equivocating Gore, who unlike Dean, didn't stand up for Democrats and run because the polls didn't look good? I want to be fair to Mr. Gore, but something just feels wrong about this idea.

I like Gore. I like his positions. He would have been a great president. And based on issues, he's not different from Dean in any meaningful way.

But Gore cares too much about what his "friends" in the beltway media and "Democratic leadership" think about him and he let them screw up his 2000 campaign.

I still don't think Gore gets it. American politics, today, is not a friendly contest of competing ideas. The media is not an impartial reporter. The Republicans no longer follow the Marquis of Queensbury rules.

....on a daily basis? :shrug:

I can name several that Gore has done without even trying! :evilgrin:

Hint: If you can see this message...............thank Al Gore! :)

The more the establishment tries to bring this guy down, the more I love it. It does not take any great mind to figure out what kind of people are trying to get Mr. Gore back in the race.

St Augustine: Hope has 2 beautiful daughers, anger and courage; anger at the way things are and courage to change them.

That sums up how I feel about Howard Dean and his Presidential campaign.

I like Al Gore and supported him in 2000 and had hoped for him to run again in 2004, but I'm glad that he bowed out when he did because Howard Dean has proven to me that a Democrat can be innovative, caring, and passionate about being a Democrat. Yes, I think that Gore is also caring, but he wasn't as innovative as Dean.

I won't go back and support Al Gore if he re-enters the race now. Dean has earned my full support.

Most hard left Dems in the party feel that Dean is to far right. Plus, his character makes him hard for the party to 'control'. Dem leaders are scared of Dean.

Gore is a party pushover. A mouthpiece with huge name recognition. That is a winning combination.

Diesle

Yes he may be fiscally conservative, but he's one of the most liberal of the candidates on social issues.

So I'd say Dean is left of center - not a centrist and not conservative. While he isn't as far left as Kucinich or Sharpton, they almost all share the same social beliefs.

is going have to exhibit some fiscal conservatism to get the financial house back in order.

They had it bass ackwards in 2000. Joe should have been the top guy; Gore the veep. Gore is a perpetual second banana. He's a bit too much of a lap dog for the top spot. Lieberman is the steady leader of the two. Gore was a loose cannon out there. You never knew what gaffe he would do next. Let's get it right this time. Joe wouldn't have let 2000 slip away.

I will just say "I don't think so"

Excuse me while I go laugh hysterically.

(I'm not trying to be insulting -- I really do find it hysterically funny, though.)

Eloriel

on DU. I don't think it is tha unique a position. And certainly nothing to laugh at.

good one

Most people I talked to didn't like the fact Lieberman got the nod as the Veep. A lot of people hold a grudge against him because of his stance on censorship and blaming video game violence for the horrors of today. Forgetting the fact he backed a war that has created violence.

I got dead people higher on my list than Lieberman.

I can't, in sound mind, support someone that believes government should deem what is appropriate to read, listen to, watch, or play.

Lieberman never advocated censorship, didn't believe the government should be involved, and stated what a lot of parents believe: the violence on video games, etc. is harmful to their kids.

Liebermen would be a great president.

I was a strong Gore supporter in the last election, but when he said he wasn't running I took him at his word. It's hard to get a mindset back for Gore after his announcement that he's not in it.

I hope he sticks by his first decision at this point, I'd support him but I'm not happy about the Mario Cuomo play.

The NRA? Support by the people and not the corporations?
Can you say the gun industry?
Seriously, the NRA is one of the worst special interest groups in America.
Dean should be ashamed to have an A rating.
Why do Dean supporters ignore this fact or brush it under the carpet?

Tennessee. Gore does not because he is known as a gun grabber.

Do you want to win, or do you want to whine?

Dean wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in Nashville of carrying Tennessee. This notion of the Deanies that the South votes only on gun control is political myopia. ONLY a Southern or border-state candidate could possibly carry Tennessee. Gore didn't carry it last time but it wouldn't take that large a switch for him to win it in '04 while Edwards, Graham, Clark and maybe Gephardt would all be at least somewhat viable as well. Dean would lose it 60/40.

Unless there's a southerner on the ticket you might as well kiss the South goodbye.

Where do I come off saying that?

The last northern Democrat to do well in the South was John Kennedy and he had a southerner as his running mate and that was before the civil rights movement which resulted in a realignment of white voters in the South.

It ain't gonna happen.

I don't have a dog in this fight. I will vote for any Democrat that emerges victorious from the primaries.

Having a southerner on the ticket is a necessary but not sufficient condition for Democratic electoral success in the South.

The Dem's should not be blind to Electoral College realities.

Dean supporters know this. His stand on the issue is both principled and sound, though many democrats may disagree with it. No ones skirting the issue.

At least he's solid on his belief and gives a good logical reason to it.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

as a states rights issue

why isn't abortion.

That's what the Pukes say.

At least the Pukes can point to an Amendment to support their position.

