Sunday Morning Coffee Talk: Gore/Lieberman Edition

Interesting Topic, Mike (4.00 / 1)

My answers:

1. We would not be at war against Iraq, although (per the former VP's record) we would have a far more aggressive sanctions regime, coupled with targeted strikes against Saddam.  We would have international support for these efforts, enabled by the fact that our President would not be burned in effigy around the world.

We would be at war in Afghanistan, but it would be far less costly by 2008, as we would have (a) maintained a far more aggressive troop presence there from 2002 onwards, thus enabling the Karzai government more breathing space; (b) recognized -- and brought the world together -- the opium poppy crisis at a far earlier data, and never have pushed an ineffective spray-the-fields-only strategy like this Administration.  As a result, Taliban/Al Qaeda resources would be a fraction of what they are right now; and (c) we would have nailed Osama's ass when we had the chance.

2. We would not have needed an Inconvenient Truth, as we would not have had a vapid double-digit IQ moron on the White House who refuses to acknowledge scientific truths, and who is not at the beck and call of corporate polluters.  A Gore-Lieberman Administration would have aggressively invested in alternative energy, and would have joined the rest of the world (or most of it, anyway) in agreeing to reasonable caps on carbon emissions.

3. Whither BH?  No Dean or Lamont, true, but there still would be a Charlie Bass (the BH trigger, right?) and a John E. Sununu.  Furthermore, the GOP attack machine would, in all likelihood, function in as aggressive and outrageous a manner as they did against President Clinton.  Am pretty confident that they would have given us fresh material.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 08:09:33 AM CST

Before Bass (0.00 / 0)

It was the Dean Campaign that "Activated" me. Not sure if I would be an "Activist" had 2000 gone to Gore.  

Hope > Fear




Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 09:10:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Gore was my inspiration; Bush was my trigger. (0.00 / 0)

But I think I would have come to activism anyway.  That said, there would still have been a BH, though it might have been started by different people.

--
Hope 2012

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 14:13:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

In answering the topic, (4.00 / 1)

I stumbled on this, which just made me really sad, especially the very end of part one:

I pretty much agree with everything DD says up top, but I would also add that a Gore Admin would have been less likely to de-prioritize Richard Clarke's position and priorities, and likewise would likely have had a team more interested in intelligence reports entitled "Al Qaeda determined to attack inside the US" than Condi and the crew were.

And if there still had been a 9/11, I am certain that Gore's Def. Sec. would not have been issuing orders to look for a way to link it to Iraq within hours of the tragedy, reality-based intelligence be damned.

Lastly, however Gore would have handled the economy, he'd have three trillion dollars more of it to play with that weren't instead flushed down the toilet of Bush's Baghdad folly.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 09:27:16 AM CST

i wish i had (4.00 / 1)

my own blackhawk helicopter in my backyard....

---

by: sdoyle @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 10:29:07 AM CST

[ Parent ]

More than a trillion. (0.00 / 0)

Not only would we not have wasted so much on Iraq, but clearly he and President Clinton believed in balanced budgets, which means less borrowing from the Chinese government and all the good things that come with not doing that.

Balanced budgets--yet another reason I want Bill Richardson on the ticket.

--
Hope 2012

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 14:23:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

interesting (0.00 / 0)

I'd still be stuck with Jeb Bradley in CD1.

The GOP would still have control of the NH House and Senate.

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 15:58:27 PM CST

I would think (0.00 / 0)

with Gore in the WH Shaheen would have beaten Sununu, President Gore campaigns for Gov. Shaheen? draws some votes...

---

by: sdoyle @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 16:11:32 PM CST

The biggest (only?) downside (4.00 / 1)

would be a likely Lieberman candidacy for POTUS 2008.
Yikes!

...the Doo Dah Man once told me you've got to play your hand. Sometimes the cards ain't worth a dime if you don't lay 'em down.

---

by: rambler american @ Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 19:39:39 PM CST

imagine that (0.00 / 0)

a Lieberman, Clinton, Obama, Edwards et. al. Primary.. that would have perhaps had more contrast with the war supporters vs the non supporters.

Hope > Fear




Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Mon Mar 03, 2008 at 05:47:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

would (0.00 / 0)

have Obama won in Illinois in 04 if Gore was in the WH? From what I understand with his Senate campaign he ran against the Bush administration, he would have to had run a very different campaign if Gore was President.

Edwards may of been tapped for AG in the Gore administration after he won re-election for his senate seat in 04.

---

by: sdoyle @ Mon Mar 03, 2008 at 15:53:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

True dat (0.00 / 0)

and no big speech at the 2004 demcom...

Hope > Fear




Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Mon Mar 03, 2008 at 21:59:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]