Why is Gore considered the "Savior" of the Democratic Party on DU?

[TwilightGardener]

What need will he fill in the race that our Dems who are running don't already address? Why do folks here believe he can win this time around? I like and respect the man, and I voted for him, but I just don't get the worship. Help me out here.

[graywarrior]

1. It's not just here. Ask Michael Moore.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Because he isn't running.

Period.

As soon as he announces, he will be trashed just like all the rest.

[hlthe2b]

12. there is some truth to that... unfortunately, Buz clik

[illinoisprogressive]

120. amen. I just posted the same thing.

[illinoisprogressive]

121. Also, he had a popular movie so he is proclaimed saint Gore

[acmavm]

3. Take a look at the other candidates. That should tell you. But I also hold

out hope, although not much, that Wesley Clark would run again.

Of the ones already out there I guess I'd have to go with Edwards, haircut and all.

[Clark2008]

90. Poor thing.

Having to drop down from Gore or Clark to Edwards - who changes his mind hours, days, an entire senate career, later.

[acmavm]

95. Well, I sure a shit can't find anything trustworthy or honest in any of the

rest of the bunch of declared candidates. The other two front runners as are phony as they could possibly be. And the rest (like Biden) are outright corporatist/elitists.

Where is there to go but the only candidate that is making the poverty and joblessness an campaign issue?

[justinrr1]

109. Elitist?

The guy that makes the least money out of all or our candidates.

[acmavm]

114. He supports the richest amongst us. He thinks he's one of them. He does

their bidding.

[BlueStater]

105. Get a life already

I have no idea why the hell you hate Edwards so much but attacking the guy every time his name is mentioned is tiresome.

[msongs]

4. obama is the new messiah, gore is a usurper LOL actually I have

not noticed anybody claiming Gore is the Savior. can you quote this in posts?

At least he is out there DOING something useful for humanity rather than just TALKING.

Gore won the election is 2000 then failed to do the work required to claim the office. well too bad. I happen to think
he would make a good president and would like to see him run. He is not my savior however. there is no such thing as a savior
outside of our minds. we must be our own saviors.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[TwilightGardener]

6. I'm not quoting anybody on the "savior" thing, just my impression.

[Indy_Dem_Defender]

96. I'll go on record

and say over the last 2 weeks I've seen at times as many "Gore's going to announce, I know" or "I hope Gore announces soon" threads on the GD: politics board as threads about Obama, Edwards and Clinton.

[JeffR]

5. I don't worship anyone

But this man has more experience than the rest of the candidates put together, he has his priorities straight, he knows what the nation's priorities should be, and he won the first time he ran. He can win again.

[TwilightGardener]

8. He was neck-and-neck with an ABSOLUTE MORON! The next GOPer won't be a moron.

[JeffR]

20. Chances are very good the next GOPer will indeed be a moron

And yes, Gore's campaign was pretty farcical. But he still won. But for 5 Supreme Court Justices, he'd be finishing out his second term as we speak.

[TwilightGardener]

29. I don't think you really believe that Rudy or Romney are as brain-dead as the Chimp.

[Buzz Clik]

63. You can be a lot smarter than * and still be a total moron.

[dansolo]

70. Romney? Absolutely.

Rudy is a lot scarier because he isn't an idiot. But he will never win the nomination, not with all of the pictures of him in a dress.

[TwilightGardener]

73. God help us if Rudy wins--the Muslim world will REALLY love us for the

cross-dresser we put into office!

[JeffR]

76. That would be scientifically improbable, if not impossible.

But there are many shades of stupid. Just caught Duncan Hunter on TV this morning, for example. I could also bore everyone with stories about the unfathomable idiocy of responses I've received from Senators Chambliss and Isakson in response to demands that we end the occupation. Breathtaking dumbness abounds in their ranks.

[Mabus]

45. After years of Pepsi, people will want Coke

After eight years of a Democratic administration that was hyped by the GOP and the media as "scandal ridden" people wanted a change. Add to that the media memes that Gore was a fanatic (because of global climate change), Gore was a liar (remember how well that trick worked again against Kerry in 2004?), Gore was delusional (He thinks he invented the internet), the sickening "There's no difference between Bush and Gore" that was repeated during the campaign, etc. So, actually Gore started out in the polls way behind and caught up with Bush over the course of the campaign.

And then there was Nader, Michael Moore, Arianna Huffington, Bill Maher and others that helped perpetuate the Gore myths among their various factions and fans. Don't forget to factor in the Terry McAuliffe DNC that was always more friendly toward the Clintons than Gore. And then there was the DLC that Gore left behind and pissed off. In other words, our own party wasn't working real hard for Gore.