The state's rights argument is a slippery one at best

Here we have a chance to support a man that is principled but yet a hunter. Big FRIGGIN deal! He supports guns for hunting, Name one candidate that doesn't.

now I am GLAD I can still buy a gun relatively easily, and I plan to do just that. When they come kicking down my door I can at least pick off one or two before i go down. So flame me.

I'm a pro-2A liberal and a former NRA member to boot. Dean earned his NRA "A" rating based on his sensible approach to gun control. The NRA is being run by thugs but the NRA is still just regular "people". I don't ignore Dean's "A" rating or brush it under the carpet. I use it to get people to consider voting for him.

One last thing...

Seeing that the country is coming under control of neo-fascists, I'd think that the best thing any responsible liberal could do is to get himself a firearm, take a safety course and learn to shoot. The freedom you save may be your own.

Why do IDUDOYOU supporters ignore this fact or brush it under the carpet?

and didn't fight for his right to be President, so what makes anyone think he has the will to actually fight for the people?

Dean has shown he has the WILL to fight. Something few of the others has shown.

I was even willing to rally behind Gore if he ran for 2004. He didn't, so he's not in the picture, as far as I'm concerned.

And Dean has made tremendous progress in large part due to his willingness to speak out and, most importantly, fight. Hell, if we're going down, I want to go down swinging; but, more optimistically, I see Dean as being able to land the punch that shatters Bush's glass jaw. I just don't see Gore doing that, unfortunately.

Where was the outrage for what the bushes did to Al Gore. Gore was being painted a sore loser B/4 the recount was even over. I did not see droves of Dems marching in the street when the high court handed bush the Presendency .Iam amazed that Dems would play the blame the victum ,and I really dont blame Gore for wanting to get away from politics ! With that said ,things have changed alot ,more people realize what a raw deal Gore was handed .bush has proved to be all the Gore said he would be. I believe Gore returning would bring the Dems together for a common cause, justice for Gore and for our party ! Iam for a Gore win in 2004 .The right person at the right time !!!!

You have described exactly how I feel!

:toast:

Draft Gore!

http://www.draftgore.com/

What NicRic said goes for me as well! I am sick of the "blame the victim" crap! I mean really, where were those here that are blaming Gore for not standing up to Smirkboy and Team Smirk during the recount, asleep? It was a well orchestrated plan from beginning to end to convince the American people that Bush was the winner and Gore was trying to steal the election away from Bush. With the help of the media, they pulled it off. Gore was never going win even though he did WIN! Who stood behind him while this was happening? Exactly no one! I can't even imagine what would have happened if Gore tried to fight for what he rightfully won! He was called a liar every time he opened his mouth during the campaign, painted as a sore loser because he just wanted the all the votes counted, was accused of running to the Courts first which was a lie that the media didn't bother to refute, and had his running mate stab him in the back over absentee military ballots, not to mention members of his own party calling for him to concede. But hey, Gore is a wuss for not fighting more! :argh: Right! :argh: As if that weren't bad enough, now if he is drafted and accepts after saying he wouldn't run in '04, not only will the media and repugs vilify him for not keeping his word/not being a man of his word, apparently so will some DUers! The guy can't win can he?

I don't by the retrospective arguments that Gore didn't fight hard enough. We didn't either. Where were the street protests; the hundreds of thousands of marchers we marshalled to protest the war?

If we had known what was in store for us, we might have marched in support of Gore, but we didn't so we are not without culpability in Gore's "loss."

There are two strategies for winning.

The DLC strategy says: the pie is always shrinking, and 40% always vote one way and 40% always vote the other way, so engage in focus-group politics to snare enough of the 20% in the "middle" to win.

The "conviction politician" says: people are disenchanted and will respond to a healthy, populist message, and that will bring non-traditional voters to the polls, thereby dipping into the other, bigger pie of people who don't vote.

Kerry, Gephardt, Graham, and Lieberman subscribe to the first theory.

Kucinich subscribes to the second.

Dean subscribes to neither. His followers are "proud" of pissing off both the so-called centrists, as well as dissing the "thinking liberals." His entire support structure, so far, is made up very vocal activists in the middle between liberals and centrists.

There's no way that kind of constituency will translate into a win against Bush, a guy who got enough votes to steal the election by "being a guy someone could have a beer with."

It's time for a conviction politician to win. While Kerry is making some moves in that direction, Kucinich is already there. He wins in a conservative district filled with "Reagan Republicans."

Kucinich is the politician the people have been waiting for. Wake up and smell the new day in America.

http://www.kucinich.us/electable.htm

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

Nope.

stage and say "I Told You So!!"

I hate myself for this, because I was really starting
to like Howard Dean. But if Al Gore comes back in, I'm
his.

So many people have tried to tell me I shouldn't
like him, he's a corporate mouthpiece, he's squishy,
whatever, I have liked Al Gore since he ran the first
time in 1988.

Do I want him back in? I don't know. I want justice
for him. I want him to stand up and punish the people
who stole the White House from him.

AArrgghh. :argh: