What were Gore's biggest mistakes and how can we learn from them?

[fujiyama]

We hear constantly that Gore ran a bad campaign, and for the most part it's hard not to argue, but how exactly was it a bad campaign? Was it his campaign message? Did he appear to be pandering too much? Was he defined too much by consultants and Donna Brazil? Was it his choice in his VP candidate? What were the main problems? Was it Clinton fatigue?

Or was it because of unavaoidable factors such as the media's smear campaign? Was it because Gore was "wooden" and "boring"?

And most importantly, how can we learn from these mistakes?

Notice, I didn't list Nader as a factor, not because I disagree he wasn't a factor, but because his candidacy and its ramifications have been beaten to death. We have to win this thing by as big a margin to make Ralphie and his band of lemmings irrelevant.

[jsw_81]

1. Don't pick Joe Lieberman for VP!

If Gore had picked Kerry, he'd be running for re-election right now.

[Must_B_Free]

3. A Dead Flounder would have been better than Joe

more likeable, less whiny...

[izzie]

10. My sister and I talked about this and I am not anti-Jew but,,,,

When we grew up people were, in the30's 40's, 50's and we felt these people voted and specially in the South so we wondered if Gore should have picked him. We felt it was because he, Joe, had spook out on Clinton and Gore felt Clinton had hurt him with his acting up in WH.I think this hurt Gore. Also he did not seem to stick to what he had seemed to believe. He was not himself. So he is some what up tight, who cared.

[buckeye1]

5. Hear! Hear!

Joe is such a wimp. Kerry yes,but Graham even more so.

[Must_B_Free]

2. Gore's biggest mistake is not running in 2004

This whole canard of "rerun of 2000" is now impossible, since it is clear that everything Bush said was a lie and everything Gore said came to pass. Gore has basically been proven right on every acount. He has no skeletons in the closet that 8 years didn't already root out. Bush's crimes have made Bill Clinton look like a saint, so Gore doesn't have to carry that burden. The economy is runied.

The basic revelation that most people have figured out is that Bush is a liar. So all that stuff they said about Gore being a Liar was really a Bush lie.

But I guess Gore truely isn't Presidential material - if he doesn't want to run when he's was needed the most, than what good is he, really.

[robbedvoter]

45. Yup. he legitimized Bush by doing that.

look for DNC power play as the source - but he is ultimately responsible.

[sampsonblk]

4. Where Do I Begin??

1. He ditched President Clinton. If President Clinton's successes don't matter, then why on earth would anyone vote his VP to be President? As Bush said time and again, "He's been in there for 8 years already!"

I have heard that the polls showed a majority of Americans were against President Clinton. So what? A majority of Americans were against the Iraq "war," until it started. President Clinton has a way of talking to people that makes them want to go his way. Gore should have used that (and the stellar record) on the campaign trail.

2. He didn't use his surrogates to explain that he didnt say he invented the internet. He let this one go, and it just snowballed. Next thing ya know, his liars are a joke on all the late-night shows. I am not laughing.

[mike from ri]

41. he mishandled his relationship with clinton

he should have simultaneously ditched clinton and stayed with him: ditched his personality and stayed with his policies. he could have done this by supporting censure vocally while defending against impeachment. he never did live down that "one of our greatest presidents" comment.

[Piperay]

6. All those homespun antidotes he continually

used even after it was pointed out that they weren't accurate he continued on with them. All of that enhanced the image that he was playing lose with facts (not true but repukes distort everything). Also Gore shouldn't have kept running away from Clinton, Hillary utilized Big Dog in her campaign and she won.

[Leilani]

7. Gore didn't fight back

He allowed the repugs & the press to characterize him.

He closed off his campaign to the press; he should have schmoozed them, like the Shrub did.

[Kahuna]

19. Hey! Great minds.... See my response below..

:pals:

[LiberalFighter]

52. He didn't fight back on the recount either or had a support group

fighting for him.

[bushwakker]

8. He distanced himself from President Clinton

It was decision made at the very start of the campaign and it was fatal. He tried to appeal to the Beltway pundit crowd (Russert, Matthews, Woodruff etc) by showing his independence from Clinton in hopes that they would ease up on him - which never happened of course. Amazingly he was still tarred with all the "scandals" while reaping none of the credit for the admins spectacular successess.

