Gore comes out for single-payer national health care

And there you have it folks, Albert Gore sealing his fate two years before the next election. The only question remaining now is, will the Democratic primary voters (who are much more liberal than the run of the mill Democrat) nominate the sure loser?

 

On this issue, the status quo has pretty much failed embarrassingly. Harry and Louise got their man in the White House, and health care in this country gets worse by the hour.

I think Gore has realized as well that running left is going to be the best way to get the nomination - the right wing of the Democratic party getting its collective ass handed to it, and all.

With Bush using his huge mandate (cough) to push for mass privatization of the federal government, bi-partisanship is dead on arrival. That means in the next race, there will actually be a disagreement on issues. Democrats win campaigns based on issues.

Re-elect Al Gore.

 

I ain't sold on single-payer.

But it's pretty obvious the current system ain't working:

Medical insurers courting disaster

The ballot measure lost -- and I would've voted against it -- but here's another take from the same guy, whose opinion I respect because (unlike some people on this board) he actually thinks:

Health insurance system hangs on

 

Go Al go!!!

America is absolutely crying out for Socialism right now. The government taking complete control of one seventh of the US economy is exactly the right move.

Please Santa, I've been good. Make the Democrats nominate this guy again. Please?

 

I bet Bradley loved hearing this. Gore is heartless. Please, I beg every Democrat here, do not put him on the ballot again. I would like to have a better choice than Gore and Bush.

Clinton doesn't like him, Bradley doesn't like him, his traveling press core hated him, his home state didn't elect him and he and Leiberman aren't the best of friends. Some of his advisors had some awful things to say about him after the election.

And if he is going to give us two years of "i should of won" and more back seat policy driving when he is nothing but another citizen now, the American people are going to grow to hate him.

When will the Dem's do the math?

 

There's the rub...who you got in mind?

 

>(unlike some people on this board) he actually thinks

Thinking make brain hurt.

 

If it would make you feel better, I could tell you what to think. That works for a lot of people.

 

I will take anyone else. Anyone.


I'll move this down from my edit above:


Clinton doesn't like him, Bradley doesn't like him, his traveling press core hated him, his home state didn't elect him and he and Leiberman aren't the best of friends. Some of his advisors had some awful things to say about him after the election.

And if he is going to give us two years of "i should of won" and more back seat policy driving when he is nothing but another citizen now, the American people are going to grow to hate him.

When will the Dems do the math?

 

Wow. This is pretty shocking news, to me anyway.

In general, he got a really, really bad rap on this. Remember Bush running as a uniter, not a divider, and a compassionate conservative? Those were naked political calculation, and if any of you had an ounce of doubt about that 2 years ago, you had to have shed those doubts by now.

But yeah, that WP article did come across this way. It wasn't just the one line from Gore. The way that line worked with other lines, made it seem like a mechanical process. Step 1, assessing the Dems' performance last Tuesday. Step 2, assessing how that can work for Al.

I'm just really skeptical of anyone who tries to depict the Dems' losses as crushing. They were crushing politically, in that they lost the Senate. They were manifestly NOT crushing ideologically.

 

Actually, I think that's a pretty fair assesment of the midterms. I thought Ford's op-ed in the Post a couple of days ago was dead on, though, about why there were losses.

EDIT: As far as the healthcare thing, I think this is a huge mistake for Gore with regard to the general election. It may work for him in the primaries, but it won't take a very large pin to prick this balloon once the real election starts.

 

Of course compassionate conservatism was a calculated politcal move. But Bush was putting a spin on the stance he already had. Bending his angle a little. Gore just flip flops stances whenever he feels it will serve him personally.

Spin is a necessary evil. Chaning your mind is the sign of a pensive politician. Gore doesn't bends his stances, he blatantly contradicts himself and panders to the audience. He is not the only one, there are few strong backbones in politics these days, but no one's is weaker than Gore's.

 

Maybe Al's purpose isn't to win the general. Maybe he just wants to push this issue onto the agenda with a strong primary run. Sort of like Pat Buchanan tried to push his agenda onto the table in '92 and '96. Pat had to know he was never going to win.

What's funny is that way the media pack have accepted the definition of this as a party-changing election. It'd be hilarious, in a farcical sort of way, if it didn't have such an impact on our political process. The Dems are overreacting because if they don't, the media will depict them as out of touch. It's just amazing to me how the media follows RNC spin.

I'm hopeful that this worm will turn, and you Reeps will get that helpless feeling of seeing the media hop on the other guy's bandwagon, and drive the entire debate. Got sack?

Anyway, it's good that Gore, at the least, is getting this forgotten issue back on the table.

 

If you want to bank of that razor thin edge again, then go for it. But I know a lot of Gore voters who wouldn't vote for him again. And frankly if he had trouble not seeming condescneding and overbearing in getting his message out as a canidate, i can't wait to see the high wire act he does as "out of office guy who feels wronged but uses his time to second guess the sitting president". That should bring independent voters who didn't like his sighs in the first debate right around.

superdave, if your unlikely theory is correct and Gore sacrfices himself as whipping boy for his party by bringing to the forefront several issues from the left that Dems in office might be cautious to champion, then I will change my opinion of Gore completely. But I am not betting on it.

 

Gore isn't the guy to sell this message - if he's the nominee, he's the Bob Dole of 2004.

I'm certainly not sold on a government-run system, but who would intentionally create the managed care mess we have now? Nobody. Citizens of the greatest country on earth are entitled to good health care. End of story.

I've always felt that one of the hang-ups is the word "insurance." People don't want insurance. They want health care. The whole concept of pooling risks without universal coverage is pointless.

 

Why not? He's 3-0 on presidential tickets.

 

No love for Edwards?

 

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/TheNote.html

Speaking of Gore: just still more proof that Republicans are pond scum.

 

If you want someone to advocate liberal causes, and I do, why Al Gore? It just comes across as so johnny come lately.

If you want a true liberal, go with the real deal. Russ Feingold in 2004. In addition to his progressive views, no one questions his integrity.

 

As if a Democrat never did anything stupid.

And, no, I am not condoning their actions. People need to get hobbies. Too much free time wasted on way too many stupid people.