Gore won't run in 2004

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Chadder007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
The good news is that it won't be a Gore-Bush election.
The bad news is that it will still be a ______-Bush election.
I want that scumbag out of office for what he did during the CA energy crisis, which is absolutely nothing. This is the most anti-Californian president in a long time, and I want him gone.

It was CA's crisis, he left it for the state to work out like they should had. Just shifting the blame from the CA dems to the republican in the White House arent' you?

That's kind of like the police saying they left it up to the criminal and the victim to work things out. It's FERC's job to prevent this type of market manipulation. FERC is staffed by Bush appointees, and they didn't do their job. Therefore blame belongs on Bush, and you are the one trying to shift it.

Who should we blame for FERC not doing their job in 2000 when your state was asking for their help?

Oh I don't know.
You tell me why FERC didn't do it's job.

You didn't answer my question. Who shall we blame for FERC not doing it's job in 2000 before Bush was elected and before he appointed anyone to FERC?
High temps in the summer. But in 2000 we had outtages, but prices did not escalate to thousands of dollars per megawatt, because FERC would have stepped in and not let it happen. In 2001 energy companies knew that FERC would stay away if they manipulated the market, and that's exactly what they did. There are tapes of energy execs saying it wouldn't be such a bad idea to keep plants offline a little longer.
Now you tell me why energy prices didn't explode in 2000, but did in 2001? 2001 was after tech industry was on the decline and summers wasn't as hot, yet we had prices explode through the roof.
Tell me why what hapenned in 2001 didn't happen in 2000? I think it had something to do with who became president in 2001.

You are woefully misinformed. Power costs in CA were going up rapidly in 2000. Your govenor asked FERC for help. Their response:

On December 15, 2000, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said, "The commission's intention is to enable the markets to catch up to current supply and demand problems and not to reintroduce command and control regulation that has helped to produce the current crisis."

I am not defending Bush, I am simply pointing out (once again) that there is more to the story than "It's all Bush's fault." To insist that is the case in this instance is either disengenuous or ignorant. I have eliminated your ignorance excuse.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Chadder007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
The good news is that it won't be a Gore-Bush election.
The bad news is that it will still be a ______-Bush election.
I want that scumbag out of office for what he did during the CA energy crisis, which is absolutely nothing. This is the most anti-Californian president in a long time, and I want him gone.

It was CA's crisis, he left it for the state to work out like they should had. Just shifting the blame from the CA dems to the republican in the White House arent' you?

That's kind of like the police saying they left it up to the criminal and the victim to work things out. It's FERC's job to prevent this type of market manipulation. FERC is staffed by Bush appointees, and they didn't do their job. Therefore blame belongs on Bush, and you are the one trying to shift it.

Who should we blame for FERC not doing their job in 2000 when your state was asking for their help?

Oh I don't know.
You tell me why FERC didn't do it's job.

You didn't answer my question. Who shall we blame for FERC not doing it's job in 2000 before Bush was elected and before he appointed anyone to FERC?
High temps in the summer. But in 2000 we had outtages, but prices did not escalate to thousands of dollars per megawatt, because FERC would have stepped in and not let it happen. In 2001 energy companies knew that FERC would stay away if they manipulated the market, and that's exactly what they did. There are tapes of energy execs saying it wouldn't be such a bad idea to keep plants offline a little longer.
Now you tell me why energy prices didn't explode in 2000, but did in 2001? 2001 was after tech industry was on the decline and summers wasn't as hot, yet we had prices explode through the roof.
Tell me why what hapenned in 2001 didn't happen in 2000? I think it had something to do with who became president in 2001.

You are woefully misinformed. Power costs in CA were going up rapidly in 2000. Your govenor asked FERC for help. Their response:

On December 15, 2000, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said, "The commission's intention is to enable the markets to catch up to current supply and demand problems and not to reintroduce command and control regulation that has helped to produce the current crisis."

