In five days Draft Gore Massachusetts will kick off a signature drive to place Mr. Gore's name on the ballot for the Massachusetts Democratic primary in March. There are regional Draft Gore groups in Eastern Mass (Boston/Cambridge), Central Mass (Worcester) and Western Mass (Amherst/Northampton) and we are looking for coordinators in other regions. Signature-gatherers, organizers, and volunteers of all kinds are welcome to help build a strong statewide movement.
Our intention is to continue this effort until Gore is either placed on the primary ballot or he declares that he will not be a candidate.
There is no guarantee that Gore will enter the race, but he has not ruled it out (as he did to end a movement to draft him for the presidency in 2004).
One thing we do know is that he is very unlikely to enter the race before mid-October. He has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and there is every reason to believe that he very much wants this prize. The winner will be announced on October 12, and a declaration by him before then would undercut his chances of winning.
We also know that he has two high profile political/policy events scheduled around October 12, a fundraiser for Senator Barbara Boxer (on the 11th) and an address to the Chicago Economic Club (the 17th). The latter would be an unusual forum for a declaration but an ideal one to lay out a campaign platform.
The primary calendar strongly suggests if not dictates that Gore could not launch a 50-state campaign later than October. So an announcement, one way or another, before November seems likely.
A Draft Could Affect Gore's Decision
Although Gore hasn't said so in so many words, he has made statements that suggest he would respond to a serious draft.
First, in his new book, The Assault on Reason, he appeals for a grass-roots movement to restore American democracy.
It is my greatest hope that those who read this book will choose to become part of a new movement to rekindle the true spirit of America.
If we can create a movement that is “his greatest hope” and we ask him lead us, could he then honorably refuse?
Also, in Time magazine in May, he said:
I'm not convinced the presidency is the highest and best role I could play. … It would take a lot to disabuse me of th[is] notion….
“What it would take, specifically?” he was asked.
I can't say because I'm not looking for it. But I guess I would know it if I saw it. I haven't ruled it out. But I don't think it's likely to happen.”
Strong draft movement in Massachusetts, California and other states would transform the political landscape in ways that no one has foreseen. (The last successful draft of a presidential candidate occurred in 1952 under a very different nomination system.)
- The draft would be seen as a direct response to his appeals for action both on the climate crisis and to “rekindle the true spirit of America.”
- It would knock the legs from under if not silence the detractors in the reportariat who so foolishly found fault with him in 2000.
- It would spark the enthusiasm in Democratic establishment that will be needed for a successful campaign.
If you want a candidate who is sure to run, Gore is not for you. But if you believe that we need the best possible candidate to lead our country and help the world deal with the looming climate crisis now is the time to act.
Draft Gore Massachusetts needs your help in the next six weeks to make Gore hear the sound of boots/shoes/sneakers/sandals on the ground and feel the draft that he is “not looking for.”
I've never been alive for a JFK-type President. Al Gore could inspire a generation and be one of the best leaders this nation has ever seen, if only he'd get in the race. I'd stop the presses and volunteer all my time and energy for a Gore candidacy. Run, Al, Run!!
But I'm not going to work hard to try to convince him to run. Just too many steps, and if he doesn't want it, I'm not going to make it my job to convince him.
and Al Gore is no John Kennedy
I’ve never been alive for a JFK-type President
<
p>
…actually a sentient being during the JFK presidency.
<
p>
He actually did some good things, like lower the WWII era income tax rates.
<
p>
He also did some bad things, like expand America’s role in the Vietnam War. In part by supporting the coup against then SVietnam head-honcho Diem, thereby essentially making the war America’s.
<
p>
I won’t go into the Cuban missile crisis, since the facts are too convoluted.
I was more referring to the fact that he actually inspired people, in ways that no president since has. He wasn't a perfect President – someone you could say did some wrong things and didn't do enough right things (for example, he could have advanced the Southern Freedom Movement's timeline by years, but didn't). Yet, with all of his short comings, he was an inspiration… and I'd die to have that in a candidate while I'm young enough to be optimistic and still care.
On a personal note, I happen to think Al Gore would not only be just as inspiring, but also be one of the best Presidents in America yet – even if all he would ever achieve is serious progress on Global Warming.
I like the guy. If it is not Hillary, then he's the one. Or why not both on the same ticket. Though I don't agree with some of his extremist views on the environment, I Keep wondering how we may have done things differently (successfully) after 9/11 had he been elected, or at least represented in the new government of Bush Junior.
… goes to scientists when he wants to learn something about science.
To Exxon Mobile, they're extreme. But the environment isn't a political issue. When it comes to Space Ship Earth, I say we urge on the side of caution, thank you very much. We'll never be able to build another one quite like it.
Does Al Gore want to run for President?
If yes, why isn't he running — to increase his shot at the Nobel Prize?
If no, why should we convince him — to have a candidate who doesn't want to be a candidate? Winning the presidency isn't something that comes to a person going through the motions — just watch Fred Thompson.
The Assault on Reason in May, and he's no Fred Thompson.
(You can watch for yourself, here: http://www.youtube.c…)
Al Gore is passionate, but he's been badly burned by the SCOTUS and the media, so I think he is looking for more grassroots support than most candidates do.
If he doesn't want it, he won't jump in.
