CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › At least we'll always have Al Gore to kick around
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

At least we'll always have Al Gore to kick around

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Who wants to put odds on Gore NOT running in 2004?

Gore Lashes Out at White House in Florida
Sat Apr 13, 4:25 PM ET
By John Whitesides

ORLANDO, Fla. (Reuters) - Al Gore (news - web sites) got a hero's welcome Saturday at his first Florida appearance since the 2000 election recount, delivering blunt criticism of the White House's domestic priorities and urging party activists to stand up and fight.

In his highest-profile speech since emerging in February from a year of political seclusion, Gore gave a rousing list of what he said were the Bush administration's shortcomings on the economy, environment and values and urged Democrats to speak out in opposition.

"I've had it," Gore told a roaring crowd of 2,500 activists at the Florida party convention. "America's economy is suffering unnecessarily. Important American values are being trampled. Special interests are calling the shots.

"If you agree with me, then stand up with conviction for what we believe in and fight for it," he told the activists, many of whom sported signs and stickers proclaiming "Still Gore Country."

Showing the fire he often was criticized for lacking during the 2000 campaign, Gore rejected arguments that criticism of the White House was unpatriotic. He said he stood with the president and the military in support of the war on terrorism, but patriotism "means speaking up."

"SPEAK OUT BOLDLY"

"The time has come to speak out boldly -- not only when we believe the administration is right -- but to offer constructive alternatives when we believe what they're doing is wrong for America," said Gore, who did not refer directly to President Bush (news - web sites) by name.

Gore, 54, has not said whether he will run in 2004, but sounded like a man who was ready for a campaign, telling delegates: "Regardless of who the nominee is, we're going to elect a Democratic president in 2004."

Gore is one of five potential Democratic presidential contenders appearing this weekend at the Florida Democratic conference in hopes of making an early impression in a state that is certain to play a key role again in 2004.

The former vice president lost to Bush in 2000 after a five-week post-election recount battle in Florida and largely stayed out of the public eye for more than a year afterward, taking some teaching jobs and giving occasional speeches.

He had stepped up his pace in recent months but jumped back on the political stage with a bang on Saturday, appearing to satisfy party critics who had urged him to take a stronger role in rallying opposition to Bush.

Gore thanked the crowd for their campaign efforts in 2000. Many of those attending the party conference at a hotel near Disney World worked for Gore during the recount.

"I know in my heart that he won the race," said Randy Fleischer, an attorney in Broward County who supports Gore for the nomination in 2004. "He won before and he'll win again."

LIEBERMAN TO SPEAK

Among the other speakers at the conference will be Gore's vice presidential running mate in 2000, Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman. The two, making their first appearance at the same event since the end of the 2000 campaign, had a morning breakfast before Gore gave his speech.

Lieberman, who does not appear in public on the Jewish Sabbath, will speak on Sunday along with Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry.

Also appearing Saturday were Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. Edwards spoke shortly before Gore and earned polite cheers while extolling Democratic positions on health care, education, prescription drugs and the environment.

Dodd also earned a polite reception from the crowd, agreeing with Gore that Democrats must be willing to take on the administration and "stand up and identify the differences when they exist."

"It is not unpatriotic in this country to debate the issues of the day," Dodd said.

Three others considering White House bids in 2004 -- Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle, House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt and Vermont Gov. Howard Dean -- have other commitments and will not appear in Florida this weekend.

Gore, along with the other potential Democratic candidates, is expected to decide whether to make a presidential run sometime after the November mid-term elections.

His speech came one day after a Gallup poll found that only 43 percent of Democrats thought he should run again, with 48 percent preferring that he sit out the 2004 campaign. More than 80 percent of the poll's respondents also had said Gore should not criticize Bush.
post #2 of 21
Thread Starter 
I think Alec Baldwin should put his money where his considerably large mouth is and go for the Dem nom.
post #3 of 21
It will be interesting to see who gets the nod at the Democratic Convention. I'm hoping to see either Kerry or Daschle go for it in 2004.

Gore brought up some great points in his speech (check it out in realvideo, I caught it on CNN.com, but I'm sure there are other sites that have it too like MSNBC). It's good to see arguably the highest-profile Dem in the nation start to take this administration to task.

Cheers!
Joram
post #4 of 21
Thread Starter 
Yes....I eagerly await the Gore 2004 campaign. it should be fun watching the bore fail miserably again wink
post #5 of 21
The Democrats greatest fear: Gore-H. Clinton 2004.
Daschle appears to be the second coming of Michael Dukakis. Best bet for the Dems would be Kerrey but my guess is the nomination will go to someone who is not currently in the public eye ala Bill Clinton in 1992.
post #6 of 21
I wouldn't call Gore having 500,000 more votes than W. doing "miserably"

Burke - you hearing any rumours of another person to run? If Al Gore keeps up this kind of energized and on-target method of speeches, I wouldn't be surprised for him to start building a lot of support early. His name recognition means a whole helluva lot, and if Bush keeps failing on domestic issues, a victory by Gore wouldn't be unforeseen.

