Why are so many people committed to voting against Al Gore?

[skipos]

WNBC/Marist Poll. Nov. 27-Dec. 3 "Do you want to run for president in 2008 or not?"
Al Gore: 32% yes, 66% no, 2% unsure
Amongst other Democratic possibilities, Clinton, Edwards, Obama and Biden had fewer "no" vtes. Kerry and Sharpton had more "no" votes.

Gallup Poll. Nov. 27-29 "please say whether you, personally, would or would not like to see this person run for president in the next election."
Al Gore: 31% would like to see him run 31%, 67% would not like to see him run%, 2% unsure
Edwards, Clinton and Obama scored better, Kerry worse.

Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Nov. 9-10 "please tell me if there is a good chance, some chance, or no chance you would vote for each one."
Al Gore: 53% no chance
Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Biden had lower "no chance" votes, Kerry had higher.

I got these from http://www.pollingreport.com/2008.htm#misc but every poll I have seen looks surprisingly grim for Gore. I know that polls this far out don't mean a lot, but they are all pretty consistent. Personally, I doubt that all the pollsters are in on some conspiracy, as Democrat Zogby's polls aren't flattering to Gore either. I would have thought that America's growing disappointment with Bush would give a bounce to the "other guy" they missed out on in 2000. Most Americans believe that global warming is happening and that humans are contributing to it, and Gore is taking it head on. Gore sure dominates the polls on DU, Kos and the like.

Soooo... what gives? :shrug:

[bowens43]

1. Because he makes a really shitty candidate.

If you can't beat GW Bush, you have no business running for any office.

[JackBeck]

4. I thought he did beat GWB.

:shrug:

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. We can't afford any more victories like 2000 and 2004

[nam78_two]

5. He did beat Bush.nt

[Subdivisions]

6. Ummm...WTF!?

Gore

DID NOT LOSE

to GW Bush. He was ruled against by the Supreme Court and lost because of election fraud.

GET YOUR FUCKING STORY STRAIGHT!

[Smarmie Doofus]

7. That would include Ann Richards, Al Gore and John Kerry.

I'd say you're a bit 'cut and dried'.

[tkmorris]

9. Nice.........

:eyes:

[StClone]

10. Reagan was shitty candidate

Lost twice then was a two-termer. Where do these anti-Kerry, Anti-Gore and even anti-Hillary types come from? All three of these would be exemplary Presidential candidates as far as representing Democratic values.

[melm00se]

22. not along enough attention span?

if it can't happen in 10 minutes it's a failure attitude?

[uppityperson]

11. He did. eom

[JNelson6563]

23. Still telling lies eh?

Hey, when that's all ya got I guess you go with it. :shrug:

Julie

[LittleClarkie]

32. 1. past tense 2. he didn't lose

He may have MADE a lousy candidate.

His problem now is much of America hasn't seen the change in him. He'll have to do a good job of showing them if he wants to run again.

[VOX]

33. WRONG. Corporate media kept sticking Gore; still, he beat GWB...

What you're saying is simply not true.

[MethuenProgressive]

2. They're not just polling likely-to-vote Dems

and polls suck, anyways.

[nam78_two]

3. I guess DU and Kos are more left than most of the country

:shrug:

Maybe his going on Oprah will help. I guess he should go on some talk show and talk about how much he loves his kids and maybe cry and share a personal story or two-that would probably make him more "human" :eyes:


I wouldn't worry about this...once his hat is in the ring things will be different. And honestly, even in the lefty blogosphere he wasn't that popular till the movie came out and apparently his personality has changed. I see no real difference, but apparently he is doing something now that is more appealing, "less wooden" or whatever it was people disliked before :shrug:

I see the same person I saw in 2000, but hey whatever works....

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. They are more to the left than most Democrats

[Smarmie Doofus]

8. Relentless hostility from the $$$ 'news' media?

My guess is the numbers will improve dramatically once he makes his announcement.

[featherman]

12. Bad press...the MSM hated Gore and beat up on him relentlessly for

the 18 months prior to the 2000 election. It was pretty much universal. Maybe a handful of scribes and pundits have seen the error of their ways (ie, the result being the disaster that is Bush) but most of them would lazily revert to familiar territory: blatantly biased Gore-bashing posing as "reporting" and "opinion". Blechhh...unfortunate but there it is.

(I nearly cried watching Al Gore in "An Inconvenient Truth" and daydreaming about what a different history and country we could and should have had since the horror that was Election Day 2000.)

[OzarkDem]

18. Bingo

and he's turning that around, at his own pace.

