I was actually hoping for a Gore candidacy; I haven’t really gotten all that fired up over the current crop of candidates- Clinton’s too divisive, the Republicans will hit Richardson with Los Alamos, if he’s the nominee, I don’t think that a plurality of voters are ready for Barack Hussein Obama (if you thought that the “call me” ad that the RNC used on Harold Ford was bad, wait until the presidency is at stake), and I’ve never personally been much of a fan of John Edwards. (Maybe because his name makes me think of the “psychic medium” guy. Maybe because he talks like Joel Osteen. I really can’t quantify it).
My hopes for a Gore candidacy wasn’t based so much on picking a presidential candidate on a progressive vs. centrist ideology argument or on his work on environmental issues- I haven’t even gotten around to seeing “An Inconvenient Truth” yet. I saw in a Gore candidacy a historical parallel with the 1968 election of Richard Nixon.
To simplify it and boil it down some: Both candidates were vice-Presidents under two-term Presidents who presided over periods of relative peace and prosperity. Each lost their election to a less experienced but more “personable” and more telegenic opponent. However, in the earlier instance, by 1968, the electorate had had enough of Johnson’s war in Vietnam as well as its effects- the civil unrest that came with it, and a faltering economy. Nixon came in to office in part because enough of the electorate was looking for a return to the “normalcy” of the Eisenhower administration, and the former VP in some way represented that. (There obviously were other factors such as the re-alignment in the South due to Johnson’s support of the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s; however I would suggest that the white vote in the South for Nixon was another manifestation (albeit one based in racism) of the “return to normalcy” attitude of the national electorate.)
I think that in 2008, a Gore candidacy could have worked similarly. The 1990s saw the greatest economic expansion in human history, as well as a period of relative peace, and relative diplomatic good-will from other nations. The past six-and-a-half years have brought war, an economic slump, $3.50 Gas, and resentment and distrust from nearly every country that doesn’t speak English. Gore, as Bill Clinton’s vice-president, would have been in a position to take credit for being part of the team that brought us the successes of the 1990s; as the “losing” candidate of the 2000 election he would represent the direct opposite of the administration that has brought us the failures of this decade.
A Gore candidacy for 2008 was an improbable hope, at best. Maybe it would be time to draft Schweitzer, if it wasn’t for that pesky liquid coal thing he supports.
I think Gore’ leaving the door open a crack if he has to run for president. He seems to be sincere and motivated enough in his convictions that we would sighingly enter the race if the candidacies of the top 2 (or 4) Democrats imploded. I’ve never felt he wanted to run, but would out of a sense of duty.
<
p>
However, he doesn’t have to run, so I don’t think he will. Leaving aside the people who see Gore as a saviour (operating under similar influences we saw with Gabrieli and Wes Clark — they’re more attractive before they run), there’s enough kicking around with the 8 we got right now to satisfy most folks in the primary or the general.
hope that Gore would enter, but if he doesn’t, I’m still certain, that is 100%, that we will have a Democrat in the White House come ’08. And with that comes cabinet-level appointments, etc. If Clinton is elected, I see Bill as SoS, but perhaps Gore would be interested in Secretary of Energy. While not very glitzy, he sure would have an opportunity to influence future legislation and policy.
<
p>
IOW, don’t give up hope yet….
His recent book seems very sour on the current political environment — at least so far.
Every candidate running as a dem, to me, looks the same – at least out of the big 4. The only person right on most issues is also crazy and even I wouldn’t vote for him.
<
p>
I’ll vote for John Edwards, but I don’t know how hard I’ll push for his ascension in the primary. I just don’t view him as that much better than Clinton or Obama.
<
p>
Al Gore’s time is now. I’d wish he’d take advantage of this golden opportunity to push for the issues he so desperately wants from the position of the most power in the entire world: POTUS. If he wants global warming reform, he should – in the words of Deval Patrick – “come and get it.”
Who in the Democratic party running would do it?
get another crack at it in 08 but it just does not seem likely. For one thing – there is still the latent anti-Gore machine in the punditocracy ready to snipe at him again. The money raising by Obama and Clinton have given them a big heads up. Obama and Edwards have gathered tremendous grass-roots support and Clinton has locked many, if not most, of the local power political operative endorsements. At this point I think Obama and Edwards divide the anti – Hillary vote. Gore would make that a three-way division I am just talking political number – counting not issues or spirit. I really like the merits of Kucinich’s positions and Dodd’s prioritizing of civil liberties but I agree with the general opinion that outside of the top three no one has a real chance. Part of me abhors making such a political reductionist assessment this early, but the realist in me sees that this is how it shakes out. Anything could happen. Gore may be a long-shot last hope but I dont think it’s happening.
Gore is more effective being America’s moral conscience on global warming. I don’t want to overstate what he’s done, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that Gore’s moved the ball on climate change a good deal in today’s political debate.
<
p>
I like Gore, but the fact is that his favorability ratings were always weak, just about as weak as Hillary’s, in fact. Which is why I always thought it ironic that many of the same people bringing up the legit fact that Hillary’s unfavorables are high glossed over the fact that Gore’s are just as bad.
<
p>
In short, I’m fine with the fact that Gore’s probably not running. We have some great candidates this year, and I’m excited about ’08.
If Hillary and Obama divide 50/50 and no one has a clear majority or if its a three way with Edwards or hell a four way with Richardson then Gore could be drafted by the convention floor as a compromise candidate.
<
p>
Other than that I dont see him running unless somehow Hillary and Obama destroy themselves now.
This is a reality I’ve been mulling for a while now. Figure in the first 4 primaucuses, you have at least 3 winners (could easily expect 1 in each: Edwards/IA, Richardson/NV, Clinton/NH, Obama/SC). Gore could emerge as a compromise candidate, but I think it would come down to which one is most willing to accept a VP slot, and throwing the convention to him/her. I can’t imagine Edwards settling for 2nd again, or Clinton settling at all. But as the latest Liberal convention in Canada shows, brokered conventions are wildly unpredictable.
<
p>
And it’s also a year away, so time enough to speculate down the road.
(HALF-JOKINGLY) Is what happened in the West Wing (Season 6 Finale) Democratic National Convention going to happen in real life?
<
p>
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION 2008
PEPSI CENTER
DENVER, COLORADO
<
p>
AUGUST 25TH-28TH, 2008
My dream is that the Obama campaign is just a front for Al Gore. Obama builds the organization of young, diverse, active progressives across the country but especially in the primary states. Al announces in October that he’s in, and Obama — recognizing that he has all the money but can’t win a single early-primary state (except maybe South Carolina) — agrees to run with Al, becoming the #2 man on a powerful ticket designed to overcome the Hillary juggernaut come january and february. It’s a perfect pair, will easily (I think) win the primary, would put a huge amount of air behind the Democratic sails come the fall of ’08.
<
p>
Well… a fella can dream, can’t he?
how is that wuote any different from what Gore’s been saying for months and months?