For Democrats...

[© tweed]

2000 hurts more for me, because it looked for a long while like we might win it, and that we may not have been given a fair deal.  Plus I liked Gore more than I did Kerry, I didn't like Kerry.

[Max Power]

2004. I really like Kerry, and not Gore, so I didn't care about 2000.

[Ebowed]

2004, because we actually lost it. 

[KEmperor]

2004, because we actually lost it. 

Yes, 2004 was certainly the election when you Democrats "lost it."

[Frodo]

2004 -we put the most effort in money, voter outreach, and commitment into trying to win this election, and it still wasn't enough -not to mention the fact that we lost seats in both houses of Congress. 

[Ebowed]

2004, because we actually lost it.

Yes, 2004 was certainly the election when you Democrats "lost it."

LOL, nice

[jokerman]

2004, because we actually lost that one.  My feelings for 2000 are mostly anger.  I do believe it was the true intent of the voters of Florida that Gore be elected, and he would be our President were it not for that damn confusing ballot.

[dazzleman]

2004, because we actually lost that one.  My feelings for 2000 are mostly anger.  I do believe it was the true intent of the voters of Florida that Gore be elected, and he would be our President were it not for that damn confusing ballot.

Keep in mind that that confusing ballot was designed by a Democrat.  It was not something imposed on the poor victimized voters by devilishly clever Republicans looking to trick them.

[© tweed]

2004, because we actually lost that one.  My feelings for 2000 are mostly anger.  I do believe it was the true intent of the voters of Florida that Gore be elected, and he would be our President were it not for that damn confusing ballot.

Keep in mind that that confusing ballot was designed by a Democrat.  It was not something imposed on the poor victimized voters by devilishly clever Republicans looking to trick them.

I believe he knows that, what he said was that he believes more people went to the polls intending to vote for Gore than Bush but it didn't turn out that way, not that the ballot was a republican ploy.

[dazzleman]

2004, because we actually lost that one.  My feelings for 2000 are mostly anger.  I do believe it was the true intent of the voters of Florida that Gore be elected, and he would be our President were it not for that damn confusing ballot.

Keep in mind that that confusing ballot was designed by a Democrat.  It was not something imposed on the poor victimized voters by devilishly clever Republicans looking to trick them.

I believe he knows that, what he said was that he believes more people went to the polls intending to vote for Gore than Bush but it didn't turn out that way, not that the ballot was a republican ploy.

Yes, I think you're right that he knows that.  But there are many others who don't seem to know that, and who have fallen into the victim mentality in saying their vote was stolen from them, when in reality they threw it away by being careless.

As to whether more people went to the polls in Florida intending to vote for Gore, the real answer is not that simple, since the networks called the state for Gore while the heavily Republican panhandle was still voting.  We'll never know how many Bush voters gave up and went home because of that, as the networks intended. 

I'm not going to claim that Bush was definitely the intended candidate of a majority of Florida's voters in 2000, but I don't think Gore supporters can credibly make that claim either.

[Virginian87]

2004 hurt more for me, because we tried to give it everything we had.  We put in so much effort into fund raising and getting out the vote.  At least in 2000 we had more members in Congress afterwards than we did in 2004.  2004 seemed more of an optimistic year for us, and we felt even more disappointed because of the heightened optimism.

[TomC]

Before the 2000 election, I considered myself a Democratic leaning Independent. After the 2000 election, I became a staunch Democrat. I didn't cut my hair for months. It was ugly. I pretty much expected us to lose 2004. I liked Gore more and I felt he would really make a difference. In 2004, I just felt like getting rid of Bush would really make a difference. Kerry gave us few reasons to vote FOR him.

[Speed of Sound]

definetly 2004 because i felt a real connection to John Kerry, plus i really hated GWB.

[Defarge]

2004.  I didn't honestly follow 2000 that much, whereas 2004 I followed it for 1 1/2 years.  On the day after Election Day, I realized I had literally spent weeks of time reading about the election, time which could have been spent on more productive things.

Like girls

[nclib]

2004 since 2000 was taken for granted. Also, I looked forward to 2004 ever since 2000 ended.