Gore's campaign was by no means farcical. He won despite having the media and the pundits working in overdrive to discredit him.

[JeffR]

78. Farcical was an over-the-top characterization, granted

But it was not a campaign for Gore to be proud of. His next one, I trust, will be better.;-)

[Mabus]

91. I think the campaign as portrayed by the press was such

but on the ground it was a lot different. I wanted Gore as president in 2000 and I worked in two states to do it. The excitement on the ground was high. Also, my husband (before he was my husband) ended up volunteering for Gore in both Nashville and in Iowa. So, my perspective was formed from my own personal experiences during that time.

But, I do think you are right about one thing: if Gore runs again the campaign will be completely different.

[JeffR]

93. I hope it will embrace the grassroots energy you describe

should it happen.

[Mabus]

100. based on the reaction that Gore and his ideas get on DU

I'd say that he would have little to no problem generating grassroots support. People are literally begging Gore to run for president. From my next door neighbor to Jimmy Carter, people are begging him to run. I really don't recall anything like it on a national scale before. We've had some local activists who have garnered calls for them to run but I really do not recall anything like this before on a national level. At every appearance he makes people are asking him, no begging him, to run.

[Buzz Clik]

61. If you don't mind a quick tangent -- is there a GOP candidate that is not a moron?

I think you have to dig pretty deep into the field (those with single digit poll rankings) to find someone who is actually qualified for the job. Gratefully, none of them are as horrible as Bush. With the possible exception of Brownback.

[TwilightGardener]

67. I don't honestly think they're morons. Romney is actually somewhat

qualified, and the rest have at least SOME achievements to their names. But I believe they're wrong, not dumb.

[Buzz Clik]

71. Until 2006, Romney pro-choice and pro-gun control.

Now he's neither. This tactic might get him the nomination among the knuckledraggers, but it won't convince anyone in the center or to the left. That may not be "total moron" material, but it isn't very smart.

[TwilightGardener]

74. Maybe being on every side of the issues is GENIUS, LOL! Something for everyone!

[Buzz Clik]

92. We're already seeing how he's gaming it --

Tell the right that he really was pro-choice and pro-gun in his heart, he simply pretended to be otherwise to get elected governor in Massachussets. Then, he whispers to the left that the pro-choice and anti-gun Romney is the real Mitt, and that this latest stuff is just to appease the rightwing crazies.

If it works, the morons will be those who vote for him.

[JeffR]

79. Brownback's batshit nuts, certainly

So nuts that it's hard to get a read on what his IQ might be. Safe bet, probably, that it's pretty low.

[Buzz Clik]

68. This was and is my biggest problem with Gore.

Bush was a babbling idiot in 2000 (not much has changed), and Gore had a wealth of experience on his side -- including a previous run for President. But, Gore was running from behind the entire campaign, and was able to close the gap only late in the campaign.

On the negative side, Gore has no more experience than he did before. In the context of a politician, he is the same man he was back in 2000.

On the plus side, he has been out of the arena for 6 full years and carries none of the recent baggage being carried by all but Obama.

[JeffR]

81. I think it goes beyond the baggage, though that's germane

I think 6+ years of being way outside the Beltway have brought him wisdom and fresh perspectives. And this was one tremendously bright guy to begin with.

[Labors of Hercules]

7. Simple: The man is more wise and capable than anyone else in current positions of leadership. n/t

[TwilightGardener]

10. Then why wasn't this apparent in 2000?

[Labors of Hercules]

22. Because he was trying to function within a defunct system before having the tools to deal with it.

Once he stepped outside of that system, he has been NOT ONLY able to employ his abilities effectively (and you can't deny he has been so exceedingly effective lately it's almost scary), but has set in motion a plausible reparation to the fucked-up system that prevented the Body Politic from recognizing his excellence earlier.

[TwilightGardener]

38. Sorry, I don't buy the "blame the system or his handlers" BS. He was

an experienced pol in 2000--everyone keeps saying that his handlers kept us from seeing the "authentic Gore", but how weak of a personality do you have to be to allow anyone to convince you to show a false side of yourself? I always found that troubling about him, and it's something I find comforting about Obama--he is authentic, and smart/strong enough not to allow anyone else to define him or convince him to be someone other than who he is.

[Labors of Hercules]

46. He didn't show a false side of himself...

He was a victim of a machine that fosters laziness over thought, that a man who is stupid and can be understood more easily by fools is viewed as a more desirable candidate than a man of letters who talks intelligently and requires those listening to actually think about what is said.

Read "The Assault on Reason" and you will see that "the system and the handlers" are not who I was referring to as "a defunct system". It refers to the one-way paths of communication accepted among the body politic that eliminate dialogue and emphasize lazy, unreasoned personal reactions over making an effort to think and make informed decisions.

[TwilightGardener]

49. A good politician is skilled enough not to be "misunderstood"--like Bill Clinton.

I don't LOVE Clinton, but he was skilled enough to present himself to appeal to the masses.

[Labors of Hercules]

84. uh huh... so does that mean Bush was a good politician too?

Cause he sure as hell "appealed to the ignorant masses".

But really, you hit on why Gore has become so appealing now, and it is that he has overcome his natural inclination to "speak over people" without, (and this is the most important part), WITHOUT dumbing down the message! No matter how you slice it, this is a truly difficult thing to accomplish, and yet Gore is becoming more and more successful with it every day.

[Kahuna]

56. The problem wasn't Gore. The problem was shallow voters who

were swayed by propaganda vs. his record of public service. You apparently were one of those shallow voters. Am I right?

[TwilightGardener]

60. Maybe I am "shallow", in your terms. I'm not here to get into a pissing match

on why I am or am not a well-versed or informed-enough citizen on issues and policies, or whether I'm worthy enough to vote. Consider me an average American voter--I'll take that insult. If a politician cannot find a way to appeal to those who only glean a superficial amount of info on a candidate (most of America), then there's a real "message" or "image" problem. If a candidate requires in-depth study for a voter to see the value of that candidate, he/she is going to lose, it's that simple.

[JeffR]

23. That would be the dang librul media at work, I believe

[Labors of Hercules]

47. yep. And the fact that so many people check their brains at the door when electing Presidents. n/t

[JeffR]

80. Too true. Maybe if some voters could have a beer with friends and

leave their presidential picks to a set of higher criteria, the country wouldn't be such a horrorshow.

[Labors of Hercules]

82. I'll drink to that!

:toast:

[JeffR]

83. Me too!

:toast:

[The Count]

42. IN part because the myth of "librul media" was still alive - they attacked him

In part because the Nader acolytes were casting Gore as 'uncool".
he never had the activists behind him - like Kerry/Edwards did in 2004. But he certainly fought more for my vote than those two did.

[Kahuna]

43. It was apparent to most people. Others were easily swayed by

the anti-Gore propaganda of NADER and the MSM. Their loss.

[Greyhound]

99. Donna Brazile and the fact that he listened to her and her flunkies. n/t

[Malikshah]

9. He's been "in the wilderness" He's been cleansed to a degree

of the beltway filth. He doesn't appear to care any more about handlers and that sort of crap that each and everyone of the current crop are beholden to.

He's got the truth on his side and although the MSM media still has a stick up their collective butts about him, he can deal with them from experience now.

The question that should be asked is why there is any "savior" complex around the front runners for the DEMS-- they've not proven themselves to be working in the best interest of the country and have shown themselves to be looking out for themselves alone.

[TwilightGardener]

13. I don't think there's any savior complex around our front-runners,

and I wholeheartedly believe all three love this country and are not just in it for self-glory, especially Obama.

[Malikshah]

115. Two of them have not proven themselves to have the interests of the populace at heart

And yet they are given passes on a regular basis and shoved down our throats both here and in the MSM

In 2000 and 2004 we were told repeatedly...oh, you silly conspiracy theorists, HRC is not going to run. Yeah, right--some of us knew better and I, for one, was not surprised when she threw her manipulative hat in the ring.

As for Obama-- same thing when he was elected.

As for the "third"-- it's no real race-- it's just the first two. If you're speaking of Edwards--he's close, but will die the death of thousand cuts by the Clintonistas and Obamites.

[TwilightGardener]

118. I think that's nuts. I believe completely that Obama has the "interests

of the populace" at heart. He has a long record of public service.

[Malikshah]

123. Long? Not in comparison to some. And his choosing of mentors

and choices regarding his "roll" in the Senate are damning.

[WCGreen]

11. Well, he is a proven winner.... Well tested against the Right Wing

Machine, he knows now that he can stand up to the onslaught...

He was the first prominent political figure to speak out against the war...

But perhaps he is the closest this country has come to producing a political leader of almost literary proportion since the days of Lincoln...

No one has sunken lower than Gore in the eyes of the American Public...

So that means no one has the capability of rising higher...

