Why do the Democrats choose the Presidential candidates that they do? Gore was nediocre, Kerry too antimilit.

Question

Gore distanced himself from Clinton. Kerry at least served in military although pro-Jane Fonda/anti-military later favoring many unethical and unsavory laws. Latest two "leaders", are anti-military with the most infamous lying about being turned down from enlistment as a military lawyer "because of glasses". The one making this one look centrist (who is actually Leftist) is an admitted apostate from Islam after going to their religious schools for many years, he became a Christian. His religion's followers kill people who disavow "the one true God, Allah" and become Christians.
Just stating the facts available online all over the internet.

Answer 1

there is no doubt that Gore and Kerry were not the best candidates in the world. However, in 2000, Gore was by far the most qualified to be elected President and in 2004 , Bush should have been fired as a failure and Kerry should have won. Problem is Republicans vote party line without consideration of who the candidates on the ballot are.

Keep in mind no matter how mediocre those two are, they were and are far superior to GWB as candidates.

Answer 2

You are so ill informed it's hard to know where to start. Barack is not "an admitted apostate from Islam" and he had no control as a child over where his parents lived or where he went to school. It was not a religious school anyway. This hs been debunked many times by major news organizations, so it's hard to know why you still think this.

Secondly, only a right winger could call a guy who served in Bietnam and was shot at and was a hero "too anti-military" while still worshipping a drug-addicted draft dodger. Not to mention the huge list of chicken hawks who are big important Republicans, starting with Cheney.

Is there any issue on which a right-wing person does not exhibit total hypocrisy? I'm waiting to see that one day. At least get philosophically consistent. Either you admire military heroes, no matter what party, or you don't. Not every issue should be decided by your adherence to a certain political party. Have you ever heard of loving your country more than your party?

Oh and by the way, just because something is on the internet does NOT make it a fact.

Answer 3

Just because something is available online doesn't make it a fact. Yes, Obama never went to Islamic religious schools, and is a practicing Christian. It hardly matters to him what Islam says about converts, since he isn't a Muslim.

Yes, Gore distanced himself from Clinton, due to the constant smear campaign against Clinton by the Republicans. This was a mistake on his part. If he had instead played up his role in the successful Clinton administration, he would have won in a landslide. far from being mediocre, he is an incredibly intelligent man with a lifetime of achievement and a long career in public service. If you want to see a good definition of mediocre, look at George W. Bush.

And what unethical and unsavory laws did Kerry ever support? He realized that the Vietnam War was unethical and unsavory, and spoke out against it. What's wrong with that?

Answer 4

Democrats choose the best candidates available to them, and on some election years,(I'm thinking of Dukakis), millions of party faithful jump ship to vote for the G.O.P. candidate.
Al Gore is one of the more intelligent men to ever serve as a Senator, or as VP., but you are correct in saying that he mistakenly distanced himself from Clinton in 2004. Without that error, he would have been elected by the electoral college,..and you will recall that he won the popular vote,nationwide, by a large percentage. Except for the Supreme's interference, we might never have had to face the September, 11th,2001 attacks, and would certainly not be in Iraq right now. I'll even go so far as to say, Gore would have gone into Afganistan with full force, kicked the Taliban's ***, and found Bin Laden before he could flee to Pakistan.
I don't think Obama's faith is an issue, he just lacks the years of political experience required to be a viable candidate.

Answer 5

Remember, Gore actually got more popular votes than Bush, and most people think he got more electoral votes.

As far as the "military" thing, that can't be a huge criterion for most people, because if it was Kerry, as a War Hero, would've won resoundingly as someone who signed up for Vietnam (and had every right to eviscerate the government over it when he got back, BTW) over a guy who obviously ducked the draft (by finding a safe spot in the ANG) and a guy who tries to pretend he's Mr. Military but got 5 deferments instead of actually serving when he had a chance.

I don't see anything in the way of military pedigree in the likes of Romney, Giuliani etc. either, and I don't think McCain's making it, so again, not an issue this time.

Answer 6

I guess that is one opinion. And you maybe right. Just one foot note: Watch closely as Republican candidates get as far away from this administration as possible as the election gets closer. If they stand any chance they have to.

Answer 7

yeah...

let me start by stating that this is a BRILLIANT question - really...

you pretend that the republicans didn't select bush over mccain before mccain lost his spine.

everyone who reads this post is currently lost in thought wondering what the world would be like with either kerry or gore in charge right now...

Answer 8

You seem to be very good at picking and choosing your "facts".

Answer 9

Flashy "pretty" candidates.

Answer 10

truth seeker is neither a truth speaker nor a truth seeker...he is a partisan hack!

but to answer your question, democrats choose the candidates they do because they have no other choices...they all suck...