[Democratic Hawk]

2004 because after one term of Bush, voters should have had more sense

Dave

[A18]

Yeah. He should have won all 50 states.

[dazzleman]

Yeah. He should have won all 50 states.

^^^^^^

[Virginian87]

Yeah. He should have won all 50 states.

I'm going to pretend that wasn't posted.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Neither hurts really; I'm more *irritated* by the outcome of the 2004 election and the huge list of cock-up's made by Kerry than I am with 2000 and Gore's cock-up's; at least some of those were somewhat understandable. Gore made the mistake of throwing everything at Florida. The gamble nearly payed off. Kerry... well... did he even *have* a strategy?

[Virginian87]

Neither hurts really; I'm more *irritated* by the outcome of the 2004 election and the huge list of cock-up's made by Kerry than I am with 2000 and Gore's cock-up's; at least some of those were somewhat understandable. Gore made the mistake of throwing everything at Florida. The gamble nearly payed off. Kerry... well... did he even *have* a strategy?

Yeah, he did.  Appeal to the military and people who considered him weak on national security by emphasizing his military service.  Boy did that backfire.  The KRPM (Karl Rove Political Machine) stopped at nothing to tear him down.  So we had questionable allegations from "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."  The rest is history...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yeah, he did.  Appeal to the military and people who considered him weak on national security by emphasizing his military service.  Boy did that backfire.  The KRPM (Karl Rove Political Machine) stopped at nothing to tear him down.  So we had questionable allegations from "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."  The rest is history...

I meant after that
But even so "I was in the Army" isn't really the best electoral strategy I can think of... this isn't the early 19th Century and Kerry isn't a Whig...

[AuH2O]

Kerry's testimony in front of Congress was not a "questionable allegation."

He was flawed from the start, but yeah his strategy was pretty bad.

Just yesterday I was talking to a friend about how bad it must suck to be Al Gore. In a way I feel sorry for him, because I would not take a loss like that very well at all.

[ATFFL]

Yeah, he did.  Appeal to the military and people who considered him weak on national security by emphasizing his military service.  Boy did that backfire.  The KRPM (Karl Rove Political Machine) stopped at nothing to tear him down.  So we had questionable allegations from "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."  The rest is history...

I meant after that
But even so "I was in the Army" isn't really the best electoral strategy I can think of... this isn't the early 19th Century and Kerry isn't a Whig...

You have to realize that, for John Kerry, the phrase "I served in Vietnam" had been a political cureall for him.  Tough primary?  Mention Vietnam.  Strong Republican opponent?  Mention Vietnam.  Military debate in the Senate?  Mention Vietnam.  Howard Dean imploding and Gen. Clark getting the media?  Remind them you are from New England and you served in Vietnam.

Then, come the summer, everyone had heard that over and over again.  The positive impact of it was completely gone.  Plus, before the Swift Boat Vets came forward, no one had ever tried to use the negative aspects of his Vietnam record against him.  His testimony had never haunted him, the overdone accent he put on for it had not haunted him, the brief tenure and the going back to film highlights for future use had never been used against him. 

So how did he respond?  He mentioned Vietnam some more.  When that did not work, he had no clue what to do.  SO he aked Bush to stop teh Swifties.

Bush responded in what was, in my view, the most deft political maneuver of the campaign.  He asked Kerry to join him in standing against all of the so-called 527 groups, including the Swifties and MoveOn.org and all the others. 

Kerry responded by mentioning he was in Vietnam and again calling on Bush to stop the Swifties.  He completely missed the boat on that, and it really gave Bush some good momentum heading into the RNC.

Until the very end Kerry could not wrap his head around the notion that mentioning Vietnam was no longer working its old magic.  The well had run dry and he kept trying to pump more out of it.

[Virginian87]

Kerry's testimony in front of Congress was not a "questionable allegation."

He was flawed from the start, but yeah his strategy was pretty bad.

Just yesterday I was talking to a friend about how bad it must suck to be Al Gore. In a way I feel sorry for him, because I would not take a loss like that very well at all.

It wasn't his testimony.  It was those idiots who appeared in the Swift Boat ads with the questionable allegations.  Some of them never even served with Kerry.