I also fault Joe Lieberman. Couldn't he have spent more time in New Hampshire, a state very close to Connecticut? To be sure New Hampshire isn't quite Connecticut, Lieberman's state, but it could have been enough.
On the other hand, if not for Lieberman's pull with Jewish voters, Florida would have a clear, controversy-free win for Bush.
This, though, may have been the only meaningful contribution Lieberman made to the ticket. Why would Al Gore NOT choose a running-mate with some charisma, given his own deficiences in that department?
Right. I also think that it was a huge blunder for Gore to bet everything on Florida , especially considering that Dubya's brother was Governor of Florida. The temptation for electoral fraud was high, so it would have made good sense to ensure that GOP vote fraud (if such in fact happened, and it cannot be repudiated) would have been pointless. Perhaps Gore underestimated how corrupt the Rove/Bush clique was; heck, if these fellows signed off on the "black baby" canard against a primary opponent, what would be too low for them?
I can say this: had Gore picked up even one state with at least four electoral votes, then he would have also won Florida because nobody would have had an incentive to cheat.
Gore could have campaigned in Tennessee, Arkansas, and Missouri; any one of those would have won the election. Was Clinton influence that weak that the incumbent President couldn't have pulled Arkansas? Lieberman could have also campaigned in Ohio, a state that (like Florida) also has lots of Jews and was also close in 2000.
When the opposition is as ruthless and amoral as the Rove/Bush clique one must play "Beat the Cheat". One must put that opposition on the defensive everywhere that it can be put on the defensive. I contrast Obama in 2008, who took no such chance. Maybe McCain was not as ruthless and amoral as the Rove/Bush clique... but that was not a chance worth taking.
It could be that Joe Lieberman was a bad choice as a VP nominee. Connecticut was never in doubt, and John Edwards might have picked off one of the states that Clinton had won but neither Gore, Kerry, nor Obama has since won. "You go for Southern moderate populists and I'll go for Yankee liberals" might have made good sense in the 2000 election.
For what's worth, Bob Shrum said last summer that in hindsight, the time and money they spent on Tennessee, should have spent on New Hampshire.
Also, as Chuck Todd said, West Virginia in 2000 was something similar with Indiana in 2008. A reliably Democratic/Republican state who nobody believed was in danger, until it was too late.
