How will Trump v Hillary be different from Bush v Gore?

[yurbud]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by uppityperson (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Obviously, demographics are far more in favor of any Democratic candidate today, but as far as the candidates themselves, it seems eerily similar.

In both campaigns, the Democrats had a relatively competent, knowledgable candidate. Their weakness, coming from the DLC/Third Way wing of the party was their policy prescriptions were incremental at best (though Gore was following the still popular Bill Clinton).

The Republicans ran trust fund babies with few facts at their command and questionable resumes, but the unique ability to incite some white folks' inner lynch mob.

Though Bush "won" by dubious means, he got close enough to look respectable (to those who didn't look to closely).

How will it be different this time?

[onehandle]

1. 'SINOs' lackluster efforts for Trump will torpedo him.

The GOP was All In for W.

[yurbud]

2. great point. It remains to be seen whether GOP will get religion on Trump before November

If the owners tell the politicians to do so, however, they will.

[emulatorloo]

5. They're all supporting him. But they are finding it very difficult to defend him so far.

Saw a few Republicans asked last night if they support Trump's racist attack on a federal judge. They squirmed and attempted to deflect. But they own this shit now.

Additionally in terms of comparing Bush and Trump as GE candidates:

- Bush fooled GE voters by positioned himself as a rational moderate Republican
- Trump has no impulse control and appears neither rational nor moderate

[yurbud]

7. good points.

[madinmaryland]

3. Don't forget that Gore completely ignored the popular Bill Clinton. That is not

happening this time, as likely nominee Clinton has embraced Obama and he will probably have a pretty high profile in this campaign. Both Obama and Bill Clinton are great campaigners and will spend most of the time eviscerating and embarrassing tRump.

[comradebillyboy]

4. Hillary is a much better candidate than Gore and

Trump is a much worse candidate than W. Gore ran a crappy campaign with the odious Joe Lieberman as his awful running mate while Bush ran a fairly competent campaign. Plush Nader helped Bush.

[yurbud]

9. Nader didn't help Bush in a way that hurt the outcome. Lieberman is odious to progressives

though at the time, more people bought the Third Way stuff, so he was offensive to fewer people.

For some people like me, it wasn't until we saw the DLC/Third Way/New Dem enabling of Bush instead obstructing that we realized that kind of Democrat has no intention of looking out for our interests.

[Arkansas Granny]

6. Hillary will be more than happy to have President Obama campaign for her, whereas Gore

shunned Bill's help on the campaign trail. The endorsement of a popular sitting President will be huge.

[yurbud]

11. Has Gore ever acknowledged that that hurt him or said why he did it?

[Cyrano]

8. The SCOTUS won't be in a position to pick the prez

The court is split eight to eight and there will be no decision, unlike what happened in 2000.

In 2000, the Florida Supreme Court ordered that the counting continue. (That would have resulted in a Gore win.)

The case was appealed to the Supreme Court which had no business interfering in a state voting process.

Nonetheless, the five wingnuts on the SCOTUS decided to "make an exception" and overrode the Fl court. Stopping the voting excluded many, many Gore votes.

In effect, five very fucked up people appointed George W. Bush (and Cheney) to the White House. And we all know where that led. Our troops are still on the ground there today.

Too bad that we never attacked the target that was really responsible. Saudi Arabia.

[yurbud]

10. Any competent Democratic candidate should have hung Saudi around Bush's neck in 2004

"Mr. President, you invaded two countries for 9/11. One that was at worst, al Qaeda's landlord. The other had nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11. But instead of attacking the country that funded and directed the 9/11 hijackers, Saudi Arabia, you sat on the back porch of the White House smoking cigars with the Saudi ambassador who cut checks to them.

You can never say you are tough on terrorism or even care about protecting America after that."

[Nevernose]

17. Why do you hate the military?

Don't you support our troops? Are you saying our boys died in vain?

I can just imagine that kind of bullshit and more from Dubya's camp in 2004. Instead, Kerry not only voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq, he justified that decision more than once. Even if he had wanted to use your logical line of reasoning, there was no way he could (at least not among the reality-based).

[yurbud]

18. toy hedge to be willing to go for the jugular:

"NO. I'm saying George W. Bush and Dick Cheney lied to them and got then killed to fill the pockets of their cronies with our tax dollars and profits from Iraqi oil. They are as guilty for the death if our troops as they are for the deaths of the Iraqis."

Having written this, I realize any candidate who planned to say this would have a car accident, plane crash, or double shotgun blast suicide between typing it up on his computer and the first time he planned to say it in public.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Bush* 's message was "I am a uniter, not a divider."

We can debate the authenticity of the argument. Trump 's message is one of white grievance. The contrast couldn't be more stark.

[loyalsister]

13. It's more difficult to counter the "no difference" argument

They are both closely tied to corporate USA at a time when people are suffering under the power it weilds. They are both warmongers, although Hillary has more practical ideas in how to execute hers.

There was a distinct difference between Bush and Gore.

[yurbud]

14. Was Gore as pro-active a warmonger as Hillary?

[loyalsister]

16. No

He was pragmatic and not perfect, but I think he would have had a more measured response to 911 and would never have gone into Iraq. To me, his contrast in temperment and style revealed a difference between the wanna-be cowboy and a solid, thoughtful leader.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

15. Most of what you've said there sounds like it would apply just as much to 2008 and 2012. N.T.

[yurbud]

22. McCain and Romney were not demagogues

Which is not meant as a compliment.

[Rex]

19. Scalia is dead and won't be able to swing the election in his parties favor this time.

Hopefully there will never be another stinking evil corpse like Scalia on the bench.

[alphafemale]

20. bush baby had a good relationship with the press. Right up to Katrina.

The press is turning on the orange shit weasel.

He was an amusing play thing for awhile.

But they are pissed now.

[JI7]

21. Bush ran as compassionate conservative and did well enough with hispanic voters for a republican

[uppityperson]

23. My apologies but I am locking this. Please repost in GDP where OPs about the Democratic

candidates must go for now.