I am not defending Bush, I am simply pointing out (once again) that there is more to the story than "It's all Bush's fault." To insist that is the case in this instance is either disengenuous or ignorant. I have eliminated your ignorance excuse.

There is no question that other politicians are to blame. Starting from Pete Wilson, going on to Gray Davis, and so on. But that doesn't excuse Bush's actions, and his FERC did stand by as CA was gouged.
Why did Bush's FERC in 2001 wait until after long term contracts have been signed to introduce price controls? If they don't believe in price controls, they should not have imposed them at all. If they believe in price controls, they should have imposed them way earlier. Do you think it's concidental that FERC didn't step in until it was too late in 2001?

 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
There is no question that other politicians are to blame. Starting from Pete Wilson, going on to Gray Davis, and so on. But that doesn't excuse Bush's actions, and his FERC did stand by as CA was gouged.
Why did Bush's FERC in 2001 wait until after long term contracts have been signed to introduce price controls? If they don't believe in price controls, they should not have imposed them at all. If they believe in price controls, they should have imposed them way earlier. Do you think it's concidental that FERC didn't step in until it was too late in 2001?

I have no idea why they waited. Why didn't the FERC from the previous administration step in when they were asked? They had a lot more time and were way more informed about the problems than Bush's FERC. Maybe the non appointees in FERC convinced the appointees to just wait and see. I have no idea, I wasn't there. The point is that it wasn't just the current FERC that was screwed up, the former FERC was just as culpable if not more so.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
There is no question that other politicians are to blame. Starting from Pete Wilson, going on to Gray Davis, and so on. But that doesn't excuse Bush's actions, and his FERC did stand by as CA was gouged.
Why did Bush's FERC in 2001 wait until after long term contracts have been signed to introduce price controls? If they don't believe in price controls, they should not have imposed them at all. If they believe in price controls, they should have imposed them way earlier. Do you think it's concidental that FERC didn't step in until it was too late in 2001?

I have no idea why they waited. Why didn't the FERC from the previous administration step in when they were asked? They had a lot more time and were way more informed about the problems than Bush's FERC. Maybe the non appointees in FERC convinced the appointees to just wait and see. I have no idea, I wasn't there. The point is that it wasn't just the current FERC that was screwed up, the former FERC was just as culpable if not more so.

Actually the Clinton administration ordered on Dec 13 2000 that the power generators sell electricity to CA when they refused to do so. So Clinton did at least something.
 

Mrburns2007

Platinum Member
Jun 14, 2001
2,595
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
The good news is that it won't be a Gore-Bush election.
The bad news is that it will still be a ______-Bush election.
I want that scumbag out of office for what he did during the CA energy crisis, which is absolutely nothing. This is the most anti-Californian president in a long time, and I want him gone.


California is run by left wing monkees so what do you expect, besides Great Davis is the one that screwed the pooch. He conspired to drive the energy bills up so the state of california could take over the power companies. He failed miserable in his attempt.

And your source is? Or are you just making things up as you go along?


It was from a 48 hours or 60 minutes II show I watched, the problem was that the people in california were dead set agianst the state taking control of the power companies.

You can't give the wholesalers freedom to set there price and NOT give it to the retailers as well.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
The good news is that it won't be a Gore-Bush election.
The bad news is that it will still be a ______-Bush election.
I want that scumbag out of office for what he did during the CA energy crisis, which is absolutely nothing. This is the most anti-Californian president in a long time, and I want him gone.


California is run by left wing monkees so what do you expect, besides Great Davis is the one that screwed the pooch. He conspired to drive the energy bills up so the state of california could take over the power companies. He failed miserable in his attempt.

And your source is? Or are you just making things up as you go along?


It was from a 48 hours or 60 minutes II show I watched, the problem was that the people in california were dead set agianst the state taking control of the power companies.

You can't give the wholesalers freedom to set there price and NOT give it to the retailers as well.

