What Did Lieberman Add to the Ticket? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 21, 2024, 07:39:52 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  What Did Lieberman Add to the Ticket? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What Did Lieberman Add to the Ticket?  (Read 8916 times)
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« on: October 08, 2005, 06:46:23 AM »
« edited: October 08, 2005, 08:41:10 AM by dazzleman »

Lieberman helped Gore come within 600 votes of president.  He possibly delivered PA.  I would say the Lieberman was one of the five best picks in the last 40 years.



He may have delivered Penn but he lost Gore Tenn.

No, I think Gore lost Gore Tennessee.  I don't think Lieberman had anything to do with it.  Gore was popular in Tennessee when he was a conservative pro-life Democrat.  When he became a liberal Democrat and the poster child for NARAL, he lost a lot of his Tennessee support.  By 2000, he hadn't held an office elected statewide for 8 years, and he had changed quite a bit, especially during Clinton's second term.  I think the Lewinsky scandal, and Gore's strong defense of Clinton, is what cost him the south, including Tennessee.  Lieberman had nothing to do with that.
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2005, 06:53:02 AM »

Seriously, why did Gore choose Lieberman?  Looking at Gore's top VP picks, Governor Jeanne Shaheen would have swung NH to Gore, winning the election.  Same with Graham or Nelson.  What did Lieberman bring to the ticket that was so important?

That's all hindsight.  Did anybody really know at the time of VP selection that the election would come down to very narrow margins in any one state.

I think Lieberman was a good pick.  It's easy to forget, but at the time, he was a centrist Democrat who questioned affirmative action, stood up against Hollywood, and favored at least considering school vouchers.  He had also taken a stand against Clinton's moral failures, perjury, etc.  Yet he was basically a mainstream Democrat who would not turn off the Democratic base, and clearly, in the 2000 election, it was not with the base that the Democrats had a problem.

Lieberman lost much of his luster for me when he kissed Maxine Waters' ring, and agreed to drop any position that he had that made any sense.  I think Maxine Waters is one of the stupidest, most malicious people in government, and when I saw him meeting with her, and agreeing to adopt the positions she wanted, I could never view him the same way again.

Still, Gore's strategy of holding the base and reaching out to enough moderate voters, who were disgusted with Clinton's personal behavior and unwilling to vote for an overtly liberal ticket, would have worked but for one reason - Al Gore himself.  He was a terrible candidate who turned off just enough voters to end up losing at a time of peace and prosperity when his party held the presidency.  It was a pretty good feat.

But let's put the blame where it belongs.  It belongs not to Lieberman, but to Gore.
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2005, 12:01:25 PM »

Why excatly should Gore have distanced himself from a President who had lead America into one of the longest period of economic growth and prosperity in history, and approval ratings reaching nearly 60%?

Two reasons.  #1, a sitting VP running for president is in a very tricky position.  He must prove he's his own person.  A VP rarely gets elected simply by hanging on the president's coattails.  Even George Bush in 1988 distanced himself from Reagan's greatest perceived weakness somewhat by calling for a "kinder, gentler America."  Clinton's greatest perceived weakness was his personal behavior, and Gore needed to distance himself from that.

#2 - While Clinton's job approval ratings were high, his personal approval ratings were low.  Because of Gore's strong defense of Clinton's behavior, he was somewhat stained with Clinton's problems, but he lacked the personality and demeanor to get voters to forgive him for it, the way Clinton did.  Also, in terms of a state-by-state analysis, their polls showed a much greater distaste for Clinton personally in the south.  Gore knew he had to crack the south in order to win, and that he would win in the northeast and on the west coast even if he killed Tipper on camera in the middle of the campaign.

So I think his campaign strategy was not such a bad one, but that he was a bad candidate, and would have been regardless of his strategy.
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2005, 04:21:36 PM »

Why excatly should Gore have distanced himself from a President who had lead America into one of the longest period of economic growth and prosperity in history, and approval ratings reaching nearly 60%?

Gore had horrible advisors.

Yes, I'm still waiting for Donna Brazilla to be kicked out of the Democratic party. She's friends with Karl Rove!

James Carville is married to Mary Matalin.
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2005, 05:09:36 PM »


No, he was at the bottom of the hill to begin with.  He's dug himself a hole since then.

Smiley Tongue
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2005, 11:11:46 PM »


Not in large enough numbers and, with Bush the elder, that attracted some of the Muslim vote.  Further, the states where the Muslim vote is a factor, MI, NJ, even NY and IA, Gore carried.

The Muslim vote was a factor in FL.

The boost in Jewish turnout wasn't strong enough overcome the Muslim swing to Bush.

Are you saying that Muslims voted for Bush simply because Lieberman was Jewish?  You may be right, but that's not a good reflection on muslims.  And now they don't like Bush because he wants to fight terrorism.
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

« Reply #6 on: October 09, 2005, 06:29:58 AM »


If you actually analyzed the Muslim demographic you can easily see why Shiites love him and Sunnis hate him, if you know what those are of course.

Yes, I do know what those are.  The question is whether I care.
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 0.033 seconds with 14 queries.