HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Al Gore declines to endor...

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:06 PM

Al Gore declines to endorse Clinton.

Al Gore says he isn't ready to endorse anyone in the 2016 Democratic presidential race, including front-runner Hillary Clinton.

"It's still too early, in my opinion, to endorse a candidate or pick a candidate," Gore, who served as Bill Clinton's vice president, told People magazine in an interview published Tuesday.

Read the ENTIRE article here:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/259723-gore-says-its-still-too-early-to-endorse-anyone

12 replies, 1214 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to PatrickforO (Original post)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:09 PM

1. the earlier post about this same thing capitalized DECLINES. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:11 PM

2. *posts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:14 PM

3. Yeah my point in posting this is that a Clinton supporter posted it with exactly the

same reply title except it said, "Gore Declines to Endorse Bernie Sanders."

I felt this was misleading and so reciprocated. I mean, I know it's the primary season and all, but the RIGHT thing to do would be to post "Al Gore will wait to endorse any candidate."

See what I mean. The pundits on Chris Matthews tonight were saying Bernie 'gave it away' to Clinton when he said 'enough with your damned emails already!' Some lady was saying that Clinton got a big boost and Bernie's campaign is crashing.

I don't think that's true, notwithstanding what the polls are saying. Call me Don Quixote but I'll be supporting Sanders all the way through. I suspect the pundits might get a surprise when the actual voting begins.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatrickforO (Reply #3)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:35 PM

6. That was a copy-cat of this thread: "Al Gore DECLINES To Endorse Hillary Clinton for President"

Al Gore DECLINES To Endorse Hillary Clinton for President
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251791898

Which was posted by Segami, a fellow Bernie supporter.

So a HRC supporter posted a thread entitled "Gore Declines to Endorse Bernie Sanders" to answer Segami's headline.


So you have copy-catted a copy-cat thread which was a copy-cat thread entitled the same as your thread.

Which is kinda cool!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emulatorloo (Reply #6)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 09:01 PM

8. Poor Martin O'Malley

no one is paying attention to who isn't prematurely giving him or not giving him an endorsement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #8)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 09:41 PM

10. Actually laughing out loud! Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emulatorloo (Reply #6)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 09:37 PM

9. Yeah, I didn't see that other one...

Now that I think about it, I SHOULD have done the right thing, just like Bernie did when he declined to attack Clinton on her emails

My reply title should have read:

Gore declines to endorse any candidate at this time.

Because, you know, it's kinda a meaningless article anyway. He's not going to do anything for some time, if at all. Now, Bernie is closer to his positions on global warming, but the Clintons are mighty powerful and if you piss them off, mighty punishing. People who endorsed Obama back in 08 found that out sometimes to the loss of an election.

It's sad, I think, seeing all the negative back and forth. Now, I'm a Bernie supporter to the max, on the issues. So when I post I really do try and just confine myself to the issues. But that is hard because there are some hard core Clinton surrogates on this site (and plenty elsewhere) who are busy driving some serious wedges into the campaign. This because I suspect Clinton cares a bit more about getting elected than she does about doing the right thing once elected. She's just not a stateswoman, for that reason.

But these wedge issues - Bernie has a race problem with AAs, Bernie has a race problem with Hispanics, Bernie isn't electable, Bernie supporters are so horrible, terrible, awful that they are driving people away. Then today I saw a post with Che Guevara wearing a Bernie tee shirt that said this is exactly the message Bernie needs or something to that effect. Anything to drive people like cattle away from discussing actual issues. You know, wedge issues.

To my thinking, having worked for Obama in 08 and supporting Bernie now, Clinton tries to stay clean, have 'plausible denyability' for stuff, but she programs her surrogates to attack viciously. We saw this again and again and again in 08 and we're seeing it now. The Clintons play to win and do not care how ugly it gets.

Anyway, should have done the right thing here. Kinda sorry, but kinda not. Because I'm not going to let opponents play out of the Books of Rove and Atwater and not fight back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatrickforO (Reply #9)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 09:46 PM

11. That was a whole lotta bullshit for a single post.

 

Best time spread it out, let it fertilize a few more square feet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatrickforO (Reply #9)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 09:49 PM

12. Fighting back the Rove/Atwater tactics is absolutely the right thing to do

That stuff is toxic, and really has no place on a site for Liberals and progressives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatrickforO (Original post)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:26 PM

4. Why would she care. It was as she thought another step closer when she could run for

 

President. It was the same in 2004 when Terry McAuliffe refused to challenge the Ohio votes or the stolen votes (140,000) so as to hopefull set Hillary up for 2008..How did that work out?
So we had a stolen election in 2000 (Hillary smiled) a stolen election in 2004 (Hillary smiled)"she said look out 2008 here I come"


http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2920

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to INdemo (Reply #4)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:30 PM

5. McAuliffe will be among HRC top VP choices.

A loyal cog in the machine since way back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #5)

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:41 PM

7. sure he will be

 

He cost John Kerry the Presidency in 2004 so he could set Hillary up for 2008 (How did that work out)
So why wouldn't he be rewarded? I dont think the man has the intelligence to serve....but wait I think she has to win the primary first and then the General if she gets that far.
Might want to do that before she names he VP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread