If the Democratic Party split into two: Clinton vs Gore...

[AP]

...which camp would you be in?

[janx]

1. Where on earth did this question come from?

?

Where did you get "Clinton vs. Gore"?

[GreenPartyVoter]

4. Seriously, I don't think they are different enough

to break away from each other.

The question would have been better phrased had it put Kucinich and Wellstone against Gore and Clinton.

[janx]

7. Right wing tabloid punditry. And people on this board

BELIEVE it!

Amazing.

[_NorCal_D_]

8. Good point.

Still, I would probably go with Clinton. B-)

[beyurslf]

29. Clinton. n /t

[AP]

11. I think Gore supporting Dean puts some differences in relief.

[sistersofmercy]

2. Clinton camp

[HILLARY SUPPORTER]

51. Clinton camp all the way....NT

[JVS]

3. Gore

Clinton shat the bed.

[LeahMira]

5. You didn't include...

... Green.
(She ducks!)

Honestly, I think that's not going to happen. But let's not hasten to a disaster, OK?

[Rowdyboy]

6. The perception that the Clintons back Clark and they're

all "DLC". Dean represents the "populist rebels" against the establishment. Gore opts for Dean, to keep the Clinton's candidate from maintaining their control of the party.

I personally think the theory is garbage but thats why the question was posed (I assume)

[Bush loves Jiang]

9. How about this little theory...

Both Clinton and Clark from AR.

Wasn't that easy?

[janx]

10. But it's all put out by the right wing. 24 hours a day.

And people on this board eat it up and grow more and more divided.

[rman]

16. "Clintons spread the (good) word about Clark"

International Herald Tribune
http://rasa.iht.com/articles/110542.html

"WASHINGTON Behind Wesley Clark's candidacy for the White House is a former president fanning the flames.

Clark said Thursday that he had had a series of conversations with Bill Clinton and his wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, as well as close aides to them and that all of them had encouraged him to run."

(more...)


now, where did this garbage theory come from again?

[janx]

20. But it's based on right wing propaganda!

Why bring it here?

[oasis]

62. Gore comes forward to save the Party. Clark comes forward to save America.

Clark has explained his resaon for entering the race for president. He is aware that his Democratic Party credentials are not the best. The General is convinced that the country can't afford another four years of Bush.

[ecstatic]

92. pure garbage

Just because they said some nice things about Clark does not mean they are evil and trying to keep a certain element in office.

[Iverson]

12. Less Filling! Tastes Great!

If the most important ice creams in the world were French Vanilla and Vanilla, for which one would you take to the streets in passionate advocacy?

[GreenPartyVoter]

24. *snort*

Too funny! :7

[helleborient]

13. I didn't vote...

Because I think this kind of split in the party is highly unlikely.

If nothing else, Bill Clinton is one of the most gifted political campaigners of all time, and pushing this kind of split would be very difficult to repair in the party in time to win the November election.

[janx]

18. The wingnut pundits are pushing for it very hard right now.

Here is but ONE of them:

Dissatisfied at how thoroughly forgotten he is among active Democrats and resentful of all the attention Sen. Hillary Clinton, his White House rival, is getting, Al has reportedly decided to flank the Clintons by backing Howard Dean for president.

Forget the November election. The fight we are witnessing is a battle for control of the Democratic Party.

In one corner stand the Clintons, sending contender after contender out to center ring in an effort to stop Dean from taking over their party. First Joe Lieberman came limping back. Then Wesley Clark ran away from the early primaries and forfeited the match. And now John Kerry is so far behind in New Hampshire that he is down for the count.

more at link http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/12928.htm

[Guaranteed]

14. Clinton will follow Gore.

Because, it's true- they're not that different. We're moving left, which is where Clinton probably wants to be anyway. There's no way we can avoid this fight. It has to happen, and Clinton's smart enough to know it.

[THUNDER HANDS]

15. Gore

I like Gore a lot better on the issues.

[On the Road]

17. Fascinating Question!

and the results are just as interesting.

Personally, I voted for Gore because of his increasing populism, his opposition to the war, and his vision.

