Who is most responsible for Gore's loss in 2000? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 05:41:11 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2000 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Who is most responsible for Gore's loss in 2000? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: .
#1
Gore himself
 
#2
Monica
 
#3
Bill Clinton
 
#4
Hillary Clinton
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 135

Author Topic: Who is most responsible for Gore's loss in 2000?  (Read 27903 times)
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« on: March 10, 2010, 03:40:51 AM »

Gore himself.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2010, 08:13:04 PM »


That was designed by a Democrat.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2010, 08:29:11 PM »

Gore, without a doubt.  This should have been the map:


Give TN to Bush and OH+NV to Gore. That should have been the map. (I would anticipate Gore losing TN since he flip-flopped on abortion and gay rights after he left the Senate.)
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2010, 07:02:28 PM »

Gore. He to way to much for granted. Although, I still say Bill could've helped a bit more than he did.

Ralph Nader should've been an option in this poll!

Gore told Bill not to help and if Gore had run a good campaign he could have made Nader irrelevant.

I agree with this. Bush Sr. didn't need Reagan's help to win a landslide victory, so Gore shouldn't have needed Bill Clinton's help to do the same.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2010, 07:17:05 PM »


Why?
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2010, 01:20:22 PM »


She was still a Democrat at the time of the election, though.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2010, 01:22:49 PM »

Looking back at this, I should have included Joe Lieberman as an option.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2010, 12:18:22 PM »


She was still a Democrat at the time of the election, though.

Yes, in name only.

That's irrelevant whether she was a DINO or a real Democrat. Democrat means Democrat.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2010, 12:30:20 PM »

How Al Gore managed to lose his home state is beyond me. Even Walter Mondale won his home state. By that point, people from Tennessee had been electing a guy named "Gore" at the state level since the 1950s--it's amazing how he could throw away a statewide political dynasty.

Even if he had asked Bill Clinton to campaign in Arkansas (hardly a move that would alienate swing voters), he could've won.

Gore lost Tennessee because he flip-flopped on abortion, guns, and gay rights after he became VP and thus many of his former supporters deserted him. And I agree that Clinton should have campaigned more with Gore, but Clinton should have focused more on FL and NH. I doubt Clinton could have swung Arkansas to Gore--the margin there was just too large.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 15 queries.