If he runs and wins, three-four hundred years from now he will be remembered for at least the circumstances surrounding his life story...

[TwilightGardener]

14. See, I read this and think you're talking crazy. He never impressed me all that much.

[WCGreen]

19. It wasn't when he was a political figure that his reputation rose...

It was how he acted in defeat, how he resurrected his life in another direction....

Rememmber, politics, and therefor leadership ablities, are all about perception...

[still_one]

30. You are right... /nt

[twenty4blackbirds]

102. k&r

*ding* *ding!* That's the definition of a winner.

[still_one]

28. That was because he was painted that way. Read his latest book, it is outstanding

Throughout that whole time the media painted him as a stiff suit with no personality. The real Al Gore was what you saw in his movie An Inconvient Truth, and in his latest book. He is his own person now, not be lead around by a bunch of incompentents

Bill Clinton didn't impress me that much, but to many here he is a god. Funny, I would take Gore over Bill Clinton any day.

[stellanoir]

15. Well "saviour" dunno 'bout that but

I've been calling him "the patron saint of DU" ever since I read about the "shaking the sign" incident from the '01 "ignore your nation" when the three admins were holding a DU.com banner and it was shown on MSNBC and one of the admin's girlfriends called him on his cell and said something to the effect of "stop shaking the sign. . .you're on National TV."

I'd love it if those guys (in their spare time-ha) would do a perma link on to that story on the home page and about what happened to them on that day and the several days after. Reading about it was thoroughly entertaining and I think many would enjoy it.

[hlthe2b]

16. Yeah.. Maybe we should all be rallying around Joe Lieberman!

That's the ticket!

JOE~! JOE~! JOE~! Can't you feel the JOEMENTUM building?!!!




:sarcasm:

[TwilightGardener]

17. Another reason why I question Gore's political judgment. Joe's awful.

[still_one]

21. That was the democratic machinery. Gore has grown much since then

Please recall that in 2004 he endorsed Dean NOT lieberman. Gore saw that his advisors, and the DNC at the time contributed to his downfall. He has taken corrective action since then

[JeffR]

25. That criticism is more than fair

Good point. But the Gore of 2000 is not the Gore of 2007, even if Joe's still the same old fraud he always was.

[hlthe2b]

31. Gore learned a valuable lesson all Dem pols must learn...

DO NOT (overly) rely on the advice of your advisors and handlers.... I'm betting Gore has fully learned those lessons and I'd far rather have someone who learned from those mistakes than those naively likely to repeat them.

Lieberman is a monstrous creation of his own making--not Gore's.

[still_one]

18. It is quite simple, he has been RIGHT on all the issues before it became popular

He was right about the environment
He was right about Iraq
He was right about social security

Most of the leading candidates running on the Democratic party were "johnny come lately"

Iraq, how many voted for the IWR

Frankly, Gore has the experience, and passion, and after what the country did to him in 2000, he deserves a chance again if he so desires

[TwilightGardener]

26. A lot of people were right about Iraq, the environment, social security--

Obama for one. I don't think there's ANY global warming deniers among the Dems. I also think that while it's an important issue that must be addressed, it won't be a driving issue in this election. And "after what the country did to him in 2000, he deserves a chance again"--See, I don't think the country outside of DU really cares about that. Americans look to the future, they're not out to "avenge" Gore. He'd have to prove himself all over again, just like all the others. I'm not saying he shouldn't run, just wondering why he is held in such amazingly high esteem here (to the point that many on DU refuse to support or even consider other candidates), because I apparently missed his "specialness" in 2000, and I'm not really seeing it now, aside from being a very effective spokeman on the global warming issue.

[still_one]

34. Without even running, he has 12% of the vote by the current polls

That is NOT just DU. His latest book is outstanding, and defines him

He is not the same person he was in 2000

[TwilightGardener]

44. Meaningless. The support for Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich is

the same way. Theoretical poll numbers can indicate many things about the race in general, but they don't necessarily indicate true support until someone actually runs and campaigns, and the state-by-state polls near the election count the most.

[rucky]

24. Gravitas.

Plus charisma, a clear vision, a clear message, clear solutions. And all this without even running for anything.

[annabanana]

27. I can't think of another candidate whose election would do more

to restore America's reputation in the World. It is a Karmic cleansing, a mulligan, a cosmic do-over. It would demonstrate better than anything else that the American Democracy is still functioning and has come through it's worst crises since the Civil War with it's ideals and goals intact.

