If Al Gore threw his hat into the ring today

[pscot]

how many of you would switch? I saw him on Link TV this morning giving a talk on environment spopnsored by moveon.org. The man is smart, witty and passionate. He has a vision for the future, and a fire in his belly that wasn't seen much in 2000. He fiercely took on the polluters and the Bush administration. He spoke brilliantly for an hour and a half without notes, and by the time he finished he had 'em on their feet applauding wildly. I would vote for him again in a heartbeat.

[On the Road]

1. Al Has Always Been My #1

but I think the time for him to have entered has long since passed.

[elcondor]

49. Mine too

I hope I will be able to vote for him someday--I was too young in 2000. I think that if Kerry's scandal had been true and/or no one had a good lead over the pack, then Gore would be able to legitimately jump in. Otherwise, it would be best for him to sit this one out and wait until either a brokered convention or the next election (2008 or 2012, as applicable).

[ramapo]

2. No way

Gore had his chance to run again. He didn't and there's no way he will.

I wouldn't support him because he'd just screw things up at this point.

I'm glad he's speaking out. Too bad it took losing the Presidency to get him going.

[AndyP]

3. Nope

He didn't have that flair when he ran last time, that's what turned him off to so many people. I don't think a lot of people can see past that. I think he'd mess things up and I'd just stay home in November if it came to that.

[anti-NAFTA]

4. You can't spit on the American worker that much

and get my support. Sure, I think he's changed and has learnt how to speak; but that doesn't warrant my support.

[corporatewhore]

ditto

[mojo2004]

5. If Gore had been in the race....

when Dean fell apart, it would have been Gore who would have jumped ahead of the pack instead of Kerry. I think Gore would have a better chance.

[mccormack98]

6. In a heartbeat!!!

Gore is the One. Unfortunately for us, he is also a party man. The party seems to have pressured him not to run and so he obliged.

I really wish he'd run. He'd blow Bush away. His polling numbers have been strong all year - stronger than the other democrats.

[Frodo]

7. Can't happen

He can't get his name on enough ballots (perhaps ANY). The only way onto the podium is through a floor fight at the convention and Kerry doesn't look like he's going to fail to get the nomination on the first vote.

[GreenPartyVoter]

8. Nope

I mean, I'd back him because I am ABB.

But I'd be crying cause I know we'd lose.

[dae]

9. It's a tad late, like 5 or 6 months maybe? :-)

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

10. Yes - if he apologized for NAFTA

otherwise, probably not

[cosmicdot]

11. I'd rather keep him where he is until convention time

just in case we need a consensus candidate ... he's safer where he is during Media-Rove attack and destroy season ...

the last person * would want to face in a debate is the reminder to everything-in-a-glance: Al Gore

[democratreformed]

12. not me n/t

[Sly Kal]

13. Yes

Since I have no candidate at this time I'd be happy to support Al Gore.

[Thrill]

14. Yes

And Gore would win Tenn this time

[demnan]

15. Sure

But I'm still hoping we will win.

[mitchum]

16. No, he has terrible political instincts

[argonne]

17. He'd miss

the ring.

[zoeyfong]

18. I would definitely vote for him over Kerry.

[Piperay]

19. No...

I couldn't stomach a repeat of the 2000 campaign, which is exactly what the repukes would do. I want to see something entirely different. I would vote for him in the GE but I would be prepared to lose.

[Raya]

20. In 2000 Gore Got the Same Shaft that Many Here are Giving Kerry Now

Live and learn

[molly]

42. Well said.

[littlejoe]

21. If he threw his hat in the ring today I would step on it!

[union_maid]

22. I would still back Kerry

And if Gore had been running all along, I'd still have backed Clark when he was running. I was not thrilled with the idea that Gore was going to be the defacto candidate back when it seemed that was the case. I think he's a lousy campaigner. He has learned how to speak, but I don't know if that would translate to his campaign this time around. I think he's a good man. I think he'd probably be a decent president, but not better than some of the choices we've had this time around.

[arewethereyet]

23. it should get thrown back out.

[Spirochete]

24. Not at this point

it's too late for him to get into this one as a candidate. Not fair to the ones who have been campaigning all along.

[bowens43]

25. He lost last time and he would lose again.

Gore had everything going for him in 2000 and he lost. Bush is a MUCH stronger candidate then he was in 2000 and Gore would be a much weaker candidate.