[NicRic]

20. Agree !

The being his own man and not including President Clinton was fatal ,and he still actually "won" the election .Lets not forget he did get more votes thru out the country and in Florida. Some other states that where very close, if just one went his way ,he would be a sitting President right now and the country and the world would be a better place then it is under the idiot we have in office now ! I admire President Clinton and I believe he was the best President we have had since Kennedy. Its a shame , in a moment of weakness he gave the repuds a gift to use against him. However if you look at his record on all aspects of his Presidency , history will remember him as one of the tops ! President Clinton is still admired in the U.S. and in the world. I sure do miss the Big Dog. Its a shame that many of the advances he made are being rolled back by the corperate whore we now have in office !

[earthsea wizard]

9. Gore's Errors

1)Didn't get mad - Gore should have drawn a line -said ENOUGH! Show some fire.

2)Over handled - The debates were a good example of this -where the hell was Gore in the debates? One debate he was Gore, another he was Reagan, another he was Gore, but a different Gore! Too many conflicting images.

3)Lieberman/Clinton. Grabbing Joe might have worked if Gore had not tried to distance himself from Clinton. Lieberman was all the distance Gore needed. Gore should have played up the "Bill Clinton is my friend" image, let Liebermen remind everyone that Gore was no hound dog like Clinton, then Gore should have been everywhere with Bill, treating him like that friend you have that keeps fucking up, but you stay friends because that's what friends do?

Friends are loyal.

Otherwise, Gore rocked with his campaign, turning a double digit trail into a 500,000 vote lead.

[Awsi Dooger]

11. So many gaffes

* His Elian Gonzalez stance looked like a pathetic say anything/do anything attempt to rescue a segment of the Cuban vote in South Florida

* Incredibly, Gore allowed Bush to portray himself as a moderate. A simple "follow the influence of the money" would have been plenty to prove otherwise. Bush's record warchest was not moderate money, it was far right wing dough desperate to regain control after 8 years out.

* None of the soundbites or campaign themes were creative or effective. "People vs. the powerful" was a horrid choice. If Gore was idiotic enough to separate himself from Clinton, at least he should have used the master as consultant and swiped his words.

* Gore gave up on Ohio, ignored winnable Nevada, took Tennessee for granted for too long, didn't fight back in West Virginia, not enough emphasis on New Hampshire, and slightly overplayed Michigan and Pennsylvania. Our margins in those two states were fairly substantial, making me cringe at what some altered pitstops could have meant.

* Most of all, Gore failed to understand debates are about likeability. He would be president until January 2009 if the same smiling, respectful, normal candidate had shown up in all 3 debates.

[LiberalFighter]

53. Elian Gonzalez

Should had responded with the RULE OF LAW. And screw the Miami-Cubans. Democrats are not going to do anything right as far as the Miami-Cubans are concerned. So Gore wasted his time siding with them on that issue.

[Guava Jelly]

12. He wasnt buddy buddy with the press

While Bush was jovial and gave the reporters nicknames.Gore was boring and drab.
The media loved bush and hated gore.
Not to mention the PMRC issue that Tipper pushed in the 80's.
I believe and i will forever That more people voted Against Bush than for Gore..I know I did.
Also Bush got the Arabic vote in 2000.How much of that crowd will vote for him this year??.
I think Florida may not be an issue this time.

[robbedvoter]

46. Maybe the press didn't want to be buddy buddy with a dem...

[patricia92243]

13. "Unlikeable" - and we're getting ready to do it again.

[union_maid]

14. It was the worst campaign by a good candidate I ever saw

Gore was the epitome of electability. Coming off a successful administration. Clinton's negatives were all about his personal life and Gore seems to be a true family man and had none of that attached to his name. Tipper would have been a classic first lady in the most traditional sense of the word. And Gore is presidential looking and plenty tall enough. :) He had everything going for him...and then he started campaigning. I voted for him, but I cringed during two out of three of the debates and through most of his prepared speeches when he appeared to be reading the words for the first time.