Cheers!
Joram
post #7 of 21
Gore would be president now if not for the corrupt antics of Bushs idiot bro Jeb.

My boy is McCain. He should have ran on the Republican ticket in 2000 instead of Bush the sequel.

post #8 of 21
Quote:
Joram Manka:
I wouldn't call Gore having 500,000 more votes than W. doing "miserably"
I think this needs to be restated so that we can all get back to seeing how call is the personification of the education system in America.

What did your math SATs look like if you couldn't grasp the idea of "GREATER THAN"?
post #9 of 21
Thread Starter 
Oh now....I don't think you want to get into a pissing match regarding education levels. And as for the 2000 election, all I can say is: who is the president right now? That's right. NOT Al Gore.
This thread was not meant to be a place for sour grapes over Al Gore' failed attempt at stealing the presidency. Time to let it go......

Edited to to be much less acerbic, to use an old devilf definition of my writing.
I hope my inadequate education allowed me to spell it all correctly.

post #10 of 21
Quote:
General Zod/w Kung Fu Grip:
Gore would be president now if not for the corrupt antics of Bushs idiot bro Jeb.

My boy is McCain. He should have ran on the Republican ticket in 2000 instead of Bush the sequel.
No, he should have run on the Democratic ticket becuase that's what he is.
post #11 of 21
Thread Starter 
And John McCain is a Republican in name only. He and Zell Miller of Georgia should just go ahead and trade party affiliation right now

post #12 of 21
Thread Starter 
jinx
post #13 of 21
Gore will not come near to winning in 2004.
post #14 of 21
Quote:
call7001:
Oh now....I don't think you want to get into a pissing match regarding education levels. And as for the 2000 election, all I can say is: who is the president right now? That's right. NOT Al Gore.
This thread was not meant to be a place for sour grapes over Al Gore' failed attempt at stealing the presidency. Time to let it go......

Edited to to be much less acerbic, to use an old devilf definition of my writing.
I hope my inadequate education allowed me to spell it all correctly.
Call, why do you keep on posting these types of topics if you dont want people to get annoyed/pissed off? Gore is not president, but that does not mean he "failed miserably".
post #15 of 21
Quote:
Joram Manka:
I wouldn't call Gore having 500,000 more votes than W. doing "miserably"

Burke - you hearing any rumours of another person to run? If Al Gore keeps up this kind of energized and on-target method of speeches, I wouldn't be surprised for him to start building a lot of support early. His name recognition means a whole helluva lot, and if Bush keeps failing on domestic issues, a victory by Gore wouldn't be unforeseen.

Cheers!
Joram
Joram,

I don't have a specific Dem politico in mind. I just see 2004 shaping up for the Dems the way the 91-92 campaign shaped up. With an unknown non-favored candidate getting the nomination. Unfortunately (for you), I don't see anyone beating Bush in 2004. My prediction is that Bush gets 40 states.
post #16 of 21
Gephardt and Daschle are too closely associated with Washington and all their whining hasn't won too many aside from the Democrats who always vote Democrat anyway.

Al Gore I think will have a tougher go of it this time around. Whatever people thought of Bush in 2000, he is doing good right now and has very high approval ratings. They were tied in essence last time, and in the subsequent year Bush has won a war, rallied a patriotic sense that hadn't existed for a while, and at the very worst, not screwed up. Al Gore has all but disappeared in the general public's mind, only popping up every now and then to rant and rave to hardcore Democrats about everything EXCEPT what people actually care about these days (namely terrorism and the war).

IMO John Edwards is the guy to watch. He's young, a seemingly cool guy, and he's from the South. He's got a good demeanor, and hasn't gotten completely bogged down in partisan politics. I could see him or John Kerry giving a good race, but Gore's a lost cause.

You'll rarely find a serious Democrat who will endorse Gore. At best they say "If he wants to run, he should."
post #17 of 21
In 2004, all I ask is no Leiberman. He needs to stay where he is so he can make sure today's movies and video games won't make us set fire to our hair and jump naked into vats of Crazy Glue.
post #18 of 21
I don't think the Dems are gonna want a guy who can get a majority of the votes and still lose. Lets face it, Al Gore is the Principal Skinner of politics.
post #19 of 21
Quote:
Nighttrap38:
I don't think the Dems are gonna want a guy who can get a majority of the votes and still lose. Lets face it, Al Gore is the Principal Skinner of politics.
Because he wasn't cheated out of the office or something like that, was he?
post #20 of 21
Thread Starter 
Well, no, he wasn't. But that's an argument which has been proven wrong many times over. Why rehash it?
post #21 of 21
No, no, Call. Al Gore is a wonderful man! I really think the Democrats should run him for President in 2004. Think about it. I say "More Gore in 2004!"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › At least we'll always have Al Gore to kick around