Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2023, 12:21 PM
 
155 posts, read 90,800 times
Reputation: 251

Advertisements

People say that Bill Clinton's behavior and impeachment cost Al Gore the election in 2000. Bill Clinton had a vey high job approval rating heading into the 2000 election but a very low personal approval rating. Voters approved of the way the country was but were disgusted by Bill Clinton' behavior. I'm not so sure it really hurt Al Gore though. Al Gore was running to continue Bill Clinton's policies without the personal baggage. He was not involved in Bill Clinton's misdeeds. Al Gore was Bill Clinton's Vice President, not his chaperone. Even the Bush campaign did not make a big deal over Bill Clinton's misdeeds during the campaign. I think it is just very difficult for one party to win the Presidency for more than 8 straight years. George HW Bush in 1988 was the exception. That comes from running against a really awful candidate like Michael Dukakis. 1988 would have been a squeaker if the Democrats had nominated a better candidate. Any opinions?

Last edited by MJoseph42286; 09-07-2023 at 12:51 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2023, 12:41 PM
 
Location: The Triad
34,090 posts, read 82,988,469 times
Reputation: 43666
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJoseph42286 View Post
Did Clinton's behavior cost Al Gore the election in 2000?
No. Ralph Naders behavior (candidacy) cost Al Gore the election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 01:19 PM
 
Location: New York Area
35,071 posts, read 17,024,527 times
Reputation: 30219
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
No. Ralph Naders behavior (candidacy) cost Al Gore the election.
Same way Perot cost Bush I the 1992 election.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJoseph42286 View Post
People say that Bill Clinton's behavior and impeachment cost Al Gore the election in 2000. Bill Clinton had a vey high job approval rating heading into the 2000 election but a very low personal approval rating. Voters approved of the way the country was but were disgusted by Bill Clinton' behavior. I'm not so sure it really hurt Al Gore though. Al Gore was running to continue Bill Clinton's policies without the personal baggage. He was not involved in Bill Clinton's misdeeds. Al Gore was Bill Clinton's Vice President, not his chaperone. Even the Bush campaign did not make a big deal over Bill Clinton's misdeeds during the campaign.
The way I remember it Al Gore was as exciting as paint drying during the campaign. Only later, in his movie Inconvenient Truth did he become a whirling charlatan. The overall campaign was boring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJoseph42286 View Post
I think it is just very difficult for one party to win the Presidency for more than 8 straight years. George HW Bush in 1988 was the exception. That comes from running against a really awful candidate like Michael Dukakis. 1988 would have been a squeaker if the Democrats had nominated a better candidate. Any opinions?
Significantly, 1988 was the last election in which California was in the GOP column. Thereafter, California switched from being reddish-purple to deep Blue.

There are other examples of 12+ years of White House holds, the most obvious of which is Roosevelt + Truman, 20 years. Just before that there was Harding + Coolidge + Hoover (12 years), and McKinley + Ted Roosevelt + Taft (16 years). I don't want to go earlier since 1856 - 1884 (GOP rule) was distorted by the Civil War and post-war carpetbagger governments.

Last edited by jbgusa; 09-07-2023 at 01:31 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 02:30 PM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
9,170 posts, read 13,253,306 times
Reputation: 10141
Default Did Clinton's behavior cost Al Gore the election in 2000?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJoseph42286 View Post
People say that Bill Clinton's behavior and impeachment cost Al Gore the election in 2000. Bill Clinton had a vey high job approval rating heading into the 2000 election but a very low personal approval rating. Voters approved of the way the country was but were disgusted by Bill Clinton' behavior. I'm not so sure it really hurt Al Gore though. Al Gore was running to continue Bill Clinton's policies without the personal baggage. He was not involved in Bill Clinton's misdeeds. Al Gore was Bill Clinton's Vice President, not his chaperone. Even the Bush campaign did not make a big deal over Bill Clinton's misdeeds during the campaign. I think it is just very difficult for one party to win the Presidency for more than 8 straight years. George HW Bush in 1988 was the exception. That comes from running against a really awful candidate like Michael Dukakis. 1988 would have been a squeaker if the Democrats had nominated a better candidate. Any opinions?
Did Clinton's behavior cost Al Gore the election in 2000?

Just going by myself but I think so. At the very least it was a factor.

I was one of the 3% who voted for Ralph Nadar, partially because I was Independent (also supported Ross Perot), partially because I respect Ralph Nadar, but also I was disgusted by Bill Clinton and thought he shamed the country. Although, today Clinton and Monica Lewinsky does seem so trivial now after the likes of <<cut>>.

Someone mentioned Ralph Nadar costing Gore the presidency. Cannot speak for others but I would have voted for Bush if Nadar did not run.

Last edited by mensaguy; 09-07-2023 at 02:36 PM.. Reason: We don't discuss current politicians in the History forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 02:34 PM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,398 posts, read 60,592,880 times
Reputation: 61017
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Did Clinton's behavior cost Al Gore the election in 2000?

Just going by myself but I think so. At the very least it was a factor.

I was one of the 3% who voted for Ralph Nadar, partially because I was Independent (also supported Ross Perot) but also, I was disgusted by Bill Clinton and thought he shamed the country. Although, Clinton and Monica Lewinsky does seem so trivial now after <<cut>>.

Someone mentioned Ralph Nadar costing Gore the presidency. Cannot speak for others but I would have voted for Bush if Nadar did not run.
There was certainly Clinton fatigue. But what really cost Gore the election was his inability to win his home state of Tennessee.

An before we hear the "But, but Florida", only one scenario gave Gore that state, the one where overvotes (two candidates selected) would all be counted for Gore.

Last edited by mensaguy; 09-07-2023 at 02:44 PM.. Reason: Quoted post edited.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 02:53 PM
 
Location: The Triad
34,090 posts, read 82,988,469 times
Reputation: 43666
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
An before we hear the "But, but Florida", only one scenario gave Gore that state...
The scenario that occurred.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 04:09 PM
 
8,418 posts, read 7,417,538 times
Reputation: 8767
Al Gore's loss...take your pick.

Clinton fatigue. But Gore kept Clinton at arms' length during the campaign. Clinton wasn't a happy camper about that, as he felt the old Slick Willy charm could have won the election for Gore, much like the Gipper's glow shown on Poppa Bush's election in 2012.

Ralph Nader the Green candidate. He did pull in 2.8 million votes, but IMO those votes would have needed to be in states like New Hampshire, Florida, or Nevada to affect the outcome of the election. And even then, one would have to suppose that a large majority of Green votes would have been Blue votes.

Gore's wooden personality. Even SNL was mocking him for it. And the interaction between GWB and Gore during one debate, where Bush was speaking, Gore walked up behind Bush, who turned, noticed Gore, gave him a quick nod of the chin, and then dismissed him, turned his back, ignored him, and finished speaking his response to a question. Shades of Poppa Bush looking at his wristwatch during one of his debates.

Hanging chads. The fiasco in Florida was eventually resolved in Bush's favor, but the punch card ballot system was a fuster-cluck. We simply will never know the intent of the Florida voters, we only know those ballots selected for Bush, for Gore, and for the discard pile.

But Tennessee - that's an excellent point. I had forgotten that Gore failed to carry his own state. Those 11 electoral votes would have swung the victory to Gore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 05:04 PM
 
Location: In the Pearl of the Purchase, Ky
11,087 posts, read 17,545,902 times
Reputation: 44414
I'd bet it did, and it didn't have anything to do with any candidate. I've seen a lot of elections, quite a few local, where the incumbent messed up somewhere and had to resign. In the special election or the next regular election after that happened, 9 times out of 10 the party of the person leaving office usually lost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 06:11 PM
 
5,714 posts, read 4,291,854 times
Reputation: 11713
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
No. Ralph Naders behavior (candidacy) cost Al Gore the election.

Maybe Al Gore's candidacy cost Nader the election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2023, 06:22 PM
 
78,421 posts, read 60,613,724 times
Reputation: 49725
Gore lost because of Elian Gonzalez.

Period.

1000ish votes in florida and the Cuban American vote in the state swung by 100k votes from 2000 to 2004.

Moderator cut: Inappropriate remarks for this forum were removed.
Welcome to history.

Last edited by mensaguy; 09-08-2023 at 01:04 PM.. Reason: Recent politics
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top