Monday morning quarterbacking: Gore/Lieberman '00

August 7, 2000 8:11 AM

Monday morning quarterbacking: Gore/Lieberman '00 I could've sworn it was going to be Massachusetts' own John Kerry. With New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen and Missouri's Dick Gephardt removing themselves from the running, this was probably the most courageous choice, and makes Cheney look even sillier than before. The downside is that the Connecticut senator's disapproval of Clinton during the Monicagate scandal may wind up calling more negative attention to Gore than positive. And then there's the bigotry, both veiled and unveiled, that no doubt is already on the way in ads, whisper campaigns and so on. I wonder to what extent was Gore's choice rushed by Bush's huge post-convention bounce. Did I miss any ramifications? Anyone care to play Dennis Miller here?
posted by allaboutgeorge (17 comments total)

Wouldn't the "most courageous choice" have been a non-centrist Democrat? You can only put a different spin on blandness for so long...
posted by NickBarat at 8:18 AM on August 7, 2000

This makes Cheney look even sillier?? Gore talks about how the Cheney pick is "retro" and Liberman is only a year younger than Cheney. I say both Bush and Gore made solid choices that can both plausibly be president if called upon.
posted by gyc at 8:20 AM on August 7, 2000

I think the Jewish-candidate thing was only a matter of time at this point (way to alienate the Nazi vote, there, Al!), but from where I sit, the right-winger chose a moderate, and the moderate guy chose a righty.

So in November, it's the tomato versus the tomahto.

Someone please re-illusion me? Please?
posted by chicobangs at 8:27 AM on August 7, 2000

The irony of all of this... now that they've got their VPs chosen, both tickets finally have people that could actually be president.

As for me: looks like I'm voting for Nader.


posted by silusGROK at 8:43 AM on August 7, 2000

Oh, fuck.

Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck!

Joe Lieberman and my industry (video games) do not get along at all. He's had a thing about violence in media, especially games, for quite some time.

Now, granted, I agree with Joe on that matter: I think games are too violent, but I think it's bad from a design perspective rather than a sociological one. I think making a game where the only way to win is a sign of an unimaginative designer who doesn't want to make anything new and exciting (like John "Dude, I Have My Own Company!" Romero). However, I don't want to ban games outright. I don't want to ban movies and tv shows because they portray violence. I want a shift in the culture where people say they also want something new and different and vote with their wallets.

Lieberman and his ilk would rather legislate and ban the sale of games and movies and other things like that, which will, of course, only lead to a backlash as everyone tries to outdo each other in an effort to piss off the Veep.

Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck! Great...what a ticket. All we need is ol' Tipper to get cranking on the PMRC again...

Fuck.
posted by RakDaddy at 10:00 AM on August 7, 2000

Man! Stop it with the profanity!!! You can get your point across without!
posted by FAB4GIRL at 11:38 AM on August 7, 2000

Sorry. The guy just really gets my goat. And I'm not thrilled with the idea of a Gore White House with a right-leaning Veep.

On the other hand, if Joe Lieberman is the VP, how much damage can he really do? I should happy about this.

But still.

So, I will use non-profane expletives instead.

Pants! Pants, pants, pants, pants, pants.

posted by RakDaddy at 11:58 AM on August 7, 2000

The only reason I supported Clinton in '92 (well, besides the candidacy of Daddy Bush) was because of Al Gore... and he turned out to be a pretty lame VP. So I'm reluctant to have VP choice factor into my support (unfortunately I still can't vote)... However, I do think that Nader's running mate, Winona LaDuke is a really good choice. Of course, I wonder how people will react to having a Jewish/Indian/Female running mate. I hope in 20 years or so, people won't be so closed-minded that stuff like that matters and she can run for president and be taken seriously...
posted by kidsplateusa at 12:01 PM on August 7, 2000

"Anyone care to play Dennis Miller here?" I think Miller going from political humor to sports says volumes. It could be the most profound statement Miller has ever made. There's much more respect in sports commentary than there is in taking potshots at such obvious targets as politicians.

This presidential election is funny in that same way that stubbing one's toe in the middle of a party full of people is funny. It's painful and embarrassing and stupid funny. It's accidently getting one's tie stuck in the meat grinder funny. It's "I WOULD vote for the lesser of two evils if I could only figure out which one that is!" funny.

Gore is even using the same methods of operation for his campaign that Bush did. Ten days before the convention, announce your VP candidate If the public doesn't like it you can change your mind, and if it does like your choice you'll go into the convention with a positive rating. What? Are they both using the same political consultants? Reading the same rulebooks on this topic? What's the deal?

Are they trying to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that it really doesn't matter who we vote for?

My sentiments mirror those of RakDaddy. There are some times when a well placed expletitive is the only way to properly convey the emotional weight of a given situation.
posted by ZachsMind at 12:25 PM on August 7, 2000

I bet when no one's looking, Gore and Bush exchange underwear. They were separated at birth. The more they talk the more they look alike.

