Would Gore have won?

[Smid]

Montana is another curiousity to me right now.  I don't put as much stock in the state's overall Democratic drift as some do...though it's surely a factor.  Some of the reading I have done seems to suggest the state is becoming an increasingly popular place of residence for environmentalists, new age types, etc -- so perhaps Gore's environmental stump would sell there?  Meh -- just a guess.

Montana is strange to me too. I don't see Gore winning it, but who knows. It went Democratic in 92 and wasn't close again until this cycle.

I think that Montana went Democratic in 1992 because Republicans in the state are more libertarian and were attracted to Perot's "Washington is too big" campaign. I know that there is some conjecture as to whether or not Perot aided or harmed Bush or Clinton, and while his campaign may have harmed Clinton in some states, I think he harmed Bush in Montana. Perot did particularly well in Montana and I think the majority of his votes came from libertarian Republicans. Likewise, Montana is one of the states that may have been unimpressed by the socially conservative agenda of the previous administration, particularly when considered alongside the sizeable deficits over the same time. None of that plays well among right-libertarians, so I can see why they may have been willing to switch sides this election (hence why it was close again this year). I think that Montana's frustration with these issues was evidenced in the 2006 mid-terms, with the Democrats picking up Montana's Senate seat that was contested at that election - from an incumbent Senator who had been around since Adam was a boy. That's my take on Montana flipping in 1992 and being close in 2008, anyway.

[justfollowingtheelections]

[Daniel Z]

Gore: 291
McCain: 247

I do think that there would have been a significant anti-Gore vote, but the Democrat was going to win this election.

[Rob]

[Associate Justice PiT]

     There's really no doubt, though he wouldn't have done as well out west as Obama did.

[Psychic Octopus]

Obama was a very weak candidate, and until the crash it was close. My bet is that gore would have won a bigger victory.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Obama was a very weak candidate, and until the crash it was close. My bet is that gore would have won a bigger victory.

Gore wouldn't win Georgia (he's a left-wing loon now, remember?) but the rest of map I agree with (see my map on the previous page).

[Marokai Backbeat]

He would have won, to be sure. But it wouldn't have been as big of a margin. Gore has drifted a fair bit leftward since 2000, even publicly supporting Gay Marriage.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

[CCA]

Even Blagojevich could've won...

[chinaglenn]

I think Gore could of won in 2004. Most of America, even some of the (honest, who thought Bush was an idiot)  Republicans felt that Gore was royally screwed. I fully expected Gore to run in 04'. It was his time.

When he did not run, I thought, WTF? Personally, if I was him, I would have been so pissed off that my 2004 campaign would of started the day after the Supreme Court vote. The Democratic Party would of given him another shot, and fully expected to do so until he announced he wasn't going to run. The day he said he would not publically, I really wanted to kick his ass. Because I think he could of won, and he would of been a hell of a lot better President than Bush ever was, and I think that he would of won. I think he would of carried Ohio, which was needed to win the election, and maybe even a state or two down south. The Kerry/Edwards campaign was a joke. Kerry (who I dont necessarily think is a bad guy) came across as elitist and aloof, and Edwards was just a goof, who won one statewide election in his life, who wasn't going to be re-elected in his home state for a second term (if he could of, he'd still be there in the senate.)

The Democrats picked a weak ticket in 04', and they could not beat Bushco, especially only 2 years after 9/11. Gore could of, maybe. 2004 was his time. It would have been a close election and would of probably mirrored Kerry, but I think a bit more people would have voted for Gore. It could of been very well an election where Gore would of won Ohio and won the election but lost the popular vote. Two back to back elections where one candidate would have won the popular vote and lost the election would have been very detremental to the society and would have led to great apathy over a political system, that I honestly believe that few Americans truly understand.

I think in 2008, all bets were on Hillary Clinton winning it all, and nothing and nobody was going to stop her. I think if everyone knew how vunerable Clinton was, maybe, just maybe Gore might have ran again. Gore, if interested in 08, was probably spooked by the Clinton machine, and I think that by 2008, Gore did not have the fire in the belly, and he got his cause celeb in his "environmental movement", and that his his gig and he doesn't need the Presidency to define who he is.

Could and would of Gore beat Hillary in 2008? Who knows? I think by 08 his ship has sailed. He would not have run against Bush again. Gore was part of Bill Clinton's administration and obvioulsy the powers that be in that apparatus wanted Hillary to win the nomination which would of defeated Gore. Hillary really could not of knocked Gore about much, since he was the VP in her husband's administration. I think if Gore was a candidate in 2008, that Obama would have lost and would of been a VP under Hillary.

In short, Gore pussed out in 2004 and 2008 became too late for him, and forget 2012. Dont feel sorry for Gore, he's rich (and still cute). Feel sorry for me, I touched that lummux's hand during the 1992 election and would of liked to have said that I touched a President of the United States. Touch a Vice President. please. All of them lately were either idiots or evil.

Senor