Anyone Else Think We Might Be Better Off If Gore Had Won?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A "Republican" House and Senate would have blocked him at every level.
The Patriot act would have been at least read, and shot down in flames.
The 1994 AWB would have expired.{as it did anyway, but GWB was in favor of signing a renewal}
The House and Senate would probably pass stringent immigration bills and they would have been vetoed by a Dem President, thus strengthing the GOP House and Senate control.
At best, no new laws infringing on our rights would get passed.
 
It certainly couldn't be any worse, dispite what the blind repub followers say.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm absolutely certain he wouldn't have been worse, and fairly certain he would have been better.

Then again, I'm a Democrat and I voted for him, so that shouldn't be surprising.

EDIT: I really have to get one of those "I was against Bush before it was popular" bumper stickers I saw the other day.
 
I am not a DEM or REP . I believe that grid lock is better than one "party " having complete sway over all 3 branches.
 
Would I rather have had Algore?

No!
NO NO NO NO!

He is a prime example of just exactly what is WRONG with this world.

NO!
 
My point is not whether or not Gore would have been a better president, but whether we as in "We the People" would have been better off Constitutionally had a Dem been elected in 2000. I say we would as the House and Senate would have remained in "conservative" hands and only gotten stronger as a Dem president vetoed bill after conservative bill.
Wolverine, do you really think Gore would be able to run a "bye bye gun rights" bill past Tom Delay or Trent Lott?
Please if anyone cannot give actual reasons and resort to "them pesky dems wooda took our guns" please refrain from posting.
 
Would I rather have had Algore?

No!
NO NO NO NO!

He is a prime example of just exactly what is WRONG with this world.

NO!
Click to expand...

Care to...elaborate? "Al Gore is teh devilz!" is generally the kind of thing that you're supposed to, you know, back up a little.

Is it because he favors science over gut instinct?

Because he woulda grabbed your guns? (which would have been unlikely anyway as long as at least one house stayed in Republican hands)

Because he claimed to invent the internet? (to this I'll say the same thing I say to the recent Kerry quote...if we want to start taking quotes out of context and jumping on somebody when they claim to have misspoken, I have about 6 years of "Bushisms" for you)


And remember everybody in here, we aren't talking about Al Gore in absolute terms as a president, only Al Gore in comparison to our current Great Dear Leader....because that was the choice we were faced with in 2000.

Lastly, I think it's important to point out why we ought to be asking ourselves this question. A plurality of people in this country actually chose Gore. If not for some serious issues with our election system down in Florida, it's highly possible that that state could have gone to Gore as well, putting him in office. The man won the popular vote by a margin larger than the entire voting population of my state. So we really ought to ask ourselves if we're happy with what we've had for the last six years, because if you aren't then we really ought to see what we can do to keep it from happening again.

If you are...well, I disagree but I guess different strokes for different folks.
 
He is a prime example of just exactly what is WRONG with this world.
Click to expand...



And W is the prime example of what not to sound like when you want to be articulate. It is not that hard to say nuclear!!!
Good thing W is pres though, we wouldn't want that surplus he was left with to get any bigger.
 
We would still be waiting for a clear resolution from the UN authorizing us to pursue AlQada in Afghanistan.

US Manufacturing would be in an even worse state of affairs thanks to our compliance to Kyoto and any other eco-nut document which would not be binding on any of our competition.

Instead of being tied up in Iraq US forces would be all over the globe doing the bidding of the UN.

The gov't funded study on "What we did to deserve 9/11 and how to appease those who may have commited it." would still be 9 months away from completion.
 
Don't forget if Gore was elected he would have broke down your doors and eaten your brains.

There is no possible way any human being or monkey could have done any worse than W. By far, he is the worst president to ever sit in the oval office.
 
In the long run yes, in the short run no. Republicans and Democrats getting more and more the same all the time. There is nothing really conservative about them anymore (except occasionally what they SAY in the campaign to get our votes) The Republicans are just a few miles behind the democrats. Electing a republican is only slowing things down a little, but it's still going the same direction. On the other hand, if the democrats get control they can speed things up and finish messing up everything so we can start from scratch
 
A "Republican" House and Senate would have blocked him at every level.
Click to expand...
How could they block him ? The Democrats just took control of both the House and Senate. 2007 would be a very bad year.

The Patriot act would have been at least read, and shot down in flames.
Click to expand...
Since the Democrats voted for it this time, there's no reason to think they wouldn't vote for it under a Democrat president.

The 1994 AWB would have expired.{as it did anyway, but GWB was in favor of signing a renewal}
Click to expand...
Of course not. Gore would have pushed for renewal. Wasn't he the deciding vote as Vice President (may have been some other gun bill) ? And even if they couldn't get the votes, they would certainly be renewing it come January 2007.

The House and Senate would probably pass stringent immigration bills and they would have been vetoed by a Dem President, thus strengthing the GOP House and Senate control.
At best, no new laws infringing on our rights would get passed.
Click to expand...
I have zero confidence in that statement. I didn't see them pass any "stringent" immigration bill while Clinton was president. They would have considered it "profiling."

There may have been some things Gore would have done better, such as paying down the national debt with the budget surplus, but RKBA issues are not the place to look.

There are lots of things Gore would have done worse. He wouldn't have taken on Bin Laden and the Taliban, and we would have had more attacks in the U.S., an opinion that will be confirmed or rejected after the Dems take the Presidency in 2009.
 
Saying that Dems would shoot down an immigration bill is just dumb.
Dems and Repubs alike have done nothing, especially on the Federal level. It is the state governments fueld by angry citizens that have done the most good. Here in AZ the people took control of the border and the government is fine with that because we are actually doing something. All the border patrol does is harras US citizens while the ranchers and desert rats who have lived here our entire lives know the routes and where to go and what to do.
 
But if Gore had won in 2000, who is to say that a trulr conservative would not have won in 2004?
Your statement is that the the Dems will take control in 2007. This might not be the case if Gore had won in 2000, and a true conservative had won in 2004.
The Dems are no more the boogie men than the Republicans.
The Patriot act would not have been ratified by a Republican House and Senate if a DEm pres proposed it.
Clinton was effectively neutered after the 94 elections.
Remember ,gridlock is better than complete control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top