ENDORSEMENTS FOR AL GORE 2000
•Baltimore Sun: "Those who disparagingly claim there's not a dime's worth of difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush haven't been paying attention. Make no mistake about it: There's a cavernous gap between the two major party candidates—and Al Gore stands on the correct side of that deep philosophical divide. ...The vice president has a wealth of government experience Mr. Bush lacks. Mr. Gore was an effective member of the House and Senate for 16 years, carving out a record of bipartisan effectiveness as a Southern moderate. Yes, he's a policy wonk who can put an audience to sleep with his recitation of facts and figures. But he knows his stuff." (10/29/00)
•
Denver Post: " For the first time in several elections, Americans
get to choose between two good mainstream candidates who have focused on serious
issues and not irrelevant trivia. Either Texas Gov. George W. Bush or Vice
President Al Gore would make a fine chief executive for the nation. ...Questions
have been raised about whether Bush or Gore better appeals to average voters
and which has the better character for the presidency. On these matters, the
two may be equally matched in both strengths and defects. The election, then,
should be decided on the issues. And on the issues, Gore has made the better
case." (10/29/00)
•
Miami Herald:
"We are not in thrall to Mr. Gore,
nor are we blind to Mr. Bush's attributes. We prefer the Texas governor's
willingness to experiment with new solutions to major issues, like education
reform, that don't rely on government. We like his willingness to question
Social Security and Medicare; we like that he is the brother of Florida's
governor, Jeb Bush, whom we support and admire. And we fear that Mr. Gore
will not be able to surmount the partisan divides in Washington, D.C., that
are so dispiriting. Nonetheless, Mr. Gore is ready now to be a good president
where Mr. Bush is not. Mr. Gore has sound judgment, a brilliant intellect,
core values and passion for service." (10/29/00)
•
Philadelphia Inquirer:
"Any choice for president hinges
in part on a gut assessment of what cannot be known: How an individual will
cope with the stresses of the world's toughest job, how he will react to perilous
crises or momentous trends yet to unfold. ...If you think the world America
leads in the early 21st century will be a simple, predictable place, Gov.
Bush's blithe style may seem fine to you. But if you recognize that running
the world's greatest democracy and economy will take great foresight, flexibility
and knowledge, then Al Gore is your choice." (10/29/00)
• Albany Times Union: "At the end of a campaign that's gone on too long, cost too much and been demeaning, at times, to the candidates and the voters alike, we find that Mr. Gore offers sound reasons to hope for a better governed nation. He is ready and able to assume the presidency. Mr. Bush may one day be similarly prepared. But in the year 2000, he is not." (Albany, N.Y., 10/22/00)
• Atlanta Constitution: "Gore is prepared to change government policy to reflect the needs and opinions of 21st century America. The Bush team, by contrast, is either denying the reality of those changes or advocating an outright retreat, a bridge back to the 20th century, so to speak...Gore is much more engaged in the world around him, more willing to do the work needed to comprehend a complex situation, more willing to think things through to the point that a solution is found. Bush is either unwilling to submit to that grind, or incapable of pulling it off." (Atlanta, Ga., 10/20/00)
• The Beacon Journal: "In this race for the presidency, it is essential to assess the record. Who has shown leadership in the corridors of government? Who better understands the needs of the country? Who has the experience and skills to lead from the Oval Office? In our view, the answer is plain: Al Gore. If his shortcomings are obvious, his strengths far exceed them. ...The record reveals that Al Gore is the better prepared, the more experienced, the more thoughtful and decisive candidate. He is the better choice for president." (Akron, Ohio, 10/22/00)
• The Courier-Journal: "Mr. Gore offers sounder proposals for safeguarding Americans' economic security and for advancing American interests and principles abroad. To his credit, Gov. Bush, as governor and candidate, has been more moderate and non-ideological than much of the Republican Party... However, Gov. Bush demonstrates an intellect and grasp of issues that are mediocre, to be generous...Al Gore offers superior stature, ability and vision for national leadership. He should be elected." (Louisville, Ky., 10/22/00)
• Detroit Free Press: "(Al Gore) would build on the best policies of the Clinton administration, clean out its worst mistakes, and bring wisdom, consistency and strength to foreign policy...For the continuity of what has gone right for America in recent years, for the dedication and experience he would bring to the office and for his truly compassionate view of issues that affect so many Americans, we believe Al Gore should be America's next president." (Detroit, Mich., 10/22/00)