I love Clinton, but he's become more establishment.

[AP]

21. Clinton said Gore was member of his admin who wanted to attack Iraq most

And I have no idea what people are talking about when the call him a populist.

To me, Gore is farther right than Clinton, and he's tone deaf when it comes to campaigning.

[janx]

22. Would you be so kind as to provide a source for that?

I'd like to read about it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

43. Edwards? The famous anti-warrior?

"Clinton said Gore was member of his admin who wanted to attack Iraq most"

Your guy voted for the war.

[AP]

45. My guy has a consistent message. Your guy's all over the place.

[Scott Lee]

64. He's consistent alright - he voted for war.

And that vote, as Kerry's dilemma is showing, might well be a campaign killer. Good luck.

[AP]

71. Gore supported Iraq attack when he was VP... now he says he's supporting

Dean because of his stance on the war, yet Dean has been all over the map, AND he supported 87 bil payout.

I understand Edwards (along with Clinton and Kerry) when he says that there was enough evidence to make America worried about SH, but that the real problem is Bush's abuse of authority and this execution in Iraq.

I don't understand what the hell Dean and Gore's perspectives are.

Somewhere in this clip, towards the end, Clinton talked about Gore being very enthusiastic about attacking Iraq on CSPAN

[arendt]

74. What is relevance of Al's "stances" to endorsing Dean? He endorses.

Now we have to drag all of Al's GOP-foisted baggage
into this?

I don't care. Al Gore represents some people in
this party. Al Gore gave an endorsement.

As they say, "let's move on."

arendt

[AP]

77. Al is the third person I've heard give an endorsement of Dean whose

stated reason contradicts the facts about Dean, and facts about the person making the endorsement.

- Gore endorses him because he was against invading Iraq. Clinton says Gore was the person in his cabinet who wanted to invade Iraq on just about any pretext.

- Jackson responds to Sharpton's criticism of Dean on race by saying no candidate will be 100% on the same page (but not on Jackson's page on the issue of race!!!!)

- That other NY black congressman endorses Dean saying that he displays same independence as CBC displayed when the unanimously opposed 87 bil for Iraq. But Dean said he was conditionally supportive of the 87 bil!!!

What's going on here?

Why can't these politiicans endorse Dean for stated reason's which are both internally consistent statements and which are consistent with their personas?

[arendt]

80. Oh, yeah, Kerry and Clark are models of consistency

> Gore endorses him because he was against invading Iraq. Clinton
> says Gore was the person in his cabinet who wanted to invade Iraq
> on just about any pretext.

Fact 1: Last year (Not while he was Clinton's VP) in public
(not heresay from Clinton, who is according to this thread
an interested party)Al Gore opposed THIS war with Iraq.

Where is the contradiction?

> Why can't these politiicans endorse Dean for stated reason's which
> are both internally consistent statements and which are consistent
> with their personas?

Why can't John Kerry give an internal/consistent statment about
why he voted for the Patriot Act, the IWR, etc?

Why can't Wes Clark give an internal/consistent statement about
how he has been as thick as thieves with neocons and Homeland
Security companies?

Answer: because politics is increasingly corrupt. And they are
all one degree of corrupt or another. Nobody is clean. You just
want to shine the light ONLY on Dean.

arendt

[AP]

83. Did you see me claim they were?

I'll leave that to someone else.

Fact 1: Last year (Not while he was Clinton's VP) in public
(not heresay from Clinton, who is according to this thread
an interested party)Al Gore opposed THIS war with Iraq.


That's when Clinton made the comment that Al might not be very consistent.

Dean is also inconsistent. Today, he's not the man he was when he was governor of VT.

[arendt]

86. Sorry, what is your point? Sounds like you say all are inconsistent.

But, I must admit that the GOP must be loving this.

I'm irritated by Kerry and Clark, your irritated
by Gore and Dean.

Big win all around for the GOP - WHOSE MEME THIS IS.

arendt

[CWebster]

19. Gore is the torchbearer for the future

Clinton is the past.

Speculation about a potential struggle or powerplay has crossed my mind, it has bubbled beneath the surface for quite a while. Should the DLC and their puppets continue to divide the party and steer it closer to Bush there will be less resolve to challenge Bush when a united front matters most. Would they sabotage all to maintain their lock of party domination?

[oasis]

67. When Chimpy retains the WH, Gore and his torch will be outside in the snow

We have to fix the country first and then fix the party. If we allow the Rwing another four years to function, Democrats will fall into disarray on which course to take.

[CWebster]

73. And how nice of you to assist them

by assuming their mindset.

[returnable]

94. Really?

Al Gore? The man who so alienated the base in 2000 that many Dems turned to Nader? That Al Gore is the torchbearer for the future?

[Kurovski]

23. Yeah, terrific

do the Repubelickins' job and muse on dividing the Democrats.

Stick together, stick together and stick it out, people. Save the navel-gazing for after we get back our country.

[unfrigginreal]

25. Won't happen

Clinton will be backing Dean.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

26. As will Kerry, Edwards, Kucinich, Gephardt, Lieberman, et al.

Same if someone else takes the nomination.

I'm wondering how certain supporters respond when their candidate endorses someone they've been flaming for months?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RBHam]

28. Some people here don't belong to a PARTY

The Constitution says "We The People" not "We the Party"

[arendt]

32. Yeah, but the DU rules say this is a Democratic forum.

And my contention is that this thread harms Democrats.

arendt

[janx]

34. The idea of the thread (not AP) is meant to harm Democrats.

It's repeating today's right wing LIE: that the Democrats are divided between Clinton and Gore.

The right wing is good at its rhetoric and lies. It has reached a level at which even loyal Democrats believe them.

Edit: Tucker Carlson is talking about this split on CNN at this very moment. He is perpetuating the lie.

[arendt]

30. I'll try again, moderator. What is the positive value of this thread?

Who benefits if we start chosing up sides between
Clinton and Gore?

Answer: not the Democrats.

Before this thread was posted, I was unaware that
there were any sides to choose between.

I have heard not one word of an open rift between
Clinton and Gore. They are professional politicians.

This thread is amateurish, self-indulgent, and
of no redeeming value to real Democrats.

Why do you want to encourage people to air such
differences? Just asking.

arendt

[davidinalameda]

31. as if there aren't many camps in the party anyway

these fights are healthy

I think that the party will be united going into the general election. I would like for the party to start uniting as soon as possible.

I think that the Gore endorsement helps that.

I would have much rather seen him endorse Clark than Dean but oh well. Dean is someone we can all get behind.

[arendt]

33. Its the MEME "if the party split..." - why introduce it?

Why fan the flames?

In a different thread, I suggested that it was
a smart move to use this occasion to UNIFY the
party. But AP sees it as an opportunity to DIVIDE
the party.

arendt

[janx]

35. It's the right wing lie of the day. It's in newspapers, online

publications, on television, and on radio.

AP's only mistake was to buy into it (as so many others here have done).

[arendt]

36. What say, AP? Innocent (if sad) mistake, or deliberate?

Thanks Janx.

I have a very low threshold for disinformation,
and the minute I saw this thread, my BS meter
went off scale.

Its good to hear that this IS the right wing
meme du jour. And its good to help stamp it out.

arendt

[arendt]

38. This thread is like the Jewish mother joke about the two shirts.

So a mother gives her son two shirts for his birthday.

The next day, he goes to her house wearing one of
the shirts, and she says:

"So, you didn't like the other shirt?"

----

This thread is that kind of double bind. Its pure
poison.

arendt

[janx]

84. HA! Good analogy. And yes--

it's poison.

[janx]

42. My tolerance level is low right now too.

As I posted on another thread, I have now heard the "Clinton/Gore" split lie from:

Clifford May
Imus
Tucker Carlson
Dick Morris
Buchanan

And it's only 10:30 a.m. here.

There will be much more of this. They're very fierce about this one. Wait until the radio talk shows get going.

[AP]

52. Check the archives. A week ago I said this division was manufactured.

It's manufactured by the right. But I think a lot of Dean people are embracing it too.

