First off, Gore was elected but due to the Supreme Court illegally stopping the vote recount, Bush was installed in office. More people voted for Gore even though Jebbie Bush suppressed the black vote.
Secondly, of course it would be better. Gore is a brilliant man. He has long years of public service while Bush was still an alcoholic bum. Gore is nominated for a Nobel Peace prize and an Academy Award. Bush has been nominated for the President who has taken the most vacation during his terms. I am ashamed for my country every time Junior opens his addled mouth.
Gore would have continued Clinton's motto which is Terrorism is Job One. There would have been no 9-11 because Gore wouldn't have ignored the August 6th, 2001 memo stating Bin Laden Determined to Strike. Gore was part of the airline security commission and would have instituted the recommendations.
Gore wouldn't have talked the economy into a recession the minute he got into office so he could get the tax cuts for the rich passed. Gore wouldn't have gutted FEMA so the Katrina victims would have had the superior skills of James Lee Witt's FEMA instead of heckava job Brownie's failures.
Also, Gore has no ties to oil or military that would make him want to start a fake war to make his father and cronies rich. Haliburton and Exxon are making obscene profits from this "fake" war based on lies while thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands Iraqis die and the American taxpayer foots the bill with "pallets of money."
Gore was planning to start a drive for alternate energy research and development. Gore has a long history of working for environmental issues. The movie about global warming that is nominated for a best documentary is based on his findings and work over the span of his political career. He also would have funded stem cell research. Both technologies would put America in the leading edge and stimulate growth without causing massive debt. We have gone from a comfortable surplus to near bankruptcy under this corrupt fool. This is as objective as I can get with the Decider.
2007-02-07 03:43:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by dsgrntld1 1
·
2⤊
3⤋
Hell no we wouldn't have been better off. 9/11 still would have occurred and the democrats wouldn't have done a single thing about it, which would lead to other terrorist attacks. Don't get me wrong, in a different time, Gore would have made one hell of a president but when it comes to national security, Democrats cant cut it. You have to blame allot of the problems we are having with Iraq on the democrats. Who was it that DRASTICALLY cut our military down? Clinton. Who (on a few occasions) was offered Bin Laden and turned him free? Clinton.......I am completely terrified of this next presidential election because if a democrat is elected which will probably happen he/she will pull our troops out of Iraq and just let the terrorist sit back and say to themselves "Holy **** we can kill thousands and have no consequences."
Yet it seems as that the democratic mindset is growing. The anti-war people. All they do is *****. And they offer NO ALTERNATIVE. I love that they have the right to protest,it's great. But if you are going to act like you so damn smart and you know everything, then when you sit there and burn the flag and talk **** about the president and the troops and republicans, then offer some kind of alternative to the war..............HMMMMMMM............Ya ain't got one do ya?.................still waiting................no?..........THEN STOP BITCHING JUST FOR THE SAKE OF BEING HEARD!!!!!!!
2007-02-07 04:06:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by raminrobert 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I doubt we'd have been better of in ANY way.
Without the tax cuts we got from Bush, the economy would have remained moribund after the 2000 Recession and the effects of 9/11 (and, yes, 9/11 would still have occurred).
Also, after 9/11 terrorism would have grown because Gore would not have responded in any meaningful way, and would probably have not fixed the holes in our security.
I really fail to see anything he stands for as being good for America.
2007-02-07 03:39:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
We were already bombing Iraq (Clinton did it, along with an Aspirin factory... remember). Remember also, it was the Clinton administration that first accused, and continued to accuse, Iraq of having WMD's. However, as spineless as Gore is, I doubt he would have done anything.
He would have raised taxes (or that was his promise, if you recall) which means you would have taken home about 8% less on you paycheck.
He would have curtailed our natural resource developement and thus driven up our dependency on foreign oil.
The stock market would have been in the toilet as consumers would have suffered from less disposable income due to higher taxes. Combined with rising energy costs, tax increases on corporations would have killed our economic growth.
Civil rights would have taken a back seat under his administration. Remember, his own father voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The nut doesn't fall far from the tree.
He would have continued to cut the military, as did Clinton, which would make us more vulnerable to attacks by our enemies.
We would be far more involved in following the UN mandates, even to the point of placing our troops under UN command, as was suggested by the Clinton administration.
2007-02-07 03:37:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by merlins_new_apprentice 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
We would likely be more focused on Co2 emissions given his movie. I think there would be more emphasis on education. I also believe we wouldnt be at a 14 yr low vs the pound sterling. I think we would have a more socialist society which I am not in favor of. But I would trade alot of that for the erasure of the Patriot act and the Nationalistic fervor that you see on some of these posts. It couldnt possibly be all roses and likely he would have made some big mistakes but his character would lead me to believe he would let go of them rather than commiting more to a failing cause. Gores problem is he comes off as an intellectual and smart people rub alot of americans wrong.
2007-02-07 04:24:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
FYI, Gore supported the invasion of Iraq.
I see no reason to think we'd be in a better situation with a blooming idiot like al gore in office.
Also, i don't think we're really in such bad shape. Why are we in bad shape? things are actually looking up nicely.
That seems to be the major division between democrats and republicans- with democrats we are always in trouble, always struggling and the outlook is gloomy, the country is in terrible shape, everyone hates us and we hate ourselves.
with republicans at least there is hope and optimism, belief in principles and faith in this country to do what is right and protect our freedoms, yes, even the freedoms of those liberals who eat like a cancer in the belly of the United States
2007-02-07 03:23:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Lane 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
No. Going to Iraq was not the necessarily the right thing, but Bush handled 9/11 extremely well. I was glad and still am that he was president.
2007-02-07 03:45:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by C.K. 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Better off it you like speaking Chinese and like paying 6 - 8 dollars a gallon for gas. Gore was set to sale us out to the China and that will happen if your girl Big H gets in.
2007-02-07 03:20:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Boomrat 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
Nope.
9/11 and Katrina still would have happened, and Gore lacks the principles and ideas to get the US out of the recessions.
2007-02-07 03:19:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by theearlybirdy 4
·
5⤊
2⤋
That's a no-brainer.
1) No Iraq War fiasco.
2) No huge deficits.
3) Action on global warming.
4) America still respected in the world.
5) Priorities for people rather than corporations.
2007-02-07 03:22:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Yahoo Will Never Silence Me 6
·
3⤊
6⤋