[arewethereyet]

28. in a nutshell, yup

[goclark]

26. No Gore Switch For Me

I really supported him in 2000. I was still a big fan until he came out early for Dean. I thought that was so unfair to the other candidates.

And now I see him as wishy washy. One day an on fire speech,the next one not so on fire.

I'm glad to see that he is out speaking for the environment an other issues that are dear to our party. I really want to like him but I would rather vote for JK or JE
or
my guy.... the GENERAL

[Skip Intro]

27. Hell yeah I'd go for Gore, but I think its too late for 2004 - a shame. nt

[sandnsea]

29. Nah, I'd vote Nader

Just like way too many people here did last time.

[Samantha]

30. In a heartbeat

I will probably write him in in 2004. Al Gore is in a class by himself. He was also the first notable Dem to stand up and speak out against the war in Iraq.

[saracat]

31. NEVER

Al Gore betrayed us twice. First by not having the guts to challenge Scotus And never demanding a total recount of Florida and second by skulking off and hiding and never saying a word even when Bush trashed Kyoto.Gore is a moral coward who takes the stage only when convenient to himself.

[mccormack98]

32. Wrong - please review your history

"Not having the guts to challenge Scotus ..." Ok, and do what? Declare the Scotus as an enemy combatant and send them to Gitmo?

"...And never demanding a total recount of Florida" - That WAS the issue, remember? Gore said "I want to recount the maximum number of counties permitted by Florida State law" - which was four. Katherine Harris said "You're taking too long - no recount for you." The Florida Supreme court said "Screw just recounting 4 counties. Recount ALL of the counties." Scotus said "You can recount all counties you like - but you have to finish by tomorrow evening! Hahahahaha!!!"

"Skulking off" ... Er, no. He gave Bush a shot at running the country then re-emerged September 23, 2002 with a broadside aimed at Bush's proposed Iraq resolution. Remember? He gave Bush 2 and 1/2 years to run the show. And how did the establishment within Gore's party respond? They made nasty comments and made it clear that Gore was embarrassing them. Why? Because the party was caving on Iraq.

Gore followed the will of the party and declined to run. But polls all through 2003 showed Gore to be heads and shoulders above the rest of the field in popularity. And Gore ALWAYS matched up much better against Bush than did any other democrat - including Hillary.

Make no mistake: if a national poll were held today with Gore in it, he would destroy Kerry and Edwards. And he'd match up better against Bush than either.

Gore has been a loyal party player who has done his country a great service. I don't think we should be bashing him.

Bill

[saracat]

35. Sorry

He could have appealed the Scotus decision.He said he wouldn't"for the good of the country" as I recall.He could have insisted on the total recount. What was there to be afraid of ? Civil War? If the vote wasn't worth fighting over, nothing is. And he did too skulk off! Two years and not a peep out of him.
"He gave Bush a shot at running the country "
And why should he do that ? Courtesy to a criminal who deprived us of our right to vote? And exactly what did big Al do for all the Jews in Palm Beach whose votes were counted for Buchanan? And the Blacks who were treated as felons and didn't get their votes counted? Nothing.He didn't get involved.He didn't even back the Black Caucus when they protested the Bush electors.
" He gave Bush 2 and 1/2 years to run the show. "
Excuse me? And who exactly was he to "give " Bush Anything. I thought that we had elected Gore, and I certainly didn't "give Bush 2 and a half years to do anything. And I believe that Gore not running again ,when he had a moral imperative was only another betrayal of the voter and not to be applauded as Party loyalty.
In retrospect it should come as no surprise that Gore would pick Lieberman ,who was the first Dem to condemn Clinton as his running mate.I didn't think it at the time but now I realize that choice as indicative of the backstabber Gore is. He turned on Clinton and he betrayed us!

[uhhuh]

37. Huh?

You can appeal a Supmeme Court decision? I didn't think you could. My understanding is that they have the final say on law, and that they base it on precedent. Who would the appeal go to? The FISA Courts?

[jsw_81]

38. A Constitutional amendment can trump a SCOTUS decision

But that clearly wasn't going to happen in Bush vs. Gore.

[Samantha]

45. You have your facts wrong

As David Bois plainly stated, there is no appeal from the United States Supreme Court. That is not the same as saying the Supreme Court Five did not act politically; it is the same as saying there is nothing one can do about it, short of rioting in the streets. Gore did not want people in the streets, although Clinton did, thus Gore issued his remark, for the good of the country.