Am I the only one who sees that the obvious answer is you wait until the next to last day of the convention itself to reveal your VP. It's called building up suspense! Geez! Even I know that!
posted by ZachsMind at 12:29 PM on August 7, 2000

Yeah, but Zach, Gore ain't the most theatrical-minded guy around or anything.
posted by chicobangs at 2:32 PM on August 7, 2000

Login page? New York Times bites. Just wanted to say that. =)

I agree Gore's not very theatrical. I think the reason Clinton did (as) well (as he did) is because he was like a kid in a candy store sometimes. Every morning he's got all these people jogging with him, following him around, so he can jog to the McDonalds and back. For better or for worse he made the position uniquely human in a way that endeared him to Hollywood and made even people who didn't like him chuckle a bit about the thought of it. The president's not a king. He's supposed to be a civil servant. He's just a person. He's supposed to be imperfect. I don't want a vanilla president. Clinton was rocky road that'd been out in the sun too long on a picnic outing. I hope history will go easy on him.

That time when he played sax on the Arsenio Hall show. He wasn't bad. He wasn't great but he was okay. I think some people lived vicariously through him. Most everybody at one time or another fancied the idea of being president. No one wants the responsibility but at times Clinton seemed to really enjoy himself, the way other people might imagine themselves appreciating the Big Chair in the country. He often sincerely had this look on his face like he really thought he was making a difference. The Town Hall Meetings. He just shined on those and yeah it was all an act but it was also where HE was helping to get people to air their views and compare notes with people who disagree. What an ego trip.

Gore however.. well let's just say he's not gonna get heavy ratings on TV during his State of the Union address. I'll be surprised to see him stay awake through his own speeches. And Bush... if he gets the Big Chair I'll constantly be wondering who put those words in his mouth. It never sounds like what he's saying is honestly coming from him. And let's be real. It's gonna be Bush or Gore. Probably Bush, cuz whatever's actually running the show behind the scenes won't stand for a jewish vice president. They haven't before. Gore and Bush are now different. Lieberman is jewish. Cheney is not. We've got so far to go before that can happen, unfortunately. I can't understand why that's such a big thing, but it is. The media's not helping either. It's like the media is being told to make a big deal out of it. Just in case people forgot it's supposed to be a big deal.

It is? No jewish VP before now? Oh. Okay. wow.

I will probably vote for Nader. If today we had the election, I'd vote for him. His VP's cool, but even less what they will accept than Lieberman. However, I know they won't win. My vote'll be my personal middle finger at the established political system. I just hope A LOT OF OTHER people flip them off too. Our democracy is fixed. It's an illusion. Smoke and mirrors. It's the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain. We should have hundreds of people running for that office. Not just two. It should be a marathon; not a badly played game of checkers.
posted by ZachsMind at 8:57 PM on August 7, 2000

Somebody (I'm pretty sure it was in here) said that it's been all but fixed already, that Bush is going to win fairly decisively, and that'll be that. That sounds a bit too true for me to be comfortable.

They're screwing us, while they're telling us they're screwing us, and it doesn't matter how much we mock them or demonstrate at their Conventions or try to derail them. They laugh like the all-powerful idiots they think they are, and then they go on and do whatever they want anyways.

This has nothing to do with Dem vs Rep anymore. I'm just pissed at the whole system. And they wonder why 60% (or 70 or 80%) don't bother voting anymore. That makes it easier on them, because the votes they buy then go farther.

Sorry for my frustration. I don't know if I wanna mobilize everyone I can to vote or just give up right now. I mean yeah, I'll vote for Nader alright, but I don't know if it's as a middle finger or a white flag.
posted by chicobangs at 9:13 PM on August 7, 2000

I can sort of see why some people are disillusioned, especially 3rd party supporters. But hey, Perot nearly pulled it off in '92 (he probably would've if he didn't drop out at first) and he wasn't obligated to any special interest groups. If anything, he was too loony for "the man." And what about Jesse Ventura? He had very minimal support until weeks before the election. Even though I'm a Republican, I say don't give up. There's such a big untapped market of disgruntled non-voters that even if you just reach 1 out of every hundred, it still would make a huge difference.
posted by gyc at 10:59 PM on August 7, 2000

Generally speaking, VPs are politically neutered once elected, so this is all image spin of course. The idea that the religious beliefs of a candidate are an issue in the 21st century makes me feel (once again, unpleasantly) like the country has been in some kind of alternate Victorian-fantasy reality since 1980. As long as religious beliefs aren't used to limit freedom or legislate behavior, who cares? If they are, I'll oppose their introduction into the political process--whoever proposes them, under whatever banner.

Generally speaking, I hope the U.S. turns around and becomes more like Canada or Holland than Saudi Arabia or Margaret Atwood's "Gilead".
posted by aflakete at 12:42 AM on August 8, 2000

Blatant self-plug but I'm linking to the text and not the mp3, so just reading it does nothing advantageous to me (like mp3's payback for playback thingy) but it does get the point across.

Vote for Mickey Mouse. I don't care. The point is we must get the majority of the American people voting for SOMEONE. Silence doesn't count in this democracy.
posted by ZachsMind at 9:08 AM on August 8, 2000

I have no idea why, in the middle of a profound period of peace and prosperity, people expect the country's politics to be anything but dull. Clue! There's NOTHING to argue about!

(Well, truth to tell, I wouldn't say nothing -- but the electorate isn't going to care. "If it ain't broke...)

Actually, Zach, silence does count. The silent people voted for the winner.
posted by dhartung at 2:52 AM on August 9, 2000