Today, I just want to know how people feel. I want to know if what the Republicans couldn't achieve after 10 years of attacking Clinton and manufacturing controversy (because the guy actually stood a chance of dragging the public to the left, even if it was only moderately to the left) is going to be achieved by Gore and Dean within the Democratic party.

[janx]

57. Dean supporters are not embracing this, I assure you.

We have the utmost respect for both Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

[arendt]

58. Thanks for answering.

This Dean person does not want to manufacture a split.

Its the people who continue to paint Dean as a looney leftist
that want to manufacture a split.

Clinton was farther to the right than Richard Nixon (not
my quote, and a common sentiment). Your statement...

> (GOP)...attacking Clinton...(because the guy actually stood a
> chance of dragging the public to the left, even if it was only
> moderately to the left)

just doesn't pass muster. Clinton is a master politician,
and he used it to sell NAFTA, GATT, Welfare termination.
He threw all that overboard in what he thought was the
interest of the Democratic Party's continued existence.

Now the party is paying the price. It looks like Republican
lite. Holy Joe Lieberman, Zell Traitor Miller, and all the
jerk senators who voted for the Medicare Poison Pill.

I'm not anti-Clinton. I just want the party to stop licking
boots and start kicking media and GOP ass.

And we don't do that by playing up internal squabbles.
The GOP don't have squables because they're not a political
party; they are a fascist party.

arendt

[AP]

60. If Clinton was so right wing, why did the RW try to destroy him?

Clinton was by no means the most liberal president ever. However, notice, we've never had a super liberal president. FDR and Lincoln saved America during times of crises while being committed to democratic principles, however those were rare circumstances. Jefferson, Jackson, Wilson, LBJ and JFK all cared deeply about democracy, but all of them had their bad sides too. None of them was a Dennis Kucinich.

The system just isn't set up for extremism. Clinton, however, definitely tried to pull the country towards the left (ie, more wealth and power for the middle and working class) in a system totally rigged to make the wealthy wealthier, which is why the RW hated them and tried to discredit him. Even the tiny increments Clinton fought for cost concentrated wealth billions.

Incidentally, I don't think Gore and Dean have that same committement that Clinton had.

[arendt]

65. Ever heard of Carol Quigley?

He was a professor of Clinton's at Georgetown,
who coined the "yankees vs cowboys war" meme.

Summary:

yankees = rockefeller east coast establishment
cowboys = texas oil money and reactionary conservatives
Clinton = a yankee trying to get power away from Bush
(Look how he got the cream of Wall St. on his team.)

> The system just isn't set up for extremism. Clinton, however,
> definitely tried to pull the country towards the left

I agree. The system is set up so these two factions of
extremely rich folks fight by proxy about who runs the
country.

I agree that Clinton pulled the country back from ruinous
deficits and a wrecked economy. Its not for nothing he's
called "the best Republican president we ever had". To
say that backing up from obvious disaster is "pulling to
the left" is an overstatement.

You want to look at what was *optional* that Clinton did:
NAFTA, GATT, Welfare Termination. That was not "moving left".

You think Clinton had a commitment to "moving left"? I
think he at least had a commitment to the forms of democracy
and some semblance of fiscal fairness. W is a rapacious
thug. Anyone looks "left" compared to him.

I think Al Gore is an intellectual more than a politician.
He hitched a ride on Clinton, and when it was his turn to
drive, he couldn't pull it off. Not because his ideas were
bad, but because he couldn't deal with the Whore Media.

As for Howard Dean, in today's media environment, I will
never, ever learn anything unbiased about him. I can only
look at his organization and say "thank goodness for this
honest and functioning bunch of real Democrats."

arendt

[AP]

76. The Bush's have connections to Wall St, to big banks and insurance...

...companies and accountancy firms too.


Have we forgotten about Clinton's attemtps to improve SEC regulations and reform accountancy profession which were thwarted by Republicans?

Have we forgotten that, as governor, Clinton broke Stephens, Inc's monopoly on issuing bonds for state construction projects, which saved (and made) taxpayers millions, and cost Stephens, Inc millions?