Lieberman was a terrible choice. "Traditional values" are basically a code phrase for wanting to turn back the clock at least to the fifties if not farther. People who care a lot about that don't vote for Orthodox Jews. People who are happy to vote for a Jew, Orthodox or otherwise, don't want religion intruding in secular public life.

Running a positive campaign is just peachy, but it doesn't really work. Negative ads work. You have to get the other guy on the defensive and have a feel for when you should defend yourself and when you should take the position that an attack is beneath your notice. The people in Gore's campaign didn't appear to have a clue.

With all that he still won the elecion and lost the selection, but he should have won with a larger margin.

[Festivito]

15. Good comments above. Adding...

He distanced himself from Clinton making Repubs look correct in their hatred of BC, hence liberals, i.e. Dems.

Lieberman didn't seem bad until after the Selection, but, again, it was to distance himself from Clinton which effectively enhanced the belief in Republican character while demeaning Democrats, Gore included. It was like shooting himself in the foot just before the race.

He didn't seem to fight for himself, let alone us:
When the three lies came out, where was the rebuttle, why did we have NO information with which to rebut, where was his fight for us BEFORE the Selection? Where was somebody with authority pointing out the dirty Republican trickery BEFORE the vote?

I'm still mad.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

16. Gore's mistake (aside from picking a Republican VP) was CONCEDING

Everyone seems to forget that Gore conceded to Bush before the election was even over - and only withdrew his concession because the CBC screamed bloody murder. Then Gore half-assedly fought back for a month and the Republicans took over the government.

[Piperay]

39. "Time for me to go"...

I HATED him using that line, it just validated what the repukes were saying. :argh: :mad:

[Cuban_Liberal]

17. His major mistakes:

1.) He ran away from Bill Clinton, who had a favorability rating of (IIRC) 68% on the day he left office.

2.) He picked Joe Lieberman, when many other VP choices would have helped more, especially with the liberal wing of the party.

3.) He let the Republican campaign define him, and never successfully fought back.

4.) He let the Republicans define the issues and frame the debate.

5.) One of the most perfect Democratic candidates our party has nominated in the last 100 years ran one of the WORST campaigns ever witnessed; the failures are legion: he abandoned OH and WV, failed to campaign in an effective manner in his own home state, wasted enormous amounts of time and money in 'safe' blue states like IL and CA, failed to identify FL as a key 'battleground' state until too late, etc., etc. .

It still makes me sick to think what could have been and should have been.

*sigh*

[Crunchy Frog]

35. I think you summed it up

just about perfectly.:thumbsup:

[Kahuna]

18. He tried to run a clean campaign against despots. Bad bad bad

strategy. He let the wingnuts and the media attack him mercilessly without responding. The wingnuts and media put out a meme that Gore was mean and unlikeable and he seemed to be so intimidated by it that he went out of his way to be Mr. Nice Guy.

[DaveSZ]

21. Gore ran a horrible campaign

In the debates he and Bush agreed on so many things, and he failed to distinguish himself from his colleagues.

We all know now that our National Parks wouldn't have been turned over to industry, and we wouldn't have invaded Iraq had Gore won.

We would be rebuilding Afghanistan right now, though I do think Gore would have been a one-termer because of the economic situation.

Let’s hope Bush is also a one-termer, and imo Kerry is a better candidate and speaker than Gore. The main bad thing about him is that he’s from Mass.

[Samantha]

22. Gore only made two mistakes

and distancing himself from Clinton was certainly not one of them. In 1992 when Clinton offered Gore the equivalent of a co-presidency, Gore was reluctant to share the ticket with Clinton because of his sleazy reputation. He was afraid Clinton's womanizing and his sleaze factor might rub off in an eventual run Gore might choose to make. Gore went ahead and accepted Clinton's draft because he was offered essentially complete control over approximately eight spheres of influence over subject matters in which Gore was keenly interested. This matter has been publicly discussed by David Mariness in his two biographies of the men, First in His Class and The Prince of Tennesee. David Mariness is apolitical and is generally referred to as one of the best biographers in America today.