[Red Zelda]

13. Because this country

... is stupider than fuck.
The Ultimately Stupid (U.S.) deserves President Giuliani.
Wave your rancid flag until your bomb-building arms fall off!

[Stevepol]

15. The American people aren't stupid; they're disenfranchised at the moment.

Once we have a democracy again, with vote counting done with hand-counted paper ballots or with fairly audited optiscans, lo and behold it will be found that the American people have very good jucdgment about who they elect.

[skipos]

19. Dukakis, Mondale, Carter (2nd run) and McGovern were all trounced

Where was their "very good judgement?"

[Digit]

14. Possibly because some believe he can do more outside of the political arena

Pretty much what Al has been saying he was planning on doing from the gitgo.
Certainly, he can do much for the issue of global warming this way.

It would be interesting to see if the pollcats asked if it can down to Hillary and Obama, would they
want Gore to run.
I would bet it would be a resounding YES!

[Loge23]

16. He's my front runner! (nt)

[Printer70]

17. Not bad

>Al Gore: 53% no chance

Last poll I showed put Hillary at 49% for this; so its pretty close. I don't think people put too much stock in polls until they see what the candidate has to offer. For Gore, its an opportunity to take his new populist message to the people.

[Beelzebud]

20. Because many people want something NEW.

I really admire Mr. Gore, however I too would like to see a FRESH face in 2008.

No one from the Clinton team.

[Nye Bevan]

21. Al Gore is staunchly pro free-trade

He was a huge advocate for NAFTA and performed strongly in a televised debate on the issue against Ross Perot.

This is not a problem for me-- I am probably more pro-free trade than most on this board-- but I think it may be costing him some support here on DU.

[skipos]

24. if you look at any du 08 poll, gore has a ton of support, usually the most

of any candidate. same over on kos. what surprises me are the national polls, where gore doesnt fare very well.

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. Gore supported NAFTA?

[fhqwhgads]

29. i'm surprised...

...that hasn't really been brought up here. like you mathguy, i'm more pro-free trade than many du'ers (though not necessarily pro-nafta - regional trade agreements aren't "free trade" by my definition).

perhaps gore has changed his position? it's possible, considering he's been publicly taking progressive positions on other issues and repudiating the dlc over the past few years. i may have missed this.

[skipos]

30. Why are you pro-free trade but not pro-nafta?

Just curious.

[fhqwhgads]

31. i'm guess i'm kind of a krugman free-trader...

...in that i believe that on the whole we gain from free trade, but that there is a real cost that needs to be addressed through social programs, and that while are countries that have benefited from globalization, there have been serious issues in others.

but to answer your question, i don't like these trade agreements because they tend to specifically favor american business by design (for example, the stringent intellectual property provisions that favor american pharmaceutical companies). this country has done a nice job of defining free trade as "trade policies that benefit u.s.-based corporations, everyone else be damned". real free trade should result, occasionally, in the royal screwing of an american corporation.

not sure i'm articulating my position well here.

i will say that i'm willing to listen to reasoned argument and change my mind. things have changed a lot in the world since i studied this stuff (my degree is in int'l economics), and i've been away from it for some time. i can be convinced.

[Uncle Joe]

28. Because Al Gore empowered us by championing the internet

No good deed goes unpunished as first learned by Prometheus when he stole fire from heaven for humanity's sake, only to enrage Zeus for this loss of power . Zeus subsequently had Prometheus chained to a rock for all eternity and had a vulture eat his liver every day only to have it made whole again at night.

The mass corporate media not having a taste for liver and enraged at their loss of power with the advent of the internet decided to trash and slander it's main champion instead of actually giving the man credit for his vision and dedication to the people. This went on for the better part of two years beginning in March of 99. This brain washing of the people regarding Al Gore's integrity and credibility had a long term effect, resulting in today's negatives. If you ever believed Al Gore actually claimed to have invented the internet as if he were in a laboratory and came up with the idea, you were brainwashed, and this is only the tip of the iceberg.

The same thing can happen to anybody, the mass corporate media decide to trash. I just have never known anyone to do so much good for the people only to be so virulently slandered by our so called "fourth estate watchdogs, guardians for democracy" or whatever other bull, they like to call them selves.

I believe these negatives can be turned around especially as more people learn the mass corporate media's own integrity or credibility has been in the out house all this time.

For a nice recap of American Journalism's behavior during the coup of 2000, may I suggest checking out Bob Somerby's archive site at the "Daily Howler" link below. When you go there google "War Against Gore" or "2000 debates" and pack a lunch, you can make an afternoon of it.



http://www.dailyhowler.com/