Have we forgotten that Clinton repeatedly tried to get a more progressive tax code?

Have we forgotten that right wingers from all over America, with support from all sorts of industries, and not just Texas oil companies tried to destroy Clinton?

[arendt]

78. Hey, I'm trying to give Clinton credit. But there are limits.

I already said that Clinton saved us from fiscal
disaster. Your first three points are all fiscal
(SEC, Stephens, tax code). I already gave you that.

My point is to say that "yankees and cowboys" is
"good cop/bad cop". In my opinion, Clinton is just
the good cop. And, these days, I would settle for
an honest, decent cop.

How much more do I have to give you?

I want to get back to stamping out this divide-and-
destroy meme of a Clinton/Gore Cage Deathmatch.

arendt

[CWebster]

87. Because they could.

They don't need a reason. Remember Clinton tried to work with them and what did that get him? He was strongest when he stood up to them.

Look at how they are casting Dean as their preferred competition to cast the illusion that he is weak.

Even with all their money and control, Bush has weakened them, and who would've anticipated such a grassroots backlash--even our own party was so out of touch they didn't anticipate it - but what were we to do--our own party was becoming increasingly worthless as opposition to the idiot boy king.

[Donna Zen]

37. Clinton

Clinton appreciates what it means to live in democracy. He also has carefully stayed in the background and out of this primary. At any time he could have made a move like Al Gore did. But for all of his ego, Clinton chose not to make this primary all about him. He must have remembered that in 1992 at this time, he had 3% of the vote.

But now Gore has declared the primaries over, and decreed the fundraising begin.

Al Gore: a supreme court of one.

[arendt]

39. Congratulations on buying the right wing party line of the day

Al Gore has no right to make an endorsement.

Al Gore, the "liar" has "declared the primaries over".

Will you listen to what you are saying? This kind
of nastiness is just what Rove wants.

arendt

[Donna Zen]

50. Al Gore

knows exactly what he did, and so do you.

The right wing party is quite happy about this. I did not call Gore a "liar" but feel free. The primaries ARE over, that is why you are feeling so superiior and free to put words in my mouth.

Clinton has a huge ego, but decided rightly, that the primary season was a time for people to vote and make their own choice. Gore decided is was time for him to exert his ego and take away our vote.

This is not an ordinary endorsement. To pretend otherwise does not become you.

You may label my opinions as "nasty" in an attempt to marginalized me, but I reject your label. For while I know longer have a say in the Democratic nomination, I do know who I am. I am a person who plays by the rules, unfortunately, those rules that have served us well for over 200 years, no longer apply.

To throw away your rights for seemingly personal gain, is a dangerous thing. Be careful what you wish for.

[janx]

63. Donna, I know you from a couple of other forums in the past,

and I respect your opinion. But I can't agree with you here. Al Gore told us that he would endorse one of the candidates at some future time.

He has done so.

He did not do anything underhanded, and he did not derail the primary process. The process is going on.

That's all there is to it.

[Donna Zen]

75. Al Gore's special place

comes with special responsibilities. Al Gore made a decision to stay out of the primaries, and now he comes and steps all over many, many people.

If Al Gore had cared about this party, then perhaps he should have been speaking out against the regime long before now. To go visible after 8 campaign's have been working hard, is disgusting. That this party thinks someone stepping on the vote is doing the right thing, pushing the rank and file around, and essentially telling the voters that they can just stay home and send money, is beyond anything that the GOP would pawn off on their constituents and expect them to swallow this poison as democracy.

[janx]

79. He said he would endorse one of them.

He did not say he would wait until one was nominated; he actually said that he would endorse one from the bunch of those running.

Nobody complained about it then.

And then he kept his word and did what he said he was going to do.

[Donna Zen]

88. He said he would stand up for us

and he never bothered doing that. 911 Al's GWB's my president????

Look, Clinton will someday support the candidate. That is the correct position for a party heavy. This is like Terry McAuliffe endorsing someone.