Gore had no option of getting a statewide recount in Florida from the inception of the election dispute. There was no constitutional provision in Florida law to ask for one. The only two avenues to achieving a statewide recount were: (1) consent from the Governor of the State, and we do remember who that was, right?; (2) by order of a court. Thus when the Florida Supreme Court intervened due to the Florida legislature having inserted in the Constitution two conflicting rules for election procedure, it subsequently acted as courts are empowered to act -- to interpret the law, not to rewrite it. Gore's selection up until that time of strategic counties to recount was simply staying within the purview of Florida law as it was written at that time and within the recommendations of A Recount Primer, the election Bible both Gore and Bush* were using as their playbook at that time. In other words, Gore played by the literal rules, not the political rules Republicans accused him of employing.

Al Gore is one of the finest politicians to ever serve this Country. I do not understand how people can constantly demean his contributions to this Country and discredit his inspiring performance to lead this Country and we as a people in a direction that we should be going.

I believe when people do stoop to discredit Al Gore, because of his sterling record, that unfair criticism is merely a bad reflection on the voice making it as opposed to the target of the attack. Al Gore is in a class by himself, and his core constitutency is not likely to find any time soon another source of inspiration who can come close to Gore's stature.

And yes, Gore head and shoulders above outpolled all Dems who entered the presidential race, and one who did not, Hillary Clinton. The biggest mistake the DLC made was to discourage Gore from running. Their selection and support of a pro-war pro-tax cut platform and their determination to move the party to the right makes the 2004 race come within a whisker of going either way. With the recent entrance of Nader into the race, the DLC's public willingness to drop the anti-war, anti-Bush* liberal element of the base who refuse to succumb to its ABB brainwashing, i.e., support the war, move to the right or get out, puts its strategy for winning in 2004 in supreme jeopardy. As Al Gore commented after our 2002 election losses, in order to win elections we must distinguish ourselves from Republicans. This the DLC does not embrace. Howard Dean, endorsed by Gore, did embrace this philosophy, and like Gore, became a victim of the party's determination to run a Bush-lite* candidate.

It's a sad political day for the liberal base of the Democratic party, but it's a tragic day for the DLC. One element or the other is doomed to disappear after this election, and it remains to be seen which it will be.

[burning bush]

33. Wow! What An Amazing Piece of Revisionism!

Post #32 deals with your errors quite nicely, but I'm always amazed that posts like yours keep popping up.

You know, you don't have to worry if you just don't like Gore. You won't get arrested for being biased. You don't have to pretend that Gore did some disservice to this country, just to rationalize your dislike.

Gore did everything within hispower to fight the Bush takeover, and then instead of sulking off, he used his connections to lay the foundations of a media liberation, stood up to Bush when NO Dems (with the exception of Wellstone) had the cojones, and got out of the race early enough for the other candidates to have a clear field, rather than lingering around, half in and half out, just muddying the waters and dissipating his energy.

When will people quit trying to blame Gore for Bush?

[burning bush]

34. Dream Candidate

Would pull support from every other person in the race, and destroy Bush. All the folks that now want Bush gone would know that Gore got the shaft, and rethink their error from 2000.

But it won't happen. Gore said he was out - he is out.

Oddly and unfortunately, we may get another shot at Gore in 2008. I don't think Kerry is gonna win this one. He is at the same place in the polls as Dukakis was at a similar point, with much more baggage than Mike.

I hate it, but I think Kerry will lose big time.

[jsw_81]

36. I'd stick with Kerry

Gore had his chance last time and blew it.

[Tim_in_HK]

39. He would be laughed off the stage. n/t

[Adjoran]

40. No way

I held on for Al through last fall. If he had got in then, I would have been supporting him fully.

Now is way too late.

[VOX]

41. I love and admire Al. But no, not now...

He would have made a fine president, and it's a tragedy that is not our president now. But he may not even be a viable candidate anymore. And his coming back in would only underscore that sad possibility.

There would be no way to even do this without damaging the Democratic Party as it lines up for the fight of its life.

No.

[mac2]

43. ZZZZZZZZZZZ

[MoonRiver]

44. Not anymore.

He had his chance and could have been the Howard Dean, who WON. Instead, he wimped out and would lose us the presidency if he gets in now. We have to be as united as humanly possible in order to get out the vote. Gore would divide us at this point.

[mbee]

46. Al Gore will always be my

President! He'd get my vote any time he wants it.

[DaveSZ]

48. Anyone who says

There is no difference between Bush and Gore is an idiot.

[DrFunkenstein]

47. Only If He Grew Back The Beard