Comments on: STUPIFYING

By: Graham Lester

Graham Lester — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Another possibility: If Gore had become President, the pressure would have been off Hussein and he would have dug up his hidden nuclear parts and had a functional nuclear weapon by 2004.

By: John Lemon

John Lemon — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

This guy is great and he's pushing Dean. I say we should encourage him all we can.

(Caveat: I still think Dean may be bad for the GOP in some west coast Senate and gubenatorial races.)

By: Robert Prather

Robert Prather — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

James,

Your last sentence sums it up very nicely. Even Al Gore would never buy into this.

By: John

John — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

So, you're of the belief that exit polling isn't predictive? Strange how we use it everywhere else to ensure fair elections in countries attempting their own democracy. I'd consider it stupendously stupid if we didn't do exit polling in the nascent democracy of Iraq. Strange how we're not going to do it in our very own national elections anymore. Kind of got cut off there suddenly with the 2000 elections. Strange, that.

By: John Lemon

John Lemon — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

John,
Think sampling bias and take a statistics class, one that includes a good dose of sampling research design.

Exit polls are still used, but in very tight elections they don't tell you much. The placement of the pollsters matters quite a bit and is usually not random. And the increase in mail-in absentee ballots has thrown a wrench into the exit polling enterprise.

By: Barry B

Barry B — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Thank you for the link and the attention.
Having been Al Gore Senior's Senate Page in 1961 and a long time Tennessee Democrat and friend of the Gores, I have what I believe to be very good reasons behind each of my assertions. If nothing else Al Gore (the boring overly informed Al Gore) would have meticulously absorbed every NSC and CIA file that crossed his desk. As always he would have made himself the best informed he could be. I believe as a result that he would have caught the warnings that were available prior to 9-11.
Al Gore would not have supported the Patriot Act or The Dept. of Homeland Security. He would have had those drones in Afghanistan take out Osama when they had the chance. The deficit would not have sapped our financial strength and the job market and economy would not be in the shape they are in today. Can any of this be proven? Of course not. Can you prove it would not have happened this way?
Thank you for the mention and the link. It is always nice to be appreciated.

You will be linked and blogrolled in return. I believe in reciprocity.

Barry at Rush Limbaughtomy.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Barry,

Thanks.

Honestly, I doubt it. I don't like Patriot Act or necessarily DHS, but those were overwhelming bipartisan measures. Indeed, GWB resisted DHS for quite some time but congressional Democrats, notably Gore's running mate Joe Lieberman, almost forced it on him.

Gore's president, Bill Clinton, didn't take out Osama when he had the chance. When is it that Bush had the chance?

The economy was falling apart when Clinton-Gore left office. Not because of bad policy but because the Internet bubble burst. The recession is global, not the result of anything any US administration did. I'm not sure what Gore would/could have done that would have created more jobs. Taxes would be higher, as the Bush tax cuts wouldn't have been passed. This might have resulted in slightly lower deficits but likely in slightly more unemployement. But it would have been marginal at best, especially since we'd have had a Republican Congress the whole time.

Now, it may well be that Gore would have read through the intel briefings more thoroughly than Bush. It's even conceivable that we would have left Saddam in power in a Gore presidency.

By: Doug

Doug — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Look up, I see Pigs Flying!!!!!!!!!!

Al Gore, what a joke.......as is the author.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

I believe as a result that he would have caught the warnings that were available prior to 9-11.

And and and... he would have cured cancer and he would have given us world peace and he would pave the street with gold.

Sad to see someone so feaking delusional.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Given the closeness of the margin of victory, the fact that the networks announced exit poll results while the conservative panhandle was still voting has always struck me as inappropriate; it's good manners to wait until all the polls in the state close before you make predictions. And if the partisan circumstances were reversed, I know lefties would be arguing that networks stole votes from Gore by announcing exit polling early.

By: Buck Hicks

Buck Hicks — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

You have all forgotten that Gore is the man who invented the Internet. Any man who can do that could surely put together a few dots concerning intelligence reports.

I have two questions. Suppose that Gore had put together the dots before 9/11. Would he have initiated a preemptive strike of any kind? How would that be different then Bush and Iraq?

By: Guy Cabot

Guy Cabot — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Mr. Prather is largely correct; while nobody can be certain whether 9/11 could or could not have been averted, it is certain our economy would have been much better and we our foreign policy handled with much greater wisdom and skill.

Personally, I believe 9/11 would have been prevented; Al Qaeda was always on the Clinton admin's radar screen. When Bush was appointed, all accounts show Al Qaeda was largely forgotten as prioritiess shifted toward rewarding certain Bush family interests.

By: The Yorkie Lady

The Yorkie Lady — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Personally, I believe 9/11 would have been prevented; Al Qaeda was always on the Clinton admin's radar screen. What the heck does this mean?? In the Clinton administration, "on the radar screen" clearly didn't translate into action of any kind. Clinton -- on two separate occasions -- gave up the opportunity to take custody of bin Laden and take him out of operation. Clinton himself has publicly acknowledged that this may have been the worst mistake in his presidency. ...it is certain our economy would have been much better and we our foreign policy handled with much greater wisdom and skill. Certain? The economy was on a downturn when Clinton left office. As James pointed out earlier, this is a global phenomenon and not the result of the actions of any single American presidential administration. As for our foreign policy, if by "wisdom and skill" you mean "kowtowing to the wishes of the United Nations" (where, may I remind you, Libya now chairs the Human Rights Commission), then I for one am absolutely delighted to have a President so completely without skill and "wisdom" that he puts American security and interests first.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Does anyone need more proof the liberals have all gone stalk raving mad???

The Dem party is toast.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Paul, if the dems do win in November, I fully expect to see a conspiracy theory from you regarding why they won. I think hubris is something to watch out for, given how close the election is likely to be. And saying things like that may be good for the cheap seats, but you'll just end up looking mighty stupid if the people you've been berating non stop actually beat you.