Safire and his take on "Dean Please!"

[DKW 86 7,899]

Very good read

Politronic chatter picked up by pundits monitoring lefty blogsites and al-Gora intercepts flashes the warning: If stopped, Dean may well bolt.

Dean start a third party, say it aint so....lol

[Tigermike 3,711]

(2) The Dean-Internet Party, its Bush-despising base so energized as to be frenetic, its leader happy to be the apostle of anger, its bandwidth bandwagon gaining momentum with each pulse of its cursing cursor.

Very descriptive.

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

3rd party = Bush landslide. Smell the fear!

[CarolinaTiger 0]

Dean Internet Party... that'll give us the GOP, the Dems, and the DIPs...

hmmm.

[DKW 86 7,899]

Dean Internet Party... that'll give us the GOP, the Dems, and the DIPs...

hmmm.

And if the Dips are are a HIT would that make them Dips Hits?

[hccobb 0]

Sadly I don't think Dean will loose the nomination. A third party would certainly mean a much more divided democratic ticket and Bush win for sure. I don't think it will really matter though -- Dean is teetering so close to the brink of socialism that he won't really stand much of a chance against Bush.

[Donutboy 0]

3rd party = Bush landslide.  Smell the fear! 

The Green Party, which appealed strongly to liberals drew 3% of the vote in the last election and Gore still won by 1/2 million votes. I believe Dean is too smart to ruin his political future on a third party run at the White House. He's making a name for himself and organizing a strong voter base in this election and will be a force in the Democratic Party in the future. He loses all of that if he bolts the first time he runs for his party's nomination and doesn't win it. I don't think there's a future for ANY third party AT THIS TIME because the two major parties control the government and manage to keep the bar raised high enough to make any third party run virtually impossible. However, I think The Veterans Party of America could be a force to reckon with in future elections.

[DKW 86 7,899]

The point of this was that the Dems were the ones predicting a Third Party run by Dean. It was not anyone outside the Party.

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

The Green Party, which appealed strongly to liberals drew 3% of the vote in the last election and Gore still won by 1/2 million votes.  ...

I'm sure you meant for this sentence to read:

The Green Party, which appealed strongly to liberals, drew 3% of the total votes cast in the last election and proved to be the difference maker in the Electoral College tally, despite Gore's approximately 1/2 million advantage in the popular vote -- making this the FOURTH time in US election history where the candidate elected President did not achieve majority of the popular vote.

FYI -- Gore will go down in history (or maybe end up as a Jeopardy trivia question) with these other popular vote winners but Electoral College dropouts: Andrew Jackson in 1824 (John Quincy Adams elected President,) Samuel J. Tilden in 1876 (Rutherford B. Hayes elected,) Grover Cleveland in 1888 (Benjamin Harrison elected.)

[Donutboy 0]

The Green Party, which appealed strongly to liberals drew 3% of the vote in the last election and Gore still won by 1/2 million votes.  ...

I'm sure you meant for this sentence to read:

The Green Party, which appealed strongly to liberals, drew 3% of the total votes cast in the last election and proved to be the difference maker in the Electoral College tally, despite Gore's approximately 1/2 million advantage in the popular vote -- making this the FOURTH time in US election history where the candidate elected President did not achieve majority of the popular vote.

FYI -- Gore will go down in history (or maybe end up as a Jeopardy trivia question) with these other popular vote winners but Electoral College dropouts: Andrew Jackson in 1824 (John Quincy Adams elected President,) Samuel J. Tilden in 1876 (Rutherford B. Hayes elected,) Grover Cleveland in 1888 (Benjamin Harrison elected.)

No, I meant it as I typed it. Gore won the first election, the one where the American people voted. Bush won the second vote, that of the Supreme(ly conservative) Court. The illegal manipulation of the federal vote by the (in)justices assured Bush of winning the electoral vote.

Neither Antonio Scalia nor Clarence Thomas saw the need to recuse themselves from the decision, even though Scalia's sons worked on the Bush campaign in Florida and Thomas's wife had been selected to assist on the Bush inauguration. Anyone see a conflict of interest there besides me? Those two votes swung the 5-4 decision to Bush, allowing him to steal the 2000 election.

As I said, I stand by what I typed.

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

...  As I said, I stand by what I typed.

Then you must be content with self-delusion. The election was close, no doubt the closest in history. The facts remain: GWB carried Florida by over 500 votes which then tipped the Electoral College tally in his favor. The Electoral College vote is the key while the popular vote does not always win the election. It does most of the time, but not this time nor 3 other times in our history. I can understand how hurt & dissapointed Gore & all his followers were in losing such a close election but, you know ... that's life. In every contest there has to be a winner & a loser, and, well ... Gore lost. There's just no way to sugarcoat a devastating defeat like that. Time will show whether or not he can actually recover from such a political disaster. In fairness, Gore did pretty good for having that albatross of being clinton's stooge around his neck.

[Donutboy 0]

...  As I said, I stand by what I typed.

Then you must be content with self-delusion. The election was close, no doubt the closest in history. The facts remain: GWB carried Florida by over 5,000 votes which then tipped the Electoral College tally in his favor. The Electoral College vote is the key while the popular vote does not always win the election. It does most of the time, but not this time nor 3 other times in our history. I can understand how hurt & dissapointed Gore & all his followers were in losing such a close election but, you know ... that's life. In every contest there has to be a winner & a loser, and, well ... Gore lost. There's just no way to sugarcoat a devastating defeat like that. Time will show whether or not he can actually recover from such a political disaster. In fairness, Gore did pretty good for having that albatross of being clinton's stooge around his neck.

The albatross wasn't Clinton. Clinton still enjoyed a 60% approval rating in his final year. Al Gore himself was the albatross. He distanced himself from Clinton and even refused Clinton's assistance in states where Clinton had done well in the two previous elections. He made a very poor choice for a running mate. Joseph Lieberman could do nothing for him. He wasn't a popular Democratic figure who could help energize the democratic base nor could he help him capture a swing state, and as the second half of the 2000 ticket, Lieberman still remains a weak contender today. If the 2004 election came down to Joseph Lieberman and George W. Bush, I'd exercise my voting right by staying home and choosing none of the above.

As for who rightfully won the 2000 election, I'll simply agree to disagree.

[DKW 86 7,899]

Gore likely shot himself in the foot when he hired Daily and Brazille to run the campaign. They totally blew off the South. If Gore wins TN, the election is his. The people that knew him best, his constituants voted against him overwhelmingly.

In his concession speech, he said "I will take the time to mend fences that obviously need mending." He was talking about his rejection by the TN voters. Daily and Brazille were/are legendary for the dead voting. Or in Brazille's words, "I can find 4000 votes in any election in any area of the country."