Bush vs. Gore/Kerry II: The Recountening

[Siege]

I can't imaging the 9/11 under Gore.
He would have surrended before the towers fell.
He would have excused the attackers, blaming their behavior on the american disregard for the enviroment.

[CountDeMoney]

There would've been no need to vote for Kerry, as Al Gore would've won reelection.

[alfred russel]

That's insane.  Any President, even Kucinich, would have invaded Afghanistan.

It's very easy for me to imagine a scenario in which Gore or Kerry accept the Taliban's request to "consider" the US's request for extradition.  Then OBL slips off to another country.  No invasion.

That's insane.  Taliban was already at "dishonorable scum" level in 2001 even before 9/11, and there is no conceivable way they would've escaped heavy retribution after such an act of war. 

Invasion of Afghanistan wasn't prompted by Bush or Republicans; it was pretty much a foregone conclusion on 9/12 that we'd be there, it was just a matter of figuring out the sequence of events that would culminate in that.

FWIW, one of my distinct memories from the aftermath of 9/11 was watching the BBC on what I think was the morning of 9/12, and it was said that NATO was working on potential plans for a ground invasion of Afghanistan. One of the BBC anchors was incredulous, saying that Afghanistan was the graveyard of empires, and reciting a list of failed incursions into the country.

I think the aftermath of 9/11 was one of those times where a political leader had quite a bit of latitude in choosing the direction of the country/western world. Bush had the decisiveness to take full advantage of that, unfortunately he didn't have the sense to make good decisions. I don't think it was at all in stone that we would be attacked from a terrorist from country A, who would then run to country B after we launched a war on country A. And then continue a 10+ year war in country A, plus launching a war on country C, while leaving country B free from troops on the ground and sending it billions in aid money in a futile attempt to get them to help us.

[CountDeMoney]

I think the aftermath of 9/11 was one of those times where a political leader had quite a bit of latitude in choosing the direction of the country/western world. Bush had the decisiveness to take full advantage of that,

Any president would've had the decisiveness to take full advantage of that.

unfortunately he didn't have the sense to make good decisions. I don't think it was at all in stone that we would be attacked from a terrorist from country A, who would then run to country B after we launched a war on country A. And then continue a 10+ year war in country A, plus launching a war on country C, while leaving country B free from troops on the ground and sending it billions in aid money in a futile attempt to get them to help us.

Saddam never tried to whack Al Gore's daddy, nor would he have had members of his administration still pissed about not going "all the way" in '91.  Which is all it was ever about.

[Razgovory]

That's insane.  Any President, even Kucinich, would have invaded Afghanistan.

It's very easy for me to imagine a scenario in which Gore or Kerry accept the Taliban's request to "consider" the US's request for extradition.  Then OBL slips off to another country.  No invasion.

Yes, but you're a kool-aid drinker so your difficulty imagining ways the Dems disappoint you is not out of the ordinary.

[Razgovory]

I can't imaging the 9/11 under Gore.
He would have surrended before the towers fell.
He would have excused the attackers, blaming their behavior on the american disregard for the enviroment.

You didn't live in the US during the 1990's.  When Clinton made air strikes against Bin Laden in Sudan and Afghanistan conservative cried foul.  I remember Rush Limbaugh whining about how Clinton had ruthlessly destroyed an Asprin factory.

[Eddie Teach]

Didn't vote. Would've voted for Bush. Now would've voted for Gore. Iraq was a big mistake.

[Razgovory]

Didn't vote. Would've voted for Bush. Now would've voted for Gore. Iraq was a big mistake.

Were you to young?  I actually liked John McCain at the time.  His stance campaign finance intrigued me.  I would have voted for him over Gore.  McCain had a temper problem, and was prone to rash decisions, but I don't think he would have invaded Iraq.  If the US had not invaded Iraq I think we would have a much stronger hand to oppose Iran.  I could see a Gore or McCain presidency in the early 2000's bombing Iran.

[jimmy olsen]

Voted Bush, but would have voted for Gore if I could do it over.

Would still vote for Bush over Kerry though. Iraq was a mistake, but once it began we had to see it through.

[Capetan Mihali]

Gore/Kerry.  Loath their personas (and to an extent Obama's), but they were the left-leaning of the major candidates, and that's how I vote. 

Voted for the Libertarian candidate for Attorney General in Penna. for her death penalty and drug law positions. 

[grumbler]

It's very easy for me to imagine a scenario in which Gore or Kerry accept the Taliban's request to "consider" the US's request for extradition.  Then OBL slips off to another country.  No invasion.

I don't buy it.  Besides, it's not like it was much of an invasion at first by the US - just air strikes and special forces.

It is always easy for a forum member to imagine a scenario that supports their otherwise ludicrous contentions.

[alfred russel]

I live in Texas so what I think doesn't matter.

Unless you sat on the USSC in 2000 it wouldn't matter anyway.

[Rasputin]

what i thought turned out to have been one of the 800 opinions that mattered a lot

i blame me but even with what i know now, it's hard to say I'd have done anything different then