Yes, but where is the proof that Davis conspired to drive energy prices up to take over power companies?
The way to take control of the power companies would be to supress prices to drive them out of business and then buy their assets. Blowing prices up is not the way to take control of the energy companies.
It's the opposite, deregulation caused the energy crisis, not state control.
 

chowderhead

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 1999
2,633
263
126
I recently met Vice President Gore and Tipper Gore. They were very nice. People have all these negative impressions of Al Gore because of all the stories the media did on him. Bush and McCain got free rides in 2000. The Gores were not able to effectively respond to the mischaractrizations. I truly believe that he would have made a great and honorable president. I proudly voted for him in 2000 and I would it again. I fully expect him and Tipper to stay active in politics. They will probably work hard in Tennessee (a Democrat was elected governor in 2002) and reestablish roots there again. Gore would be 60 years old in 2008. He would probably face Hillary in the primary then.
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
because he knows the outcome of that election. Can you imagine how tree-hugger Al would have handled 9-11? </shutters>
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: EXman
because he knows the outcome of that election. Can you imagine how tree-hugger Al would have handled 9-11? </shutters>

I think any of the possible candidates would have handled it pretty much the same.

 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: EXman
because he knows the outcome of that election. Can you imagine how tree-hugger Al would have handled 9-11? </shutters>
You are hypothesising.
What does Gore's environmental record have to do with war on terror? We are tippy toeing around the Saudis because the Bush is concerned about energy industry. 15 out of 19 were Saudis, don't you forget that.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: EXman
because he knows the outcome of that election. Can you imagine how tree-hugger Al would have handled 9-11? </shutters>
You are hypothesising.
What does Gore's environmental record have to do with war on terror? We are tippy toeing around the Saudis because the Bush is concerned about energy industry. 15 out of 19 were Saudis, don't you forget that.

It's just the standard rhetoric people spew when they don't have anything intelligent to say.

 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
It's just the standard rhetoric people spew when they don't have anything intelligent to say.

Two words: Sore / Loserman

And I suppose that you are the voice of reason LoL. Gore is a wimp plain and simple. Unless it's getting money from the Chinese Gore and his people wouldn't know what to do for foreign policy (except hold their hand out).

We are tippy toeing around the Saudis because the Bush is concerned about energy industry. 15 out of 19 were Saudis, don't you forget that.

And if he didn't "tip toe" as you so put it you'd be paying $5 a gallon for gas.

 

Mrburns2007

Platinum Member
Jun 14, 2001
2,595
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: SuperTool
The good news is that it won't be a Gore-Bush election.
The bad news is that it will still be a ______-Bush election.
I want that scumbag out of office for what he did during the CA energy crisis, which is absolutely nothing. This is the most anti-Californian president in a long time, and I want him gone.


California is run by left wing monkees so what do you expect, besides Great Davis is the one that screwed the pooch. He conspired to drive the energy bills up so the state of california could take over the power companies. He failed miserable in his attempt.

And your source is? Or are you just making things up as you go along?


It was from a 48 hours or 60 minutes II show I watched, the problem was that the people in california were dead set agianst the state taking control of the power companies.

You can't give the wholesalers freedom to set there price and NOT give it to the retailers as well.

Yes, but where is the proof that Davis conspired to drive energy prices up to take over power companies?
The way to take control of the power companies would be to supress prices to drive them out of business and then buy their assets. Blowing prices up is not the way to take control of the energy companies.
It's the opposite, deregulation caused the energy crisis, not state control.

Not true......they caused the power companies to go bankrupt and then tried to buy up the assets, I think they actually did take over some but were forced to sell them off because california had rules about state ownership.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: EXman
It's just the standard rhetoric people spew when they don't have anything intelligent to say.

Two words: Sore / Loserman

And I suppose that you are the voice of reason LoL. Gore is a wimp plain and simple. Unless it's getting money from the Chinese Gore and his people wouldn't know what to do for foreign policy (except hold their hand out).

