2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Should President Obama pick a new VP? [View all]Iggy
(1,418 posts)sorry to drag this out again...
Gore lost in 2000 for numerous reasons, other than Bush v Gore. Gore's mistakes in fact
set the stage for Bush v. Gore to happen. Had Gore won Ohio (my original point, remember)
and his own home state of Tennessee, FL may have been moot.
For starters, Gore thought he was a popular as the then POTUS Bill Clinton. that was a
huge mistake. second, he thought he didn't need him campaigning for him in order to
win. are you kidding me? throwing Clinton under the bus just for the Lewinsky fiasco?
all polling then said the majority of pple did not want Clinton impeached because of this.
Gore totally and rudely ignored the left (typical for small d democrats). this opened the
door for Nader. if Gore had been smarter, he would have thrown a bone or two to
the left, and Nader might have gone away.
I was "blogging" at the time over at Salon's public forum. the term "blog" had not even been
invented. there, 1,000's of people were predicting a landslide victory for Gore, and there
was plenty of laughing and snickering about the "nobody rich kid, dumb governor of TX".
well? almost everyone underestimated the people that got behind the bush cabal, Rove, etc.
the result was the 2000 election, in terms of the popular vote, was one of the closest races
in U.S. history. what happened to the "landslide victory"?
re: Bush v Gore-- to use the football analogy. if your team is doing crappy the entire
game, you don't blame loss of the game on the kicker missing a three point kick near
the end of the game.
re: the Medicare question.. I'm not sure I get it; I would think this a no brainer.
the threat of any changes to Medicare is going to scare the crap out of the 1,000's of elderly
people in FL. the Dems are going to fully exploit this, and I believe, swing some moderate
independent sort of voters to Obama-- who may have been considering Rmoney.