General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why are right wingers so often intellectually dishonest? [View all]AndreaCG
(2,331 posts)They don't do nuance well either anymore. My mind immediately recalls Ralph Nader in 2000 saying there is no difference between Bush and Gore. So ok, say all the Florida votes were indeed counted and Gore becomes the president. Would 9-11 have happened? Well, maybe, but the briefing paper Bin Laden determined to strike in the US probably wouldn't have been ignored, because it was the Clinton/Gore administration which ordered the study. And if the bombing happened despite taking steps to ensure it wouldn't, the Saudi royal family members whose citizens largely were the terrorists wouldn't have been escorted out of the US before the embargo on air travel was lifted and not properly questioned, because Gore was not personal friends of the Saudis due to shared family businessinterests in oil. And there would have probably been no Iraq war, because Richard Clarke stated the Bush administration planned how to start a war with Saddam Hussein even prior to 9-11, obviously not because he caused 9-11 but because Bush wanted to avenge his father's failure to reign him in, and even more because Cheney's Halliburton could make umpteen billions in such a war. President Gore would have had no such motivation to lie about the weapons of mass destruction and Saddam causing 9-11 not the Saudis.
That's just two discrete examples of how a Gore administration would have likely differed from the Bush one. Not even touching domestic policies and the environment. If you can't differentiate the substance and subtleties between two different people, parties or other groups you're going to fall back in the "well they all do it so a pox on both houses" canard. I don't know what else to say. I have a feeling this post will not budge you from your previous opinions. C'est la vie.