Al knows he did more than endorse Dean. He suggested that the party primaries must end NOW! Time to fundraise against dubya. Since Dean's your guy you are probably enjoying this sickening display of Al's power. I am not. I have no use for Dean, I find him too much of a politician and a person of little honor.

I am sorry that Al Gore, a person of so little understanding of democracy, ever achieved a position of stature in what was left of the Democratic Party. Never forget, both Gore and Dean are DLC, this is all happening not for the democratic wing or the Democratic party, but for two pretenders.

[arendt]

89. There is no objectivity here, at all

> Never forget, both Gore and Dean are DLC, this is all happening not
> for the democratic wing or the Democratic party, but for two
> pretenders.

You just admitted you flat out hate them both. You don't care
to hear anything positive about either one of them.

You don't care that Dean has single-handedly rejuvenated
the Democratic grassroots.

You don't care that Holy Joe was using Al's silence as
life support for his disgusting candidacy.

You don't care that the party has eight candidates and needs
some shaking up right away.

You just hate Al Gore and Howard Dean and you don't mince
words.

You use DLC as a cuss-word against Dean even as you support
DLCers yourself. What an incredible bunch of double-speak.

arendt

[arendt]

81. He spoke out; and everytime the media hammered him, then dropped him

Al gives a major, thoughtful speech every few months. If
he spoke more frequently, he'd be accused of "campaigning"
or "misusing his position as titular head of the party".
He takes a lot of heat for those speeches. I give him
credit. This latest flap just proves the press hates Al
Gore and has convinced lots of Dems to hate him too.

I feel scared that so many Dems so gleefully hate the man
we elected president.

Like some wag said: "If Al Gore walked on water, the media
would say he couldn't swim."

> If Al Gore had cared about this party, then perhaps he should have
> been speaking out against the regime long before now.

I'm sure that if he spoke out MORE than he actually did, you
would criticize him for not respecting his place and upstaging
the primaries.

arendt

[arendt]

82. Duplicate, sorry

[arendt]

68. Who's putting words in who's mouth?

> This is not an ordinary endorsement. To pretend otherwise
> does not become you.

I never said it was "ordinary". I just said Gore had the
right to do it.

> You may label my opinions as "nasty" in an attempt to marginalized
> me,

I labelled the opinion as coming from Karl Rove, who is
nasty. I asked you, politely, to "listen to what you are
saying." The fact that you share the opinion is not going
to stop me from calling Rove nasty. You are buying trouble
by taking my anger at Rove onto yourself, which is exactly
what he wants you to do.

> I did not call Gore a "liar" but feel free.

Why do you hate Al Gore so much?

Clearly, my statement was sarcasm. But for you it is true.
Why do you parrot whores like Joe Klein who spouted this
lie all over again on CNN yesterday and today.

> Al Gore knows exactly what he did, and so do you.

Yes, mommy. I was a bad boy - NOT. That is infantile
putdown. And just what word are you trying to put in my
mouth with that?

----

My personal opinion is that this would have happened WHENEVER
Al Gore stuck his head up. By getting it out of the way now,
he spares the party this distraction later. Or, do you hate
Al so much you would rather he never shows his face again?
I mean, he was only elected President.

arendt

on edit: change juvenille to infantile, clarification.

[Tinoire]

40. Other n/t

[JohnKleeb]

41. was gonna say the same

[Melodybe]

44. I think that the Clintons will support the nominee

I think they care enough about average Americans to wait until the nominee is announced, they DON'T want the vote to split.

[bobthedrummer]

46. Neither.

I'm an independent voter, anti-fascist. No more of this "third way" stuff would be a good beginning to a better Party IMO.

[TheDonkey]

47. Gore's new found liberalism and populist spark

I'm sure after the 2000 selection gore got a mighty wake up call that the DLC and then DNC admins could care less about him or the people's vote.

He's become a lot more liberal and vocal it seems about his anger to DC and old Democratic leaders. He should be the DLC while not the devil is certainly not the direction we need to continue to fall.