Who else could do that? America actually ELECTED this man the first time... the White House was STOLEN... By saying "NO! WE MEANT IT!" and giving it back to it's rightful occupant we reassert the primacy of The American People.

[TwilightGardener]

32. But that's fantasy. That's a lot to lay at any one man's feet. If/when he runs,

he's going to make gaffes, give boring speeches, etc--just like even the most bright and careful candidates all do. Just like he did in 2000. And those who rejected him in 2000 aren't likely to suddenly embrace him now, because most of them probably don't care all that much about the environment, and will probably have the same negative image of him. He was an object of ridicule--fair or not, that's the sort of thing that sticks over time, especially for those not inclined to take a second look now.

[annabanana]

97. It only "sticks" if we allow the RW wurlitzer to rule the impression

machine. There is rapid response out here now. People who are left with questions will search them out.. here in cyberspace.. There was nothing like this energy and counterbalance back then.

[TreasonousBastard]

33. Grasping at straws, maybe? n/t

[Grandrose]

35. He has been right .....

on the issues and has the knowledge, experience so much more!
Congressman, Senator and Vice President and who best could get us out of the mess we are in?:)

[tiptoe]

36. self-delete

[Mabus]

37. It's isn't worship. It is admiration for the man and his ideas

Because he speaks the truth as he sees it and his views reflect those of a large number of DU'ers. He's also one of the few who has been speaking out for years. He wants to give our government back to the people, not special interest groups. He talks about issues that really matter and he does so very intelligently. He's the Thomas Jefferson of our time.

[TwilightGardener]

41. OK, he is NOT the Thomas Jefferson of our time. Y'all are making him

out to be something much greater than he is. He's a good, bright, decent man, but he's also "No controlling legal authority", overstatement of his achievements, and earth tones. C'mon, people.

[w13rd0]

48. Actually...

...he may BE a modern Thomas Jefferson. I also find it fascinating that you go to:

"No controlling legal authority"
overstatement of his achievements (aka another way of bringing up "I invented the Internet" but now since that's known to be true, it's become "overstatement of his achievements")
and
earth tones

You prove the point he makes in his book. Not a word that refutes or counters his actual policy positions. Following the theft by Bush of the 2000 Presidential Election, Gore went back to his roots. During the intervening time, he's issued statements, well-timed and quite relevant, prescient in their foresight, concerning the matters of the day. He has extensive executive and legislative experience, foreign policy and domestic, oh yeah, and he isn't a senator, and he's from a southern state.

So c'mon people. Tell me the alternative, and why it's a viable alternative. But until the nomination is decided, I'll always hold out hope that Gore would throw himself in, because I would most definately support him for the merits I've already laid out.

[TwilightGardener]

54. Sorry--a guy that could barely beat a moron is not Jefferson.

My ultimate assessment of someone's skills is whether or not they win the game. He lost to Clinton in 1992, and he lost to Dry Drunk CokeHead Business Failure in 2000. You can be a really deep thinker, a statesman, and an all-around swell guy, but without that ultimate talent to get folks to pull the lever for you (at least on the national stage), what good is it? I don't necessarily have faith that he can "seal the deal" this time around, so I continue my support of Obama.

[ValiantBlue]

50. Well....

I do not disagree with you. But at the same time Gore has been consistent on where he stands on those three key issues as highlighted above. People were critical of him while he was Vice President and people that did not look at his way in 2000 were turned off by him as you said.

But I have to say it is 2007 now and the political climate has changed due to the state our country is in (it is in bad shape in my opinion). Not only that but Gore has changed. He has changed for the better and grown as an individual.

The same people that were turned off by him and his critics are yearning now for a political figure that will make a difference. They were critical of Gore in the past becuase of how he stood out like a sore thumb and now they beg for a political figure that is diffrerent like Gore. That pendulum swings one way and comes around eventually. :)

[Mabus]

87. Thanks for repeating the RW memes

Isn't repeating sound bytes fun? Do you have any original thoughts on the subject or are you content just to repeat crapola?

[TwilightGardener]

94. "Repeating RW memes"? What do you think the RW and the media

will do when he's in the race?

[Mabus]

98. Great defense of your use of them

People know Gore better than they did in 2000 now that they aren't seeing him as viewed exclusively by the Beltway pundits and reporters. Gore's practicing disintermediation and has bypassing the usual suspects by going directly to the American people. He is keeping his distance from the political media and is being seen by more people in everything from People magazine to The Daily Show. How many posts have you seen on DU where someone says they know someone who believed the tripe you're repeating in 2000 but have changed their minds? Soon after AIT came out and Gore started doing television and magazine interviews there were literally dozens of such posts.