Gore's first reaction to running with Clinton turned out to be accurate, and Clinton's impeachment had a huge impact on Gore's chance of a successful run for the presidency. All the election experts predicted it would be an uphill run for Gore in his quest for the White House in 2000, having served with a man tarnished by scandal after scandal. Of course, this is the way the sitation was perceived AT THAT TIME.

Gore employed his own private pollster to pinpoint areas where if Clinton campaigned for him, Gore would lose votes. He stuck to his pollsters recommendations, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHY HE WON THE POPULAR VOTE AGAINST ALL ODDS -- despite what one might read here as having been a failure of Gore's campaign. The often-heard remark Gore ran a terrible campaign comes from the Clinton element of the party, and stems from Clinton's ego having been bruised by not being asked to campaign more aggresively by Gore. It was Gore's campaign to run, and obviously by virtue of the fact he did win the popular vote, he made the right judgment on this issue, over a long period of time overcoming a 20 point advantage first held by Bush.*

His two mistakes were (1) underestimating the ruthlessness of the Bush coterie and their win-at-all-costs mantra. If he had understood the ruthlessness they were willingness to exhibit in a campaign against him from the beginning, perhaps he would have been more focused on offsetting it; (2) both campaigns were pressed at that time to make a pledge of running a clean campaign due to the prevalence of the politics of personal destruction prevalent in Left-Right power struggles at that time. It was a mistake for Gore to make this pledge (but to his credit, he did live up to it) because Bush* had absolutely no intention of veering from doing whatever was required to destroy his opponent.

It's very easy in hindsight to look back on the Election 2000 debacle and make simple statements which seem to pinpoint why Gore is not sitting in the White House today, but most of the statements that I read here take the election out of context and totally omit significant factors in play at that time, distorting the truth of what actually happened.

When everything is said and done, Gore is one of the most intelligent public servants this Country has been privileged to have serve it. His 25 years of service in the Congress, in the Senate, in the Office of the Vice President, functioning as a co-president to Clinton have led him to the road on which he now travels, simply that of a statesman whose speeches on critical subjects still rivet a core base of supporters and likewise impress many who did not actually follow his career. I hope he stays on the political horizon for a long time, sharing with us his thoughts and reactions on the direction in which the Country is turning, and how we as Americans should react.

It is very unfortunate that the Democratic party has no one running who can compete with Gore in terms of intelligence, integrity, experience and dedication to country. It is our loss.

[kodi]

23. agree. gore was unprepared for the onslaught of media and gop lies

he was running a campaign that was not prepared for the busheviks methods of campaigning, nor did he gauge correctly the depths to which his opponents would go to secure the white house.

gore expected the other side to fight honorably.

he did not respond immediately to media distortions or those employed by the busheviks.

he was too ethical in his reponse to the negativity that was floated about his actions.

the gop was hunry as a wolverine. and gore treated bush like a gentleman, not who he was.

in part, gore's behavior since 2002 are an indication that he now gets "it." that bush is a complete fraud and should not be accorded the respect gore gave him during the 2000 campaign.

i think gore ran an honorable campign in that he stayed clean and did not attack bush. but that sort of campaign was like using spitballs against a rabid dog.

[Crunchy Frog]

36. He should have been.

After watching what they had been doing to Clinton for the previous 8 years, there is no way that he should have not been expecting them to campaign in exactly the way that they did. He should have expected and prepared for it. There was simply no excuse for his not knowing exactly what he would be up against.

[Leilani]

38. True

And he saw what Bush did to McCain in S.Carolina primary, so he should have been ready.

I thought he was tougher in his primary race against Bradley, than he was against Bush.

[w4rma]

24. Beware GOP plants posing as make-up artists.

:tinfoilhat:

[Leilani]

51. That is very clever!

[RobinA]

25. Gore's Mistakes

1. Ditched Clinton, the master of politics in this era.

2. Didn't have his people fight the stupid lies that were told about him.

3. Didn't act like himself AND acting like somebody different every time he came before the cameras. He should have been able to beat Bush in the debates in his sleep, he DID beat Bush in the debates, but the story became his ever-morphing persona. He constantly spoke gobbledy-gook instead of using plain language.

