Democrats -- the gift that keps on giving
This primary season has been one that us conservatives have thoroughly enjoyed. Our side got it's nominee finished up quickly, and now John McCain is in a war-footing; he is ramping up his campaign to begin the general election run. On the Democrat side, however, the internecine civil war going on has a lot of us smiling. We don't like to kick someone when they're down, but the Democrats are doing a fine job of kicking one another. Chalk the following up as a result of that squabble on the Left, and a possibility that we've floated on more than one occasion:
Plans for Al Gore to take the Democratic presidential nomination as the saviour of a bitterly divided party are being actively discussed by senior figures and aides to the former vice-president.
The bloody civil war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has left many Democrats convinced that neither can deliver a knockout blow to the other and that both have been so damaged that they risk losing November's election to the Republican nominee, John McCain.
Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party's convention in Denver during the last week of August.
Two former Gore campaign officials have told The Sunday Telegraph that a scenario first mapped out by members of Mr Gore's inner circle last May now has a sporting chance of coming true.
Mr Gore, who was Bill Clinton's vice-president and has since won a Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for his work on green issues, remains an influential figure eight years after he beat George W Bush in the popular vote but lost the White House after the Florida recount fiasco.
The opening has emerged because opinion polls show Mr McCain stretching his lead over both Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton, whose campaigns are engaged in a daily cycle of attacks, character assassination and mutual recriminations on religion, race and the economy.
Between a quarter and a third of Obama and Clinton supporters say that they would not now vote for the other in November.
The prospect of a new Gore candidacy was raised last week in Time magazine by Joe Klein, the doyen of American political writers, and discussed on the main cable news networks, CNN, Fox and MSNBC.
If neither Mr Obama nor Mrs Clinton has the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, and if both appear unable to beat Mr McCain, under one scenario a group of about 100 party elders - the "super-delegates" - could sit out the first ballot in Denver, preventing either candidate winning outright, and then offer Mr Gore the nomination for the good of the party.
Tim Mahoney, a Democrat congressman from Florida, said last week: "If it goes into the convention, don't be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket." This suggests the party would accept a Gore-Clinton or a Gore-Obama pairing.
Following a brief flurry of speculation that he might jump into the race last year, Mr Gore claimed he had "fallen out of love" with politics, but he has pointedly refused to rule out another tilt at the White House and said that the only job in public life that interests him is the presidency.
Let me correct the Telegraph record here. Both Obama and Hillary have been deeply wounded in recent weeks by their own stupidity. First, for Obama, came his denial of Jeremiah Wright; claiming he'd never heard any of the controversial sermons. That is a point he directly contradicted in his infamous non-speech on race. He admitted to lying to the public about that, and because of that, it cost him ground against Hillary in Pennsylvania. It also forced his unfavorable numbers up, over fifty percent, which is a record for him.
For Hillary "Rambo" Clinton, it was the Tuzla lie, and the subsequent spin afterwords that cost her. ("Mrs. Clinton misspoke"; "I was sleep-deprived".) She also saw an uptick in her unfavorables, but not nearly as drastic a swing as Oabama's underwent. She also has her true stance on NAFTA on the record, and her schedule as First Lady shows that after the health care fiasco that cost the Democrats their control of the House, she was little more than a "greeter" at the White House, much in the same vein as Walmart greeters.
As for the idea of the Goracle being the "consensus candidate," I'm not sure how far that's going to go. It would make sense for the Supers to choose Obama to be on the ticket as he clearly is winning in the primaries. To not choose him would create a rift in the party that's not likely to be repaired for awhile, if it's ever repaired at all. But the question is what does he bring to the table other than environmental issues? You can't trust him on economic issues because his green issues trump that, and they would surely wreck an economy that needs a boost right now. Additionally, our economy isn't just tied to us. It's tied to the world's markets.
His stance on defense is disgustingly paltry, and due to his dislike of our invasion of Iraq, he would most assuredly pull and Obama or a Hillary in calling for and implementing a withdrawal. He will not use the military for it's intended purpose, nor would he work to increase it's size. The latter has been needed since Reagan left office.
And we know the sort of judges he would appoint to the high court. We'd get more Ginsburgs and Breyers rather than more Alitos and Roberts. And many of his choices to the federal bench would most likely be environmentally-minded lawyers that would pass fiat from the bench on US environmental policy.
Bear this in mind. If they run him, he will put all of his focus and energy into pimping a lie in an effort to backdoor Kyoto on an unsuspecting America. We can laugh and snicker at how asinine he sounds, but if we give this man the power, he's going to wreck this nation for generations. If he's the guy they opt to run, John McCain had better speak as little about the environment as possible, and continue his message of a stronger America, a more energy-independent America, a fiscally-strengthened America, and one that will not walk away from the Islamofascist terrorism that still wants to destroy us.