[w4rma]

48. context

The Democratic Party: Outside In
…
The Dean split is mirrored in the centrist New Democrat movement as well. No organization has been more hostile to Dean than the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). In May, Al From and Bruce Reed, the chairman and the president of the DLC -- the group that served as a policy springboard for Clinton's rise -- wrote their now-infamous manifesto warning that nominating Dean, whom they view as hopelessly left-wing, would bring certain defeat for Democrats in 2004. But, for months, another prominent New Democrat has been making a different case. Simon Rosenberg, who cut his teeth on Clinton's 1992 campaign and now heads the New Democrat Network (NDN), sees Dean as the most innovative and potentially transformative Democrat since Clinton himself. Like Stern, Rosenberg is a bit of a rebel within his own movement. He once worked for From, but his organization is now challenging the DLC and is becoming an increasingly influential player in Democratic politics. Unlike the more top-down DLC, NDN is building a grassroots network of donors and has become a key player in the new world of 527s. "NDN has not endorsed Dean or embraced him, but we have given our opinion that this is a serious campaign that is going to change the party," says Rosenberg.

As the party's split into Deaniacs and anti-Dean Clintonites unfolds, one of the most intriguing subplots concerns the machinations of Gore. Immediately after the Florida recount was decided in 2000, Gore's senior aides were purged from the DNC and Clinton's were installed. Some ex-Gore staffers are still bitter about the coup, and several express admiration for what Dean is doing.

The two men have a strained history, but lately Gore is sounding more and more like Dean. His three most important speeches since leaving office have been harsh attacks on President Bush's Iraq policy and his abuse of the Patriot Act. The two most recent were delivered before MoveOn.org, the Internet network for grassroots liberals, which is overwhelmingly pro-Dean. Some suspect that, just as Dean went outside the Beltway and built his own high-tech grassroots army to bypass the sclerotic D.C. establishment, so is Gore. It's not a bad way for him to exercise influence in the party, if he wants to make a potential endorsement more powerful or if he still harbors hopes of running for president in 2008. "The rest of the Democratic infrastructure is controlled by the Clintons," says one top Democrat.

Perhaps Gore would not endorse the former Vermont governor (though Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign manager, says "they talk relatively regularly"). Regardless, he'll have to choose sides, because the Democrats are splitting into two parties: the party of Clinton, and the party of Dean.

Ryan Lizza is an associate editor at TNR.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/13/opinion/main583484.shtml
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=84412

…
PARTY DIVISIONS. Still, much more is behind the Stop-Dean Democrats than heat-of-battle hard feelings. The unofficial board of directors of Democrats Inc. -- the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, Democratic Leadership Council chief Al From, and katzenjammer consultant James Carville -- is probably almost as eager to see Dean defeated as the Bushies. For if, over the next 11 grueling months, Dean manages to win the nomination and convince America that he should be President, the Clinton mafia will lose control of the party and possibly the election of 2008.

The war within the party, a Democratic national operative mused recently, runs even deeper than that. The bad feelings toward Dean, he suggested, stem from a 23-year rift that has never healed. In the 1980 campaign, Senator Teddy Kennedy challenged a badly damaged President Jimmy Carter for the Democratic nomination. Dean was a Carter guy. Kerry and Bill Clinton, who as President made no bones about his contempt for Carter, were Kennedy men. Neither side has gotten over the bruising fight that ended in Carter's nomination, the landslide election of Ronald Reagan, and 12 long years of Republican Presidencies.

Now the Stop-Dean forces of the Clinton/Kennedy wing of the Democratic Party have two horses in the race -- Kerry and Wesley Clark. To bolster Kerry's faltering campaign and bring order to its internecine bickering, Kennedy has dispatched his chief of staff, Mary Beth Cahill, to take charge. Clark, the general from Arkansas, is surrounded by shop-worn Clintonistas.
…
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/dec2003/nf2003121_1127_db009.htm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=94170

Dean is probably not the McGovern of Democratic establishment fears
By Suzanne Nossel

NEW YORK – It's an open secret that most establishment Democrats and liberals in the news media are waiting for someone - anyone - to dethrone former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean as the party's presidential frontrunner.