Even the popular culture is treating him differently. In a recent episode of Family Guy the world was seen as bordering on utopia after past events were changed and Gore was president. This has got to be almost unprecedented. In other words, the American people are learning not to be so superficial and judgmental when it comes to Gore. You should try it too.

[TwilightGardener]

103. If the American people have to learn not to be superficial and judgmental

when it comes to Gore, then there's going to be trouble ahead. Because we're nothing if not superficial and judgmental! :)

[Mabus]

107. So, let me know when you actually want to discuss something 'cuz right now you're dancing all over

the place. You say something and I respond to what you have said and then you come back with something tangential. If you want to intelligently discuss something get back to me otherwise you've proved to me that you have nothing factual to rely on.

[TwilightGardener]

110. Did Gore have weaknesses and flaws in 2000? Are those going to

be brought up again? Absolutely. And he'll have new attacks on him, fairly or not, from RWers. My hesitation with Gore is that many here say "he's changed--he's better now". OK, that may be true, but is this going to be apparent to the public, or is everyone going to say, here comes the guy who invented the internet again? Is he more of an alpha male now, yuk,yuk,yuk. It's coming, and you know it. It makes me nervous, much the same way as Hillary makes me nervous as a general election candidate. I want to win, and I don't want to take any chances.

[The Count]

39. The need for justice over the 2000 theft. DU exists as a result of that.

Gore also became increasingly more relevant since then through all his correct stances.
But we all want

RESTITUTION

[KoKo]

66. RESTITUTION! REDEMPTION OF OUR IDEALS! (sorry for shouting)

:blush:

[Kahuna]

40. Are you watching him on CSPAN right now? Catch the rerun and

then maybe you will be able to answer that question for yourself.

[Labors of Hercules]

51. K&R! A Better justification for our "worship" would be difficult to find...

His circumvent and redirect of that last question asking if The Assault on Reason was a "campaign book"... all I can say is, WOW.

The man is truly brilliant, and proves it over and over again.

[Generator]

52. Because

we all want to go back to the Island. (you have to watch LOST to understand) I personally think, yes, it's a fantasy. It's the ultimate political nostalgia trip. And you can't ever go home again.

Michael Moore called it redemption. Well, if the Democrats lost with Gore their candidate AGAIN, what would that do to the party? I understand that URGE, and the fucking outrageous unfairness that he isn't president right now, and the emotional pull of it. But I also think it's as you are saying in all your posts here, not realistic at all to think he's the answer to everything. I noticed a snippet on Larry King were he backed down from calling out Bush. I turned it off-it ticked me off enough-after Carter backing down on the Bush comments (and Carter is my favorite president of all time) that it was no longer compelling. Gore would lose all his guts and start the mealinmouthedness, pussyfooting around that they all do once he became a candidate. "The election was stolen..err.Larry I really mean.." ENOUGH!

(wow I was just going to keep to the pithy :LOST remark but it got out of hand!)

[TwilightGardener]

55. Good post--I think you capture it well--you can't go home again.

And the consequences of Gore losing in 2008 are too awful to contemplate, for him, our party, AND our country.

[LWolf]

53. For this reason:

Many disenfranchised voters, the non-mainstream, non-dlc, non-blindly obedient flock; the idealistic, the skeptical, the left, the progressive, the peace-loving, are not going to vote for the current "top tier."

Many of those voters WILL, however, compromise to cast a vote for Al Gore. For whatever reason. Gore probably has the best chance of unifying an increasingly fractured party.

It might be a way of reinstating the integrity of American elections after 2000. It might be his willingness to step away from party drama and take on the role of activist for a real issue. It might be his openness about the current state of American politics in his new book. All of this combines to make him a powerful candidate, should he choose to run. More experience than the rest, more integrity than most have shown.

[TwilightGardener]

58. "Reinstating integrity" of elections does not necessarily entail Gore--

that "avenging the past" thing is coming up again here. Americans want a competent leader for 2008--that may or may not be Gore, but I am convinced that restoring integrity by "restoring Gore" is not going to be on the agenda for most Americans. Most Americans do not probably believe that the election was "stolen" by SCOTUS or Diebold, so the election integrity thing is small potatoes at best, though very big here on DU. And as far as unifying the party--my concern is unifying the COUNTRY, pulling R's and Indies to our side. Gore may be the guy to do that (my belief is that it's Obama), but he has to prove it to me. Not by writing books, not by making films--by eating rubber chicken at Denny's in Iowa and kissing babies.

