Gore-Obama 2008

[beaconess]

Discuss.

:-)

[mtnsnake]

1. Magic to my ears

edited to add: Clark has been my favorite, though, and then Obama. If Gore were to throw his hat into it, that could change everything. Just the same, a Gore/Obama ticket sounds very very good and makes sense. You've got the old pro, Gore, who deserves to be President and the young up and coming Democrat, Obama, who's so inspiring already, that many want to see him get the nod himself.

2. I thought Gore said a pretty definate No. Am I wrong?

[beaconess]

3. I think he could get in if the circumstances were right

I doubt he'd run outright from the beginning, but think he could be convinced to jump in "for the good of the country."

[Kahuna]

6. Circumstances such as the Dems controlling congress and the

Majority of state houses. This greatly reduces the probability of the votes being hacked everywhere ut in Florida. Florida is a lost cause. But we still have California and now we have Ohio to counter Texas and Florida' electoral votes.

[NYCGirl]

9. Not only has he NOT said "no", but he's consistently ruled out making a

"Shermanesque" statement.

[Comicstripper]

17. He RECENTLY has opened the possibility a little

By stating that while he then had no intention of being a candidate, he couldn't rule it out. It is also known that he has met with potential backers and weighed the pros and cons. The general thought is that he will run if Clinton does not.

18. You think Hillary would bow out and stand behind Gore?

[Comicstripper]

49. Well, the rumor is...

Washington rumor is that Hillary may be offered a senate leadership post...

[Ninja Jordan]

4. Gore isn't running.

[tridim]

5. I'm happy as long as Gore is at the top of the ticket

Obama doesn't do much for me, yet. We'll see in another year.

[cascadiance]

36. I'm still a little concerned that Obama might be a "stealth" candidate of the DLC!

I have no firm reason yet for believing this, but his voting record over the last couple of years at times has me shaking my head and wondering if he's more aligned with them than I'd like to believe.

That is why I think we need experienced people who we know how they vote and where they stand on key issues. That's why Gore/Feingold (now that Feingold's dropped out of being head of the ticket) would be ideal for me.

I don't think we can afford to have Boxer on the ticket at all, because we can ill afford to have Arnold appoint her replacement.

But one thing is for sure for me. I DON'T want anyone currently connected to the DLC to head the ticket, AT ALL! We need to get public campaign financing at a national level soon, and a DLC president wouldn't let that see the light of day! Guaranteed!

[zulchzulu]

7. Two things...

1. Gore has said on a number of occasions that he is not running. I don't think he is going to run.

2. Why do we want to have Obama playing second-fiddle as VP? He is his own candidate and it would serve better for him to run in 2016, when he is only 54 years old.

[rocktivity]

8. I think Clark is a more bulletproof than Gore

But Obama would be great at balancing either ticket.

:headbang:
rocknation

[tblue37]

46. Exactly about Clark. The MSM will continue to savage Gore, because they like to, and

also because they would hate to admit they were wrong to do it in 2000. But Clark is the ideal candidate to bring in the liberal base and also the center and center-right voters, because he is liberal in his positions, but his military background and the fact that he was a Republican and served under Republican presidents attracts others.

Also, he has spent the last 4 years traveling the country shoring up Democratic candidates and getting out the vote for them. He ahs paid his dues and sharpened his skills as a campaigner. He needs to be on our ticket in 2008.

[NastyDiaper]

10. My current (2*favorite+winability) list:

Gore/Clark/Obama/Boxer/Feingold/Clinton o_O.

I think they should all give it a go. At this stage of the game my vp pick is unweighted by winability.

[katsy]

11. Don't wake me up...

I'm dreaming.

An Office of the Presidents.

Gore is the steward of the earth & Foreign relations

Wes is in charge of the dod

Obama is in charge of national affairs

[NastyDiaper]

13. Inhofe out. Boxer In. Environment chair.

I'm still dreaming. And that one's in the bag :)

[Clark2008]

16. Except (and my mission is to continue to educate DUers) Clark

CANNOT be Secretary of Defense.

Sigh.... for the millioneth time: Federal code requires the Def. Sec. be OUT of active-duty military service for at least 10 years before being named to that position. Clark will have only be out of active-duty service for eight years in 2008.

[katsy]

19. Sorry! nt

I'll remember that.

Cutie pie in chief.

[peacetalksforall]

12. Gore-Feingold ..

If a potential candidate is in the Senate - should they not run if their Governor is not a Democrat (and State rules allow the Governor to name a replacement)?

[jefferson_dem]

14. Ace ticket! Ultra-yummy!

:applause:

[jpwhite]

15. Gore and Obama would be great.

I think this combination is great. Someone earlier said that Gore isn't going to run. Then put Wesley Clark and Barack Obama together. Another person asked why put Obama as the VP. The answer is fairly simple: he is going to get attacked for not having enough experience in politics. I think his time as VP would give him more credibility. Then in 2016 when he would run for president, he would win easily.

