MIchael,
Who serving as Clinton's VP could have done
much better? Bill Bradley? Jesse Jackson?
A lot of people are dumping on Gore, and he
certainly was stiff and made crucial misstatements
at crucial times. But, he was not as bad a campaigner
as many think. No VP was going to be given the
credit for the economy the way Clinton was, and how
was one to escape the onus of Monica?
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 5:31 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:4131] Stop the name calling
>Brad,
>
>There's no place here for calling people incompetent. I voted for
>Nader. I would not have changed my vote even if it could've been
>decisive for electing Gore. I believe in the cold shower. You don't.
>That's no reason to be nasty toward other people.
>
>And I'm not looking forward to four years of Bush. Everybody accepts
>that practically anybody -- or maybe not Charles Manson, bue he was
>ineligible -- could have done a better job than Gore did. Here in Chico
>for Nader visit helped found three of four liberals to win on City
>Council.
>
>How could a decent Democratic candidate not win with the economy going
>relatively well and no big international problems against such an inept
>rival?
>
>--
>
>Michael Perelman
>Economics Department
>California State University
>Chico, CA 95929
>
>Tel. 530-898-5321
>E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