We are tippy toeing around the Saudis because the Bush is concerned about energy industry. 15 out of 19 were Saudis, don't you forget that.

And if he didn't "tip toe" as you so put it you'd be paying $5 a gallon for gas.

Sore?Loserman

That's all you got? More played out cliched rhetoric that doesn't mean crap. You're just proving further that you have no mind of your own.

 

johnjohn320

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2001
7,572
2
76
People are mentioning Bush's record approval ratings and how well he handled 9-11.

Duh, that's where he got all those approval ratings, was 9-11. Do you honestly think Gore/his cabinet would have handled it any differently? You're outta friggin mind if you do.

And honestly, if you call Gore a softy for being concerned with environmental issues, you are too ignorant for words. And as mentioned, Gore's environmental stances have absolutely nothing to do with how he would have handled terrorist attacks.

People on this board just love to change the topic when they lose on one issue.

Sore Loserman? Excuse me, half a million more people in this country voted for Gore than Bush. Does that make sense to you that Bush is in office? Of course it does, after all, YOU wanted him to be, therefore it makes it right that the canidate LESS wanted in office is now in office.

Electoral college was originally introduced basically because the fed gov't thought the American people were too stupid to handle voting on their own. It's stood there ever since. How does that make you feel? I guess just fine and dandy as long as YOUR canidate wins.
 

Walleye

Banned
Dec 1, 2002
7,939
0
0
There are many reasons the costs for power exploded in 2001.

Lets go back several administrations, to that of that gutless loser, Carter. He effectively neutered the Power Industry by making it illegal to transport spent nuclear fuel offsite. Along with several new regulations about how plants should be built, that made them not more safe, but more expensive. this was reason for glee with the tree-huggers.

Next, we go to Clinton's Administration. I dont blame him for energy Crises, i blame Carter, and Davis.
The current (and future problem) is the lack of competition in energy distribution. Officially, I can buy my power from 2 companies, but in actuality, 1 is a subsidiary of the other. So, wheres the competition that goes along with deregulation to drive down the cost of power?

Now, Davis' handling of the power crisis, was worthy of a righteous butt-kicking. (according to minsc. :) ) He panicked when he got faced with these competitions. He then signed contracts that held our power costs at a uniformly high level. our costs are still around the highest in the nation. When costs dropped, we are and will still be paying those uniformly high costs. and the energy companies are laughing their asses off at this.

And lastly, the energy companies, with their deep pockets and amazing bribing ability, got a law passed that made it illegal to generate your own power. In my area, people cant have generators, or Solar Panels, or anything of the sort. The generator law was passed primarily because of treehuggers saying we'll pollute the environment. bullS#(IT. oh well. The anti solar panels was passed because it claims that solar power on the grid can endanger the lives of electricians working on the lines when the grid goes down. this is known as islanding. however, that fear is completely unfounded, as when the grid goes down, in all tests the solar power was taken off the grid. read a copy of some power publication to know what im talking about. find something named guerilla solar, or something similar. that article should have what im talking about.

Bush has nothing to do with California's energy crisis. it is a state problem. Someone above me made the reference between the criminal and the victim. So, now our state government is a criminal? shouldnt we prosecute it? ;)
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
That's all you got? More played out cliched rhetoric that doesn't mean crap. You're just proving further that you have no mind of your own.

That is all I need to deal with whiney liberals like you all. :p more crap for you (it seems to piss you off ;) )

And honestly, if you call Gore a softy for being concerned with environmental issues, you are too ignorant for words. And as mentioned, Gore's environmental stances have absolutely nothing to do with how he would have handled terrorist attacks.

