Gore would have appointed folks to federal agencies who were considerably more regulatory, not even thought about a serious tax cut, and would have embraced more and more federal regulations. Bush is marginally better on that score.
As for civil liberties, we wouldn't have had Poindexter but we could have had someone like him overseeing the same program -- DARPA is hardly a partisan beast. It's true we might have had someone less eager about war, but then again Sept. 11 gave (in the minds of DC types) any president carte blanche, and we haven't gone to war yet. (Perhaps naively, I'm hoping the administration may back down at the last moment.) Probably the biggest difference is the conservative activist community, in DC, online and in talk radio -- they've been unfortunately silent when it comes to complaining about unconstitutional actions from a Republican administration. Not uniformly silent, of course, but still too quiet. -Declan On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 01:47:24AM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: > Gore and Lieberman would have been no prize in office either, > but they wouldn't have done much more damage to the economy > or to civil liberties, probably much less, and would have been > less gung-ho about getting us into a war and would have found > some kind of pork that's more productive than military hardware > to spend our tax money on.
