2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf Al Gore had won his home state of Tennessee, he would have been POTUS.
Period.
Florida would not have mattered, Bush vs. Gore at the Supreme Court would not have happened. History would be quite different. The POTUS would have been Al Gore on 9/11 and everything that happened afterward would have been a result of Al Gore's Presidency.
If Al Gore won the state that he was born, raised and elected in. If Al Gore won the state that his father was born raised and elected in.
How strange is that? It would be like Obama not winning Hawaii, Carter not winning Georgia, Bush not winning Texas, Clinton not winning Arkansas.
If Al Gore won Tennessee, he' have been President Gore.
All I can say is WTF Tennessee...WTF...
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)in 3 .... 2 ... 1
Seriously, though, I believe Gore was not raised in TN but in the Washington, DC metro area. His father was a fairly influential US Senator from TN.
MyUncle
(924 posts)I have never and will never forgive Tennessee for doing what they did.
Also, as a Deadhead, I have to say I never liked "Tennesee Jed" and I like it even less now because they gave us G.W. F'#$ing F*^ing, Freaking, F god danm F-ing Bush.
Can I Come Home
(32 posts)Unlike Clinton, Al Gote was never a "bubba", and that cost him.
Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)And I just have to point out that Gore won the popular vote nationwide. Just have to say that and dream about what could have been.
onenote
(42,598 posts)Clinton carried Tennessee in 1992 and 1996. Reagan and Bush 1 carried the state in 1984 and 1988. In 1980, Reagan topped Carter by a few thousand votes (less than 1/2 of one percent). And in 1976, Carter carried the state.
Marzupialis
(398 posts)it's one third of the time.
onenote
(42,598 posts)In any event, the most relevant elections are the ones most immediately preceding the 2000 contest: Clinton won both of those, which certainly doesn't indicate the predisposition against voting Democratic that the post I was responding to seemed to be suggesting was an explanation for Gore's loss.
SharonAnn
(13,771 posts)I live here and it's getting more and more Republican, right-wing, "Christian" every year since I moved here in 2000.
yortsed snacilbuper
(7,939 posts)oppressors!
Tony_FLADEM
(3,023 posts)Some voting precincts did not open on time in areas that had African American voters in that state.
MyUncle
(924 posts)United States presidential election in Tennessee, 2000
Party Candidate Votes Percentage Electoral votes
Republican George W. Bush 1,061,949 51.15% 11
Democratic Al Gore 981,720 47.28% 0
Independent Ralph Nader 19,781 0.95% 0
Independent Harry Browne 4,284 0.21% 0
Independent Patrick Buchanan 4,250 0.20% 0
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)FWIW, he lost New Hampshire by roughly 7,000 votes.
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)In 1992 the Clinton-Gore ticket won Tennessee 47%-%42, and only by 48%-%46 in 1996. The Clinton camp never took that state for granted and they sent Gore in to campaign there many times in those elections.
Then in 2000 the Gore people just assumed that Tennessee would be a pretty easy win and didn't pay it much attention. When polls in the summer warned of a dead heat in the state, the Gore people blew it off and figured that Tennessee would just come around on its own. By early October the Gore campaign realized they were in trouble in their home state and Gore was busy campaigning down there, which made for some embarrassing headlines that did not project a lot of strength ("Gore forced to shore up home state", etc.).
A similar error was made in West Virginia. Gore got caught napping and the Bush people were there to take advantage.
James Polk lost his own Tennessee in 1844, BTW.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Had Gore campaigned like he did the final week of the '00 election, he would've won. But he didn't. He ran a very tepid campaign, didn't use Clinton nearly as much as he should have, and, as you said, took way too many states for granted. I think they felt once the debates happened, he would surge in the polls and when Bush didn't vomit all over himself, their momentum stalled.
But that end campaign was very good. Gore was in his element and campaigned like mad the final week of the election. It made what was looking like a fairly comfortable Bush win (think '04) and turned it into the horse race we eventually got. Had the election been held only a couple days later, I think Gore becomes President.
Alas...
It's why I'm glad Obama isn't taking any state for granted. You can't in presidential politics.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)because of the Monica Lewinski shit and the media's seemingly incessant bloviation about "Clinton fatigue"
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)Who would have been VPOTUS.