Sure it does environmentalist are usually pacifists and do not have the balls to do what is needed. You call me ignorant because well you know Republicans are far better schooled in world affairs. Sure the Democrats are good with domestic issues I'll grant you that, but the US's biggest threat to our way of life is not due to to any domestic issues. People are different after 9-11 and people want a strong government with leaders that look at the big picture and not just how we can save a few trees. If you do not think I'm right look at the midterm elections and how the democrats lost the senate because their lack of direction in the post 9-11 world. The Dems admitted their message was too soft. They were embarassed and now you see the shake up in their leadership structure. If you think that is ignorant sorry but it is no secret that the Dems lack the leadership and vision to take the US into a very shakey future.

Electoral college still works well. Sure I know that it was created because they didn't trust the general population to vote but now with out it only the urban voters vote would count they didn't know it at the time but the electoral college evens the playing feild. Since the US population has moved more to the urban areas a popular vote election would cater only to urban voters. What? How? well think about this with out the electoral college candidates would only have to campaign in the urban areas of the east coast a few larger midwest states and California why cause that is where the large populations are. Why would the western states even matter? Even when it looked that Bush was going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college (if you remember that was the prevailing theory of how the election was going to play out) he didn't just stick to just the major urban areas but also gave the lil guys in rural states visits not writing them off as if their vote did not matter. This is not just my opinion this has been talked to death and regardless of the last popular vote the electoral college is still the way the prez is elected. If you do not like it write your congressman ;)
 

faZZter

Golden Member
Feb 21, 2001
1,202
0
0
Gore may not run but sounds like Lieberman will. (name sp?)

This is the guy who is always saying games cause violence and trys to shut them down with ridiculous laws.

Screw him.....I will NEVER vote for him.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: EXman
It's just the standard rhetoric people spew when they don't have anything intelligent to say.

Two words: Sore / Loserman

And I suppose that you are the voice of reason LoL. Gore is a wimp plain and simple. Unless it's getting money from the Chinese Gore and his people wouldn't know what to do for foreign policy (except hold their hand out).

We are tippy toeing around the Saudis because the Bush is concerned about energy industry. 15 out of 19 were Saudis, don't you forget that.

And if he didn't "tip toe" as you so put it you'd be paying $5 a gallon for gas.

Haha. You just described the Bush admins War on Terrorism. And you were bashing environmentalists as weak on defense. It turns out it's those anti-environmentalists who can't live without cheap gas who are weak on defense. Yes, let's tip toe around those who want to kill us to have cheap gas.
 

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
Screw him.....I will NEVER vote for him.
Nor would I waste a vote on Joseph Censorman. He's a career politician who has leeched off the public coffers all his life. He would make a terrible president.
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: EXman

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's just the standard rhetoric people spew when they don't have anything intelligent to say.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Two words: Sore / Loserman

And I suppose that you are the voice of reason LoL. Gore is a wimp plain and simple. Unless it's getting money from the Chinese Gore and his people wouldn't know what to do for foreign policy (except hold their hand out).


Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are tippy toeing around the Saudis because the Bush is concerned about energy industry. 15 out of 19 were Saudis, don't you forget that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And if he didn't "tip toe" as you so put it you'd be paying $5 a gallon for gas.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
Haha. You just described the Bush admins War on Terrorism. And you were bashing environmentalists as weak on defense. It turns out it's those anti-environmentalists who can't live without cheap gas who are weak on defense. Yes, let's tip toe around those who want to kill us to have cheap gas.

I'm sorry that makes no sense what so ever :( How does that make them weak on denfense it seems the opposite is true.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: JellyBaby
Screw him.....I will NEVER vote for him.
Nor would I waste a vote on Joseph Censorman. He's a career politician who has leeched off the public coffers all his life. He would make a terrible president.
GW's done the same thing. Well if it weren't the Shareholders of the Oil Companies that he ran into the ground or the Texas Taxpayers money used to build the Stadium which increased the value of the Rangers 5 fold it was the Texas Taxpayers who paid him as their "Govner" or the American Taxpayers as the Head of State.
 

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
Wouldn't vote for him either, Red. ;)

It's time to end the era of career politicos. They just trade our money for votes, bloat gubment and get us into foreign wars.