If Al Gore Had Rehired Mark Penn In 2000

and had won Florida decisively (instead of them stealing it) and thus the Presidency -

Would his rehiring of Penn have been worth it to avoid eight years of George W Bush?

President Gore would have meant:

No Iraq war

No 4000 dead American kids

No hundreds of thousands of dead and injured Iraqi civilians

No John Roberts or Samuel Alito

No ballooning federal deficit

No Patriot Act

No "Homeland Security Fuehrerstangaarten" or whatever they're calling it these days

President Gore would have also meant:

Roe V Wade secure for another generation

Healthcare for poor children

Federally funded stemcell research

Environmental initiatives to save the planet

Election reform



I realize this is a hypothetical, but answer this very simple question anyway:

Would you rather have had Mark Penn fired and Gore loses or would you rather have had President Al Gore?

nowhere is Hillary referenced in the OP.

with this idiotic "question". For the record, if Penn worked for Gore and Gore got to be sworn in as President, I may not have had a problem with it. But, that was 7 years ago, and he has stooped lower with his associations. Was Blackwater even formed then? What has Penn been up to since then? Was he questionable then, but despicable now? So you see, your trying to elevate Hillary is really a moot point. That was then, this is now.

Do you have another spin for Hillary? Which, btw, I had no problem with her until I took time to read her positions, some are very close to repub positions, which is very scary for me.

zalinda

this is about morons who would rather lose elections (and lives) because of self obsessive concerns over their ego driven ideological purity.

negative bandwagon as long as it fits their ideology--without even knowing the truth. There is so much propaganda on DU about Clinton. I used to trust DU. But, it is full of ideologues who push their agenda at the expense of accuracy.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

it's a very simple exercise in ethics.

it's time to reconsider the point you're trying to make.

Mark Penn worked for Al Gore for a while. It's a completely valid, plausible question to ask. Tells me a lot that you won't answer it. And you guys complain that Hillary won't take a position? Laughable.

pathetic.

but not answering it, you figure it out.

Let me know when you're ready to ask one.

hypotheticals are valid ways of analyzing ethical choices.

Any further red herrings you want to toss out to avoid answering it?

question: Would it be o.k. if Gore could have stolen the election, would that be o.k.?...

As much as I'd love for Al Gore to be president right now, NEVER sell your soul for dross!

its a hard very hard choice since so many have died in iraq and all the other shit that has happened but if Gore won by having Penn do shady things and we found out about it our respect for Gore would be gone and his respect for himself. I think Gore is the person he is today because of standing up for what is right.

Yeah thats a shitty question to ask since by saying he should stay by his principles its like saying your saying Iraq and other shit is allowed to happen.

So to all of you who want Hillary to win by any means, you have just lowered yourself to the same slime the republicans do. Enjoy...

We rarely get to make choices that are perfect good vs. perfect evil. There are almost always shades of gray. We can evaluate candidates against the ideal principles we have, but we only get to choose between the available candidates if we want to vote. That's not the same as the "by any means" hyperbole.

over your dislike of a pollster?

Fascinating.

i understand you have a hard on for hiLLary, and that she can do no wrong under the guise of winning at aLL costs, and that you've freeLy admitted to seLLing your souL for the sake of winning, but to make that jump you just made has finaLLy stunned me.

the Lengths some wiLL go to.

n/t

Mark Penn on.

A great many people would disagree.

which is not a stretch considering Penn has helped win elections before. For OUR side.

I'm getting a lot of obfuscation and cowardice, but very few people answering the ethical question in the OP.

How I wish I had a tape of the LOOK on The Idiot's Face when Florida was called FOR Gore!! Unfortunately I don't, but it's seared in my mind!

Not only GREAT wonderment and surprise, but ANGER as well!!! However, within and hour it was ALL Super-Duper and SMILES!!

It was BASIC CORRUPTION, and I can only WISH I will never see it again... BUT I'm NOT VERY SURE!!!

you need someone creepier than yourself, or creepier than the norm, or as creepy as the oppositions creeps. Why I stay out of politics except as a footsoldier and a forum member.

problem is that he is one of her strategists. The articles I've seen suggest he would have a staff position in a Clinton WHite house.

than to hire the equivalent of Karl Rove to run his campaign. He WON in 2000 without having to resort to scum tactics. We got * because of fraudulent felon counts and a sorry excuse for a Supreme Court decision.

is his choice for VP... but back then Mr. Lie could have been different and even a Democrat, but when faced with a very likely and SURE defeat by LAMONT... he played it DIRTY!!

But I don't fault Gore regarding this, I doubt there are many who really KNEW his Agenda and what a Sneaky Pete he has become! Lieberman that is! I know Dodd wants to seem conciliatory, but letting him off the hook is a bit uncomfortable to me. But one can't hold onto their anger forever, and I suppose he has his reasons. I like Chris Dodd a lot, and perhaps he just wants to keep the INDEPENDENT defector close by!

FWIW, I think Gore is one STRAIGHT UP Guy when you consider so many others in politics these days.

AND, I DO NOT think he's all that fond of Hillary Clinton and how she is being touted as the next best thing to emerge!!

I wish I may, I wish I might, I WISH All Gore will reveal the light!! As to his dissension with the Clintons!! I'm sure most of us have our ideas, but it would be GREAT to hear it from his lips!!!

a scumbag is a scumbag, and you're positing the thought that Gore would have won if he hadn't fired the scumbag....lame

and one person in this entire thread has been gutsy enough to answer it.

Tells me what I suspected about those who trash Democrats.

And your posts the last couple days tell me all I need to know about you, your values and your ideals (or extreme lack thereof).

I realize now that your values and ethics are superior to mine and everyone elses and that this election is all about you and your superior value system. Forgive me for not realizing this sooner.

The question is absurd on the face of it, because it was the state of Florida - - not Gore's campaign - - who illegally removed thousands of African-American voters from the state voter roles. Just how would rehiring Mark Penn have changed that? Does he also run ChoicePoint and he personally came up with the purge list out of spite for being fired from the Gore campaign?

How would rehiring Mark Penn have kept five Supreme Court Justices from making one of the most unconstitutional rulings ever in Bush v. Gore - - a ruling so bogus they wrote into it that it could never be used as a legal precedent? Is Mark Penn secretly Antonin Scalia?

In some alternate universe. Look at all that stuff he accomplished! But there's more! Mark Penn cures cavities! Mark Penn lowers blood pressure and reduces the risk of heart disease.

Your absurd little strawman question is bizarre and intellectually dishonest. Mark Penn would not have made the critical difference between Gore winning and losing (except in your fevered imagination). But your implicit defense of the scumbag is quite touching - err, I mean telling.

getting crushed by Bush in the national polls (by over 10%) and was losing New Hampshire to Bill Bradley by over 10%. A campaign shake up was certainly warranted based on the situation in late 1999.

Although I think Gore's campaign could've been run much better and that his debate performance was lacking, to say the least, people forget that he was trailing Bush by 10-20 points until the convention.

I still have yet to find a good explanation for that phenomenon. Joe Klein argues that it was all because he kissed his wife on stage but I think that's a crock.

I give it a 9 for effort and -7 for content and actual relevance.