"Gore Would Have Beaten Bush this Year
On NRO's "The Corner" blog, Ramesh Ponnuru links to a Marty Peretz article in TNR Online. It basically picks up the theme I've been playing since late January: John Kerry is a dud candidate.
Ponnuru's reaction is: "Oh, please"; not to the thesis, mind you, but to the following Peretz statement: "I actually believe that, had Lieberman won the nomination, he would have won the election. I think Gore would have as well." Specifically, that Al Gore could have defeated the President had he been nominated this time.
No. Gore might have made a more "interesting" (entertaining) race of it, but he would have gotten his clock cleaned and slicked back like his hair. He has the legacy of a messy loser, and he has since gone completely insane. Al Gore is no longer viable.
Lieberman is another story, but he would not have won either. George W. Bush's votes this election – the majority – were votes for George W. Bush. It's his plan, his mission, his leadership for which the voters voted.
I agree. Gore is a lunatic, and Lieberman lost my respect when he got on his knees to Hollywood 4 years ago. If he couldn't stand up to Streisand or Lear, why should we expect he'll stand up to Annan, Chirac, or Zaraqwi?