Kerry is going down this last path a little more than I am comfortable with. Soon we will have all candidates pontificating obtusely on "weapons of mass destruction related program-like activites." How 'bout "gay marriage-like-but-not-actually-marriage type union-seeming contracts with quasi-legal seeming benefit advantages."

[Sly Kal]

26. no rapid response team and he should have let people hit he streets

during the recount. He didn't imagine the republicans could be corrupt as they were.

He should have flattened that gasbag Nader too.

[littlejoe]

27. He listened to too many advisors, who gave bad advice.

And he did not accept help from the greatest political campaigner since JFK.

[SEAburb]

28. Ducking the hostile press corp was a mistake

He should have confronted them early in the election cycle and maybe he would have gained their respect.

Too much reliance on focus groups and polling. He should have went with his gut instincts.

[katieforeman]

29. We can nominate Edwards.

Gore had a couple of problems:
First, he was tagged as a politician who pandered and as a man who didn't know who he was.

Repubs were successful with this line of attack because Gore never articulated a coherent vision and because he couldn't connect with people. People just didn't like him, so they were quick to believe the worst about him. Gore was also desperate to get people to like him so there were constant stories about him trying to change the way he presented himself to appeal to voters.

Although, Gore had vastly superior policies to Bush. Gore didn't articulate a clear vision of wear he wanted to lead. It was difficult for people to understand exactly what he stood for because he focused most of his rhetoric on policy specifics.

Second, he was perceived as arrogant.

He beat Bush in the debates in terms of making sound arguments backed up by fact. However, he was perceived to lose the debates because he sighed when Bush was talking. As a result, Gore had to defend his sighing in the first debate and then change his demeanor in the remaining debates. This let Bush off the hook for his ignorance and led to more stories about Gore changing his style once again to appeal to voters.

The best way to avoid a repeat of 2000 is to elect a candidate like Edwards. He articulates a clear and consistent vision of turning two Americas into one America. He is consistent in his style and message. He knows exactly who he is and what he stands for as a candidate. He knows how to win people's trust from his career as an attorney. He knows how to connect with ordinary Americans and people like him.

[dansolo]

30. Listening to the DLC

I think the DLC influenced a lot of his campaign, including his selection of Lieberman and his keeping his distance from Clinton. I find it very telling that they were quick to blame Al Gore and his "populist campaign" entirely for the loss, even though I think he actually got more people to vote for him.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. Agreed with Bush too much and used vague slogans

Gore did not distinguish his positions from those of Bush.

Bush: I'm for the death penalty.
Gore: Me, too.
Bush: I'm for a strong defense.
Gore: Me, too.
Bush: I'm pro-business.
Gore: Me, too.

That approach

1) made it look as if Gore had no original ideas
2) made it hard for the DLC's beloved and much-worshipped swing voters to tell the difference between the two candidates.

I remember every election since 1960, and I can never remember one with so many undecided people the day before the election. I remember close ones, but never one in which so few people had failed to make a choice.

The problem was exacerbated by Gore's constant repetition of vague slogans. The one that irked me was "programs that help working families," which he mentioned almost every time he was on TV but never spelled out.

I agree with other posters that he should have called the Republicans and the corporate press on their lies.

I hope the next Dem candidate learns from this experience.

[Crunchy Frog]

32. Speaking as someone who

was turned off enough by Gore to vote for Nader (I know, bad me :spank: ), I can go into some of the reasons why he lost my vote.

-There was a real sense of pandering to his campaign, especially pandering to anti-Clinton sentiments that really turned me off. The biggest example of pandering, and the biggest turnoff for me personally was when he appeared to be defending the actions of the Miami Cuban kidnappers in order to get a handful of extra votes in Florida. Being willing to overturn the foundations of American family law in order to get a handful of votes is some serious pandering in my opinion.

-His choice of Lieberman as running mate. I didn't know enough about Lieberman at first to be bothered, but it became clear that it was more trying to pander to conservative anti-Clinton sentiment. The Lieberman/Cheney "debate" was a major turnoff.