Dr. Dean may or may not be the answer to the party's prayers. But well-connected and well-heeled Democrats should take another look at him, at least for long enough to see what his candidacy says about the electorate and the coming election.

Establishment phobia of Dean originates in the post-9/11 Democratic realization that to unseat President Bush, the party must win back public trust on national security issues. Hence the powerful appeal of candidates like Sen. John Kerry and Gen. Wesley Clark, with their military backgrounds and foreign-policy accomplishments. Dean, by contrast, with his staunch opposition to the Iraq war and shaky medical deferment during the Vietnam War, is portrayed as another George McGovern - a darling of the elite left who'll never appeal to all-important middle-of-the-road voters. Further, the insiders worry about Dean's "anger," concerned that what plays well with party diehards turns off ordinary voters.

But this view misreads both Dean and the electorate. It is precisely because of Dean's combative temperament that, despite opposing the war, he isn't seen as soft on Saddam Hussein, or on much of anything. Democrats are right that the 2001 attacks put a premium on leaders who will stand up to threats. But, rightly or wrongly, policy prescriptions and past military service may ultimately matter less to voters than intangible perceptions of who seems tough.
…
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1203/p11s01-coop.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=95692

[arendt]

49. Yeah, just heard this Rove spin on "The Connection"

According to these guys, you should all focus
on how the Democratic Party is "self-destructing"
instead of on how a peaceful acknowledgement of
the power of the Dean Campaign is bringing insiders
on board.

We dare not let peace break out in the Democratic
Party. Keep them fighting. Invent fights. Pump
them up against each other.

This is just what the GOP wants.

Why does any sane Democrat buy it?

arendt

[w4rma]

53. I think there may be some sort of *personality* split in the Party.

Clinton, Gore, Clark, Kerry, Dean, Carter

Why is it that some folks who like Clinton also like Kerry and Clark?

Why is it that some folks who like Gore also like Dean and Carter?

Their policies aren't very different. I don't really think it's a power struggle. (At least I hope it isn't a power struggle.)

[arendt]

56. News flash: Dems aren't lockstep GOP stepford pols...

Thank you for acknowledging that it is not
"a power struggle"

I'm with janx. Someone needs to give the
media a tranquilizer. There having a heart
attack because they get to bash Al Gore some
more. Whores.

arendt

[janx]

54. You DID?!

Holy Schmoly, Rocky! This is getting ridiculous!

What's "The Connection"?

[arendt]

55. The Connection is a talk show run by a glib libertarian - Dick Gordon

I will grant that the guy is quite good, but
he is a screaming libertarian.

Got his start on PUBLIC radio in Boston. Guy
has no shame. Walked away from the station that
made his name because they couldn't pay him
what he demanded. Now he is nationally syndicated.

I will say that he is less biased than that
shill Tom Ashbrook, another PBS libertarian.

I love how "fair and balanced" PBS is. </sarcasm>

arendt

[janx]

61. Add Rush to the list. Now it's:

Clifford May
Imus
Tucker Carlson
Dick Morris
Buchanan (though he had somewhat of his own script)
Dick Gordon
Rush Limbaugh

...someone mentioned Jack Cafferty's show on CNN, but I don't know who specifically mentioned the lie there, so I can't add that name quite yet.

[janx]

66. Limbaugh's losing it, alternately shouting and then doing his

wheezing, Muttley laugh...

Rush: "There's bad blood here, folks! You can smell it! You can smell it!"

[eileen_d]

59. I need a third option

3: :wtf:

[phirili]

69. Gore premature endorsement of Dean success; represents Gore ego gone wild

[arendt]

70. Keep spouting those GOP talking points n/t

n/t

[janx]

91. You have PM, arendt.

.

[arendt]

93. HUH?

You want me to cover all afternoon? No can do.
I'm just about out of gas.

arendt

[Hep]

72. Superman, NO BATMAN!

No, Spiderman. Yeah, thats it, spiderman.

Any other imaginary scenarios? Or was this a celebrity boxing fantasy?

[goobergunch]

85. Gore (n/t)

[Ksec]

90. If Gore acted like a leader is supposed to, maybe, so Clinton.