I am not a big fan of Hillary (her pro-war rhetoric several years ago was scary), but in my opinion she is the candidate who has the most chance of taking the White House. I don't believe in Barack Hussein Obama's chances in the general election, and the rest of the pack can't do it, period. Gore is an interesting candidate (think of the slogans “You preferred Al to Republicans once; now do it again”), but I still thinks Hillary has better chances.
What kind of idiot wants to be the only person standing between Hillary Clinton and the presidency? Does that person have a chance of coming out of it? It's like being the only person between Paris Hilton and a mob of tv cameras.
indicate that they fear him.
I suspect that they are ready for Hillary. I also think that many overestimate her because she is running against Bush right now, not an actual Republican to be named.
IMO Gore would be at least as strong a candidate as Hillary in the general and has the potential to be a great leader in office. My hopes would not be high for Hillary's performance in office.
“For our Constitution. For our country. For our planet.” would be a credible slogan for Gore but not for Hillary.
your barrack obama right-wing mongering.
BTW you can think what you want, but the only candidate who has ever won the popular election before is Al Gore. And he's only become 100,000,000x more popular and likeable since.
[pick your right winger expletive] I think it would be extremely entertaining to see Gore v. Hillary in the primary.
He's a stiff when he's in campaign mode. Sometimes a stiff in earth tones. Everyone seems to forget that. He seems a lot more comfortable nor that he doesn't have to play those games, but if he went back into campaign mode, that would change.
I don't think he wanted the job in 2000, either. You need someone who wants the job.
This guy ran one of the most truly incompetent Presidential races of all time. He ran away from popular Bill Clinton, and managed to fumble the golden eggs of our then-brilliant economy in an ill-considered veer into aggressive populism rather than sensible electable moderation. When the chips were down in Florida his team was outmaneuvered at almost every step. Finally, he took the SC’s outrageous unprecedented decision with scarcely a whimper. Gore’s fine work on climate change should not be confused with an ability to win a national political campaign. He’s tried multiple times, with the same result.
for many good reasons. I suppose that they will be coming out as a trickle then a flood before November 08.
Neuvoliberal at DailyKos has an excellent synopsis (with many links) of Gore's 2000 campaign and the Florida recount:
If any player can be accused of incompetence in the 2000 campaign, it's the press.
In 2008 the caricature would be Al Gore, visionary former Vice President, environmental leader, and possible Nobel laureate, answers grassroots call to leave cushy gig in business world to lead nation in troubled times. It's a good role for him.
If I recall correctly, the polling showed Gore lagging until he took up a populist message. Most of the postmortems I remember reading were saying, “If only he had taken the populist route earlier.”
The problem Democrats had with this moderation stuff is well-illustrated in Thomas Frank's book What's the Matter with Kansas. If Democrats do not make the case that they're on the side of working people, then Kansans will and have voted on the basis of conservative Christian values. Populism was a key to winning in 2006.
Gore did not come across well in 2000. However, you really have to take the hostility of the press to Gore very seriously. It’s widely documented. Running a campaign in the face of a hostile press makes one hyper-cautious and it means your message is always distorted. There was no Left Blogosphere back then to keep them honest.
<
p>
And they weren’t!
Because he wasn't willing to continue to put our political stability at risk for months longer (past the weeks Florida had taken to get to SCOTUS), he doesn't deserve to be President. The fact that he won the popular vote doesn't matter.
What was he supposed to do? It could have been contested in the House of Representatives, but in that battle who would have won? And would it have been good for America? Hindsight is always 20-20; who would have known just how truly incompetent GW Bush would have been. And who would have known what would happen to America in that timespan, when we just so happened to have our most imcompetent, immature and absolutely horrendous lap-dog of a President ever.
But blaming all of that on Al Gore is a bit whacked. I say third time's the charm; he won the popular vote last time – and he's only become way more popular since. He's as sure a bet this time as ever – and as evidenced by the years since he lost, he's learned from his mistakes.
…I think John Kerry ran the most incompetent general election campaign in history. Gore had to try to walk the tightrope of claiming the successes of the Clinton Administration and dealing with the desire for change after what was until then one of the most devisive eras of political discourse since the Civil War (we have out done it now). He acted like a mannered gentleman which does not get you far in a knife fight (Florida 2000). People need to remember that the political genius Bill Clinton never hit 50% of the popular vote in either of his elections, so Gore's performance could have been better, but I do not find it horribly bad in retrospect.
That said, if he is not running, he doesn't want to run. The saddest parlor game in American Politics is …why won't XXX YYY run? We went through that with Ted Kennedy in the 68, 72, 76 election; Cuomo in '88 and '92; they went through it with Colin Powell a couple of times.
There are no “perfect” candidates. It never happens whether it be for state rep, Congress, Senate or President. We have who we have, they are good people that will be head and shoulders above the mess of a president we have now. Pick one and make that campaign and candidate hear your views. It is long, hard, steady work.
Actually, he ran in 1980 and lost to Carter in the primary.
….which is why I didn't list 1980 for Kennedy.
My parents dragged me into Boston so that I could “witness” Democracy at work (my parents were big Kerry fans). I remember my mother was giving me shit on the ride in (every radio station she turned to bombarded us with “Kerry's a head in the exit polls this”, and “Kerry's a head in the exit polls that” and on and on). 'Oh doesn't look good for Bush' my mother would say.
Words can not describe the 180 degree change in mood that both my parents went through that night.