James
[e-mail]

[Nimrod2005]

20. Yes - your reaction?

[beaconess]

29. Few things would make me happier

[mentalsolstice]

21. A match made in heaven.

I think Gore has benefited from his time out of office (although the rest of us haven't), and it has been a growth experience. He was an insider for so long. Having been on the outside for the last six years will be to his advantage. He would be an entirely different candidate than the one we saw in 2000.

[AtomicKitten]

22. Yes, please.

:)

[Heewack]

23. We need new blood.

Obama would be great. Gore is unelectable. He is too polarizing after 2000. I know this won't very popular but he actually does the issue of global warming a disservice. He overstates the facts in his attempts to gain public action. Meaning that he takes the most extreme projections that are largely guesses to scare the largest number of folks that he can. It doesn't help the argument in getting this country to get on board real susbstantive action in regard to global warming. I have a great appreciation for his zeal, but he neesd to grasp where the argument is.

[VOX]

24. Gore "overstates the facts" re global warming????? Any SOURCES for this????

You should back up that statement with links to articles from any periodicals and/or sites that aren't right wing.

[Heewack]

25. Here ya go.

http://nsidc.org/news/press/20060706_goremoviefaq.html

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=299

Are you aware that the current pace of sea level rise is about 2 millimeters a year? That is double from several decades ago and even it it were to double again very soon, that would be about 10 inches every 50 years. At its current pace that is 10 inches every 100 years. Human made CO2 levels will likely fall off as oil supplies begin to dwindle. What we are witnessing now is the earth's reaction to decades ago increases. The effects from today won't be felt for sa good while in the future. By the time we run out of oil the earth will likely be adjusting in some other direction. The effects of GW will likely be felt most in poorer regions. I guess you could say it's the earth's way of dealing with over-population.

[tinrobot]

31. Did you even read those articles you cited?

Here's some quotes:

From nsidc.org

I think An Inconvenient Truth does an excellent job of outlining the science behind global warming and the challenges society faces in the coming century because of it.

from RealClimate

How well does the film handle the science? Admirably, I thought. It is remarkably up to date, with reference to some of the very latest research. Discussion of recent changes in Antarctica and Greenland are expertly laid out. He also does a very good job in talking about the relationship between sea surface temperature and hurricane intensity. As one might expect, he uses the Katrina disaster to underscore the point that climate change may have serious impacts on society, but he doesn't highlight the connection any more than is appropriate

So... how is Al Gore misleading the public again?

From everything I've read, Gore's sources and data are pretty close to the mark -- unlike your Coulteresque pronouncements about global warming 'tapering off' and being a form of 'population control' for poor people.

[Heewack]

26. I'll state it another way.

Inaction is the biggest problem we face right now. Stating the case in the extremes opens the door for the whole issue to be wrongfully attacked, leading to more inaction.

[tinrobot]

30. That was Gore 2000...

Have you listened to him speak lately?

Way more authentic. He doesn't do focus groups or listen to consultants much these days. He speaks from the heart and with convivction. He's gone from being processed food to totally organic.

[midnight]

27. Ok, I can recommend this....

Since Feingold said he doesn't want in.

[il_lilac]

28. would be a dream come true

Gore won once already and after 8 years Obama would be easily elected with our country back to a respectable state. **sigh**

[tinrobot]

32. Seems like 16 good years to me...

Though I think Gore could run well with a number of others - Clark, for example.

[loyalsister]

33. Perfect

An elder statesmen and a young VP who radiates optimism!
Suppose Gore had been at the top of the ticket in 92?
They fiddled with that formula during the last election.

Obama is a perfect VP pick for long term thinking........

[immerlinks]

34. Let's not overlook our governor

Bill Richardson.

He has a lot going for him. He has been very effective and has just been reelected in a landslide. He has served in the House and had a number of positions in the Clinton administration. Remember, governors always seem to do much better than Senators in presidential races.

I think he could capture states that might otherwise go red in the West.

[stillrockin]

35. Love Gore, love Clark, Obama--not so much.

:patriot:

[Nothing Without Hope]

37. Obama is inexperienced, plus I don't trust him. I see him as a DLC

apprentice obediently toeing their line. I wouldn't be surprised to see him as the preferred running mate for a Hillary Clinton presidental bid.

I would greatly prefer Al Gore/ Wes Clark for 2008. Now THERE is a ticket that is both winning and truly excellent for the country.

[zann725]

38. Obama negates the strengths of Gore. I don't "see" them as compatible either.

There are plenty of others who'd "work" well with Gore...like Kerry or Feingold, or even Durbin.

What IS this obsession with Obama? To me, he's like luke-warm water.