• Las Vegas Sun: "Voters can't complain that this presidential election is a choice between tweedledum and tweedledee. Democrat Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush offer profound differences on how they'd govern this nation...(both) are honorable men, yet on issue after issue, Gore's policies are in the best interests of both our nation and Nevada." (Las Vegas, Nev., 10/22/00)
• Philadelphia Daily News: "We urge you ... to put Al Gore in the White House. ...He has been a principled voice not only for the environment but for justice and democratic values worldwide. He represents the successful policies of the Clinton administration—but without the stain of impeachment. You will live in a safer, cleaner, more prosperous country under Al Gore. We cannot say the same for George Bush. Gore's opponent is a not-very-knowledgeable, laughably inarticulate son of privilege who could have been the model for the musical, 'How to Succeed in Business (and Politics) Without Really Trying.'" (Philadelphia, Pa., 10/27/00)
• Portsmouth Herald: "Al Gore has a 25-year record of accomplishment and, even though he does not have the most exciting political persona out there, he does have an exciting and ambitious and well-articulated vision for America that is appropriate for the beginning of the 21st century. ...There has been, needless to say, an anger that clings to the Clinton presidency. But Gore is not President Clinton, so whatever loss of dignity Clinton imposed on the office of the presidency is his alone. The office itself cannot be tarnished; only the person holding it." (Portsmouth, N.H., 10/22/00)
• St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "Mr. Gore has prepared for this daunting job for three decades ... Mr. Bush, his likable opponent, doesn't have what it takes. His resume is thin and his command of issues is thinner. This is a man who governs the biggest state in the lower 48 from 9-5, with two hours out for lunch. Working stiffs should have it so good." (St. Louis, Mo., 10/22/00)
• Sacramento Bee: "By a clear margin, the distinctions favor Gore, a tested leader. The next president must steer the country through an era of unprecedented change and complexity at home and abroad—a job that demands the experience, intelligence and judgment that Gore has demonstrated in his career." (Sacramento, Calif. 10/22/00)
• San Francisco Chronicle: "It will take seasoned judgment, leadership and familiarity with the world to keep the United States on top on the complex and ever-changing global challenges. Bush downplays his inexperience by arguing that he will take his cues from a cadre of expert advisers. Gore, by contrast, offers on-the-job experience. His foreign affairs Rolodex and his extensive travels provide him with a clear advantage in anticipating problems, making judgments and in advocating America's case." (San Francisco, Calif., 10/22/00)
• San Francisco Examiner: "It's crazy to think that either Gore or Bush would be a runaway success while his opponent would prove a dismal failure. But Gore will protect Roe v. Wade, while there's good reason to think Bush will not. Gore will not open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration; Bush says he will. Gore is more likely to lead the country toward economic justice. He is against Bush's monstrously large tax cuts, which even Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan says we don't need. ...George W. Bush has a bright future as a national political figure, but Al Gore is the best candidate to lead the United States over the next four years. The issues favor him by a wide margin. Give him your vote." (San Francisco, Calif., 10/08/00)
• Seattle Post-Intelligencer: "The son of a U.S. senator, Gore has served a president's intensive apprenticeship for a quarter of a century...As a result of this training, we believe that Gore would take his seat behind the desk in the Oval Office and discharge its awesome responsibilities without missing a beat; this man does not have a steep learning curve." (Seattle, Wash., 10/22/00)
• Star Tribune: "Today's good times may lull Americans into thinking the occupier of the presidency doesn't really matter. But even a cursory look at the issues facing America shows that the stakes in this election are high and America's choices are clear...Al Gore has proved he has what it takes to lead, and he has it now. He deserves election on Nov. 7." (Minneapolis, Minn., 10/22/00)
• The Washington Post: We are by no means blind to the risks of a Gore presidency. His political clumsiness and know-it-all manner raise questions about his ability to inspire the country and work with Congress...Nonetheless, we come to our choice without hesitation. Mr. Gore has shown himself through the years to be a man of good character. He brings a maturity, a soundness of judgment and a balance of priorities that would be reassuring in a leader." (Washington, D.C., 10/22/00)