[LWolf]

65. Well, you asked.

I gave you my take.

I come from a different perspective. I would like my 2000 vote vindicated. I would probably be willing to unify behind Gore, where I am not willing to do so for the current top 3. I believe Gore to be "mainstream" enough to bring in republicans.

I don't really care how many rubber chickens a candidate eats, how many babies are kissed, or how many speeches are given. I don't care what a candidate SAYS. I care what a candidate DOES, and whether that matches up with the words. A candidate has to walk his talk to get me to take a look at him.

If I'm not happy with the walk or the talk, my vote isn't there.

In other words, I know a little bit about unification, and some of the reasons why it doesn't always happen.

You don't have to agree with my answer to your question, of course. If you really want to know why, though, it might be good to ponder the reasons people give, rather than dismiss them.

[TwilightGardener]

69. Just giving you my argument--you gave me yours. That's what

it's all about! My point was to explore the reasons for the interest in Gore, by using myself and my arguments as a foil, since I'm not as much a fan. I appreciate what you say--you are an effective advocate for him.

[LWolf]

75. I did the same.

I really can't speak for others; just for myself, and my general perceptions. I know that there are others who share my perspective. Whether or not they are a significant part of the population you're asking about? I don't know.

[SergeyDovlatov]

Al is one of the few politicians with deeply held convictions

... and people respect that.

I feel that three top runners, Edward, Obama, Hillary just flavors of yet one more mainstream politician. (Kucinich or Gravel are great principled guys but they are painted as kooks.)

So out of the top tier, Gore command more respects, has excellent name recognition and considered a hero by many.

[SergeyDovlatov]

57. Al is one of the few politicians with deeply held convictions

... and people respect that.

I feel that three top runners, Edward, Obama, Hillary just flavors of yet one more mainstream politician.

So out of the top tier, Gore command more respects, has excellent name recognition and considered a hero by many.

[TwilightGardener]

59. What "deeply held convictions" did he hold in 2000? Seems like he

was as calculated as Hillary is now.

[NoPasaran]

62. He hath touched us with his noodly appendage

[TwilightGardener]

72. LOL! OK, I don't know what that means...but I Iike it!

[ohio2007]

64. Al Gore is currently a high priest of a new religion

Thats the way it looks to me



http://www.time.com/time/magazine/0,9263,7601070528,00.html

He is the leader of the global warming movement. I think his run for the oval office is over.

[William769]

77. I respect and admire Al gore, and would vote for him if he ran, but...

HE'S NOT RUNNING

[Labors of Hercules]

85. You must pay closer attention... He is waiting. That is all we know.

[Pastiche423]

113. "I have not closed the door on being a candidate"

Al Gore Tuesday May 22, 2007 Larry King Live

[marlakay]

86. No matter what is said times and people have changed

including me. We voted for Gore not because I was excited by him but because he was a democrat. At the time by what the media said I thought they were both the same. I was like most americans, no involved in politics at all. Just voted every 4 years and rarely inbetween. I thought Gore was boring to listen to and stiff. I didn't know him at all and only saw what tv showed. I didn't know bush at all either and from what media said, thought he was moderate republican and didn't think harm would come to country if he won.

God was I stupid and my first wake up call was when they fired Bill Maher who I had just started watching the year before. His show was when I started following things and after 9-11 I knew we had a major problem. And I bought Richard Clarke's book and it opened my eyes to their lies and I have been involved ever since and I worked full time for almost a year on the kerry campaign.

So why do I think this time will be different with Gore...I came up with wanting him all on my own. Hadn't been on this site for months, tuned in and surprise a lot of others felt like I did. That was back around Christmas. He has changed, I have changed, the world has changed since Bush destroyed us. Gore has the strength to fix Iraq (although it shouldn't be his problem to deal with after what was done to him) he will lead the US back to good standing in the world and promote and pass laws for the environment. I think most americans are sorry they were conned into voting for Bush because he was likeable and wouldn't it be cute to have a father & son pres....I have to have faith people will wake up and want a real pres this time before we all die....

[MasonJar]

88. Actually Gore may just be a savior for the whole of the planet if the

USA can elect someone who will listen to "reason" since dumber than dumb will not. No more GOPers in office; they are total crooks or meatheads or corporate whipping boys. The pugs are like the USA corporations; they never look past today's bottom line. Gore actually did fight for the presidency even in the face of Jeb and Katherine and their cheating. We dems let him down; we did not flood Florida with outrage and bodies like the pugs did. We are culpable not Gore. Gore is a statesman, and so is Clark. There very few others left. By the way, Jimmy Carter has also been trying to get Al to run.