[OneBlueSky]

39. I'd prefer Gore/Clark, or Gore/Feingold, or . . .

Gore and most anyone, although Obama isn't a particular favorite . . . but as long as Al Gore's at the top of the ticket, I'll work my ass off for him and whoever his running mate is . . .

[bobbie]

40. Discuss? Ok, Obama has proved nothing, he's an unknown, untested entity.

He talks real pretty, helluva speechifier. But he hasn't walked the walk. He's a newbie who has been a middle of the roader as far as I can see.

We have bonafides like Clark and Gore right now. Obama can wait his turn and focus on proving himself.

[RiverStone]

41. This combo has always been my #1 choice!

[Apollo11]

42. In Gore We Trust

It's interesting to return to this topic in the light of last week's election results.

Here are some of my thoughts and observations ...

1) Gore won in 2000, overcoming unhelpful media coverage and despite Clinton's abuse of power over a vulnerable intern. A hefty margin in the popular vote and only defeated by what I would call wide-scale theft in Florida (like not counting thousands of unambiguous overvotes where people first pulled the lever for Gore and then also wrote in his name). If the SCOTUS had paid any attention to respecting the intent of Florida's voters, Gore would still be President today. I think we all know this, right?

2) Gore did not seek the nomination in 2004 partly because it was too soon, and partly because he sensed that the Party and the Country did not have any appetite for a re-run of the 2000 election. But Gore's not running in 2004 does not necessarily prevent him coming back in 2008.

3) At this point, Gore is the most experienced and qualified potential Presidential candidate. Simply put ... he would be "the best person for the job". Probably the biggest barrier to him securing the Democratic nomination is the question of whether he has the personal appetite and ambition to run for office again and be at the center of a national election campaign. I can see that if he really doesn't want it, then it will be impossible to draft him, because everyone will pay attention to people that are genuinely interested in running (like Clark and Edwards).

4) If Gore would run again, it would have to be for President. The idea that Gore would run for the VP slot after holding that office for 8 long years is simply not credible. But that doesn't exclude that he would serve in some other capacity - in the cabinet of a future Dem President. If we can't have Gore as our President, then I like the idea of Gore serving as special adviser and "international ambassador" on climate issues. Maybe also environmental protection and sustainable development.

5) Gore does not have to make a decision until the fall/winter of 2007. He can afford to wait on the sidelines, watch other candidates coming forward, and see how the wind is blowing. Given Gore's history, it doesn't make sense for him to enter a crowded field, starting out in 3rd or 4th place (behind Clark and Hillary). He can only enter if it looks like people are really calling for him to run again, and the Party would be ready to unite around his candidacy.

6) Kerry is not as strong a potential candidate as Gore. Most people believe he lost the popular vote in 2004. Most people believe he was for the invasion of Iraq (and the PATRIOT Act) before he was against it. He has negatives around his personal history and around the way he talks. He has the image of being from the "north-eastern liberal elite". He is not able to tell a joke properly - even if you think it is appropriate to make jokes about the Iraq War during an election campaign (which I do not).

7) Clark is a great communicator, but lacks political experience. Would make a great Vice-President, Secretary of Defense, National Security Adviser or maybe Secretary of State. But if Gore refuses to run - then I agree that Clark would be a strong contender for President.

8) Edwards is another effective communicator - even if some people find him too slick. But he is simply not as well-qualified to be President as Al Gore (if Gore can be persuaded to run).

9) At this point, all we can do is keep Gore's name out there as a potential contender for President. If Gore sees that millions of people are calling on him to run, then that will make it more likely that he would change his mind about seeking the nomination. But of course - a strong grassroots campaign still does not guarantee that Gore will decide to enter the primaries.

So, in light of the above, I recommend to you all the following pro-Gore sites:

www.algore.org
www.draftgore.com
www.draftgore2008.org
www.patriotsforgore.com
www.climatecrisis.net
:-)

[bklyncowgirl]

43. Love it. Experience and know how married to youth and charisma

Al Gore knows how to be president. He can hit the ground running. He could use a little help on the charisma thing however and who among the Democrats has more charisma than Barack Obama?

Add to that the historic significance of an African-American on a major party ticket and this is a team to die for.

[LWolf]

44. Gore, yes. Obama, no.

Originally, I just wanted to see him spend some years in Congress, compiling a record that I could analyze to see if I would want him in higher office. Recently, I've seen his name so often that I've developed a callous of resistance that gets thicker with every mention. He is moving further and further from ever being in position to gain my vote. At this rate, he'll be on my "no vote" list before he ever appears on my ballot.

[tblue37]

45. No--Not Obama.

Wes Clark needs to be on our ticket. I love Gore, and would love to have him as president, but I think the MSM would savage him as they did before. But Gore/Clark would be my ideal ticket. If not that, then Clark/someone else

[Marnieworld]

47. Nah. Gore/Clark

Obama is still too new nationally imo. Gore/Clark would be the perfect combo.

[Blue_In_AK]

48. Much better. n/t