I have never understood the democrats rejecting Gore as a "loser" after his razer thin defeat in 2000. His performance in that election trumped both Clinton victories: Gore 2000 got a bigger fraction of votes than Clinton did, including a absolute majority, which Clinton never did. Clinton only ever won because Perot split the right, and Gore only lost because Nadar split the left.
Gore has been beating a global warming drum since before a few hot summers cause most Americans to believe that claim, and he instantly and loudly opposed Bush's proposed Iraqi war which most Americans now oppose. Also, he gets to claim that the evil repos "stole" the election from him; many voters believe that. Why would the demos want anybody else?
People claim that Gore is a bafoonish bore, but they said the same thing about Clinton... until he won. Now Clinton's a beloved genius (a genius because Perot ran in both of his elections!).
No comments:
Post a Comment