[Clark2008]

89. For one thing, the Dems currently running probably can't win.

Al Gore already DID win...

That's just for starters. :)

[Uncle Joe]

101. He's not the savior, but he did empower you to ask that question

for all the world to see when he championed the internet, his reward from the mass corporate media for his vision and dedication to the people was to be obfuscated, ridiculed and slandered for he better part of two years prior to the coup of 2000. The mass corporate media wanted to remain the sole gatekeepers to the truth, because information is power, and the Internet is the biggest challenge they have to their monopoly on the one way information they can pipe in to every American's home via television. It was one way television and radio which brainwashed somewhere around 70% of the American People in to actually believing Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11. I believe Al Gore has done more for democracy and our Constitution than any other leader out there.

If that's not enough consider his vision on the issue of global warming/climate change, in my opinion all other issues pale in comparison to this looming catastrophe.

It was Al Gore who warned us against going in to this foolish, unjust, tragic war in Iraq all based on lies. It was Al Gore who came out with a scathing speech indicting the Bush administration on their use of torture, something not tolerated by our Presidents since George Washington.

On top of that, the man has already been elected to the office only to be subsequently denied by a mass corporate media enabled, Jeb Bush/Katherine Harris assisted, partisan radical right wing Supreme Court.

I've only covered the tip of the iceberg here as to why I will always support Al Gore for President.

[Pyrzqxgl]

104. YAWN!!!

[cleveramerican]

106. You always want what you cannot have

the grass is always greener... I can't get no satisfaction... no matter how you say it, its all the same deluded fantasy.

[TwilightGardener]

112. Yup, a real flesh-and-blood candidate can never compare to myths and legends.

[Deja Q]

108. Same here.

:shrug:


I don't think he can win. For one thing, he can't make a decision - if he plans to run, why all these games when the Dems have officially kicked their debates and stuff running?

I voted for him too. Doesn't compel me to treat him like a deity.

More, with all the news of Gore's hypocrisy on the environment, the republicans would probably WIN if Gore opted to run.

For example, how many eco-unfriendly things can you circle in this picture?


The way all PC operating systems work these days, multiple monitors for reading text is not necessary. He could be using 1/3rd the energy by sticking to one 30" monitor alone. Even less if he used a 23" monitor. And why the TV turned on in the background?

Never mind older stories about high gas and electric bills.

Gore would be cremated for all that, of which the claim "carbon credits" is not an excuse if the environment is in such bad shape we need to cut back NOW. Instead, it's like people who eat low fat foods - they eat 3 times as much because the low fat version has 2/3rds less fat than the original product. That's the mindset installed in people and it defeats the point of low fat in the first place. People still get fat.

I've said it before - the candidate with the cleanest record (no pun intended) is more likely to win. Nobody likes Newt, nobody likes McCain, nobody knows Romney... Lou Dobbs isn't running.

Despite her record for health care that had her denounced as an evil communist, Republicans are seemingly supportive of Hillary because she shares her hubby's views on corporations. Yet with the costs of health care, I'm surprised she isn't being prodded by the R's WITH a ten foot pole. So what's her plan for health care in 2008?

[TwilightGardener]

111. Your post--OUCH! LOL!

[Colobo]

116. He can't save anything because he's not even running.

[snowbear]

117. You're catagorizing DU .. He's not my savoir!

I didn't feel like reading that long chain of responses, but I can't imagine I'm the only one here who doesn't have a candle vigil going waiting for him to enter this race!

[illinoisprogressive]

119. It's called the grass is greener. he won't run so people desire for him to.

and once he does, people will bitch about all kinds of things about him here.

[Lord Helmet]

122. it ain't just here

it's everywhere

[doni_georgia]

124. Maybe because he WON last time around

That and I don't feel any of the other candidates are truly electable. I may be wrong, but Clinton is too calculating and she's the "briar patch" of the Repukes. Barack is terrific but not experienced enough - same for Edwards. Things are in a mess. We need someone with experience and someone who is aready known on the world stage. Whoever wins has an exceedingly difficult job ahead of them. The last time our country was even close to being in this big of a mess we elected Jimmy Carter. Carter is brilliant and a good man, but he was not up for the job at the time. It is going to take someone with the (God I hate this word) gravitas to get the job done. I think Gore is the only person in the Democratic Party with the right combination of experience, respect, confidence, and agenda to get us out of the mess we are in.