-He just didn't seem to "get it". He didn't understand the Clinton hatred, and thought that if he could just show how unlike Clinton he was by being a great husband and family man, that they would somehow like him. French kissing his wife on the stage at the Convention was a turnoff, although not a deal breaker.

-I felt like he ran a terrible campaign. I never felt that he was really defined on the issues, and he did not seem to me to be presenting a clear and compelling alternative to what Bush was offering.

-The only thing that I remember from the debates was the continuously repeated phrase, "Social Security, locked box" in a very lugubrious tone. There was nothing in those debates that made me feel compelled by his vision, or even let me know that he had a vision.

-I actually worried that he might be such a weak president that he would do more damage to the Democratic party by winning the election and spending the next 4 years being skewered by the media and the right wing (is there a difference?) than by losing and allowing Bush to disgrace the Republican party.

I don't feel good about my Nader vote, and I absolutely won't do it again, even if Kerry runs a terrible campaign against Bush and picks Zell Miller as his running mate. I just wanted to offer a little insight as to why a loyal lifelong Democratic voter might have been turned off enough by Gore to not vote for him.

[Raya]

33. Gore was fine. The "Left" betrayed him just like they are doing with Kerry

You can't defend yourself against the insidious propaganda of the
RW when you are being undercut by your own.

Rove used the same old "Flip-Flop" "Unpricipled" tactic against Gore,
permeating the media with the crap. Gore couldn't fight it when Nader
and other in the Party were stabbing him in the back with the
same B.S.

[Mr.Green93]

34. Conceding

Never give up power again.

[mot78]

37. Several things

1. He was trashed by the media whores, who were out to get him from day one and didn't fight back when presented with lies.

2. His team consisted of hacks like Donna Brazille

3. I think his selection of Lieberman benefitted him to an extent, in that he got a bounce around the same time, and was able to come back from trailing against * during the summer. However, this bounce was the result of appearing as his "own man" which is why he chose someone who attacked Clinton during the impeachment hearings. I wish Gore would have campaigned with Clinton more, but I remember there were days where Clinton got more attention for doing something trivial, while Gore got no attention while he was campaigning.

[arewethereyet]

40. geting into politics

its not his "thing"

[union_maid]

48. Interesting that you should say that

Someone who I talk a lot of politics with said the same thing. She said he was unhappy running for president and that's why he can speak just fine at any time when votes aren't directly at stake. If so, that alone probably makes him more qualified for the office than most people who run for it. I've always maintained that anyone who wanted to be president probably shouldn't be.

[arewethereyet]

49. he was just following in the family business, heart not in it

and it showed.

[JHBowden]

42. I go with the "Distance from Clinton" theory.

Not only should Gore have teamed up with one of the most popular presidents in American history, Gore should have unleashed Clinton in Arkansas and Tennessee.

There was no excuse to lose either of those two states.

[jenk]

43. Gore's biggest mistake was being Al Gore

he was dull and people were on him for being insincere. He was a qualified candidate, but not somebody who could inspire and excite.

[robbedvoter]

44. Once the coup started, he said "It's just a court case" instead of civil

rights issue. he called jesse jackson from Florida, asked all the Dems to make nice, while the "burgeois revolution" was going on.
he could have emerged a great leader - with or without the presidency.
Going to Harlem to endorse dean, and lately sirta Edwards didn't do anything for his image. It's like he wanted to grow into the name freepers gave him.

[goddess40]

47. His biggest mistake was that he wasn't Republican

No matter what a Democrat does the press and the republicans play it up as wrong, it's too this or too that! It is hard to defend against because it is hard to get people to understand that while some reporters may be liberal their bosses are right wing and to keep their jobs they must read the "news" they are given.

We have to get the masses to understand that the media is not liberal and just because the right keeps repeating a lie it doesn't make it true.

Even slimey Howard Stern who can say and do disgusting things on air gets hauled off the air when he says something negative about Bush.

[MurikanDemocrat]

50. Gore's biggest problem was the media fucking him and propping

Bush up on his fake persona if he was able to complete a sentence without getting any drool on himself. it was disgusting and disgraceful what the media did to that election run up,

Makes me nauseous just to THINK about what Dubya got away with and Gore got skewered with.