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)Traitor Joe might be President right now. Doubtful but possible.
Marzupialis
(398 posts)So what's up with that? Are you gonna scold him for not winning Connecticut?
MyUncle
(924 posts)Bushes are TX and Maine people, and I am scolding TN for voting the way they did.
Daniel537
(1,560 posts)One of the 99
(2,280 posts)in Tennesee. That might have had something to do with it.
Daniel537
(1,560 posts)He must have really taken it for granted.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)It was a matter of economics, not of taking things for granted.
SharonAnn
(13,771 posts)WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)which at that time was a reliable dem state in presidential politics (even Dukakis won it), he would have won.
Tippy
(4,610 posts)One of the reasons why he lost TN is he took it for granted. He wanted to be the canidate of the people in other words he moved to far to the center..TN had been a Yellow Dog State for many years..
Daniel537
(1,560 posts)It was one of only a handful of states that actually took a bigger turn to the right in 2008 than in 2004. Even the Great Harold Ford Jr. couldn't win a Senate seat there in a landslide year for Democrats.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)The only bright spots are U.S. Reps. Cohen and Cooper.
Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)that the Gore campaign was one of the worst Dem campaigns for president in the history of the party.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)and yet came back to win the popular vote despite being outspent by Bush 2 to 1 overall, a hostile media that actively lied about Gore and was attacked from the left by Nader was worse than Mondale in '84 and McGovern in '72.
Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)Mondale's campaign was a stone-cold disaster, no doubt about it.
McGovern, though, isn't comperable. He was our Goldwater -- an ideologue who never had a realistic shot at the White House. Campaigning wasn't his problem.
But, oy, Al. Not taking his own home state (even Mondale did that). Doubling down on the DLC by picking Lieberman. Going through so many transparant image makovers it makes Mittens look authentic (the flannel, my god the flannel). But, more than anything, distancing himself from America's most popular postwar president. What the hell? Terrible, terrible campaign.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)like bogus flannel thing. That still doesn't address how such a bad campaign went from 19 points down to winning the popular vote despite being outspent 2 to 1 (3 to 1 in Tennesee).
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)in a landslide. He was by no means an "ideologue"-- he was a good man with a solid record in the Senate who was facing one of the nastiest campaigners in modern presidential politics (does "break-in of Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel" ring any bells?). Two other things that really did him in were Nixon's "Southern Strategy" (pandering to the 1968 George Wallace voters) and McGovern's disastrous selection of Thomas Eagleton as his first running mate-- the media had a field day with its reporting of Eagleton's "psychiatric treatment", and McGovern, who originally stood by Eagleton, was eventually forced to dump him. The Eagleton debacle was probably the biggest nail in McGovern's coffin.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)Iggo
(47,535 posts)Oops. Sorry. Force of habit.
Yavin4
(35,421 posts)Unlike the Obama campaign that went after, and got, non-traditional Dem states. That's the big lesson here. Making Ohio and Florida the deciding states is a bad political strategy, and it makes it easier for the Republicans to steal the election.
By putting NC, VA, MO, NV, and AZ all into play, the Obama campaign spreads out the Republican opposition.
--On Edit--
Focusing on a few big swing states is a favorite ploy by inside the beltway political consultants who don't want the campaigns to spend money on going after non-traditional Dem states. They want the campaigns to spend money on their fees.
Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)And in that time period hebecame more liberal on social issues that are important to Democrats, like abortion. That doesn't play too well in Tennessee.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)away their guns if elected. Gun ownership is big in Tennessee and Gore had been out of state for 8 years, long enough so that he lost just enough touch with the voters in a red state to where he could lose it.
Sarcasticus
(41 posts)You're making a strawman argument.
Lars39
(26,107 posts)Fraud and voter suppression going on, too...it didn't just happen in Florida. I know the county I voted in had just got those shiny new machines, too...replacing the lever machines, and going red ever since.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)Gore had to run pretty conservative as a Dem there just to win it as a Senator to begin with. It helped that his father was a Senator there and well known. The Dems were slowly losing the South anyway. It was just a matter of time and I don't think Gore could have won Tennessee.