Publius II
Plans for Al Gore to take the Democratic presidential nomination as the saviour of a bitterly divided party are being actively discussed by senior figures and aides to the former vice-president.
The bloody civil war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has left many Democrats convinced that neither can deliver a knockout blow to the other and that both have been so damaged that they risk losing November's election to the Republican nominee, John McCain.
Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party's convention in Denver during the last week of August.
Two former Gore campaign officials have told The Sunday Telegraph that a scenario first mapped out by members of Mr Gore's inner circle last May now has a sporting chance of coming true.
Mr Gore, who was Bill Clinton's vice-president and has since won a Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for his work on green issues, remains an influential figure eight years after he beat George W Bush in the popular vote but lost the White House after the Florida recount fiasco.
The opening has emerged because opinion polls show Mr McCain stretching his lead over both Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton, whose campaigns are engaged in a daily cycle of attacks, character assassination and mutual recriminations on religion, race and the economy.
Between a quarter and a third of Obama and Clinton supporters say that they would not now vote for the other in November.
The prospect of a new Gore candidacy was raised last week in Time magazine by Joe Klein, the doyen of American political writers, and discussed on the main cable news networks, CNN, Fox and MSNBC.
If neither Mr Obama nor Mrs Clinton has the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, and if both appear unable to beat Mr McCain, under one scenario a group of about 100 party elders - the "super-delegates" - could sit out the first ballot in Denver, preventing either candidate winning outright, and then offer Mr Gore the nomination for the good of the party.
Tim Mahoney, a Democrat congressman from Florida, said last week: "If it goes into the convention, don't be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket." This suggests the party would accept a Gore-Clinton or a Gore-Obama pairing.
Following a brief flurry of speculation that he might jump into the race last year, Mr Gore claimed he had "fallen out of love" with politics, but he has pointedly refused to rule out another tilt at the White House and said that the only job in public life that interests him is the presidency.
Let me correct the Telegraph record here. Both Obama and Hillary have been deeply wounded in recent weeks by their own stupidity. First, for Obama, came his denial of Jeremiah Wright; claiming he'd never heard any of the controversial sermons. That is a point he directly contradicted in his infamous non-speech on race. He admitted to lying to the public about that, and because of that, it cost him ground against Hillary in Pennsylvania. It also forced his unfavorable numbers up, over fifty percent, which is a record for him.
For Hillary "Rambo" Clinton, it was the Tuzla lie, and the subsequent spin afterwords that cost her. ("Mrs. Clinton misspoke"; "I was sleep-deprived".) She also saw an uptick in her unfavorables, but not nearly as drastic a swing as Oabama's underwent. She also has her true stance on NAFTA on the record, and her schedule as First Lady shows that after the health care fiasco that cost the Democrats their control of the House, she was little more than a "greeter" at the White House, much in the same vein as Walmart greeters.
As for the idea of the Goracle being the "consensus candidate," I'm not sure how far that's going to go. It would make sense for the Supers to choose Obama to be on the ticket as he clearly is winning in the primaries. To not choose him would create a rift in the party that's not likely to be repaired for awhile, if it's ever repaired at all. But the question is what does he bring to the table other than environmental issues? You can't trust him on economic issues because his green issues trump that, and they would surely wreck an economy that needs a boost right now. Additionally, our economy isn't just tied to us. It's tied to the world's markets.
His stance on defense is disgustingly paltry, and due to his dislike of our invasion of Iraq, he would most assuredly pull and Obama or a Hillary in calling for and implementing a withdrawal. He will not use the military for it's intended purpose, nor would he work to increase it's size. The latter has been needed since Reagan left office.
And we know the sort of judges he would appoint to the high court. We'd get more Ginsburgs and Breyers rather than more Alitos and Roberts. And many of his choices to the federal bench would most likely be environmentally-minded lawyers that would pass fiat from the bench on US environmental policy.
Bear this in mind. If they run him, he will put all of his focus and energy into pimping a lie in an effort to backdoor Kyoto on an unsuspecting America. We can laugh and snicker at how asinine he sounds, but if we give this man the power, he's going to wreck this nation for generations. If he's the guy they opt to run, John McCain had better speak as little about the environment as possible, and continue his message of a stronger America, a more energy-independent America, a fiscally-strengthened America, and one that will not walk away from the Islamofascist terrorism that still wants to destroy us.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 1:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home