If Gore runs Hillary is toast, war chest and all.

[zonkers]

[jobycom]

1. Thanks for the info. nt

[zonkers]

10. Yeah, my cadre of political analyists put our heads together and figured this one out.

[CJCRANE]

20. I commend them for their succinct summary

of the situation. It can get tiring to read all those lengthy reports.

[Dr Fate]

36. But did you focus test it on ball-cap & teddy-bear sweater wearing Mid-Westerners?

Did you focus test it?

DID YOU FOCUS TEST IT???

I MUST KNOW!!!!

[Viva_La_Revolution]

2. yep! nt.

[evlbstrd]

3. True.

[Selatius]

4. What kind of odds do the bookies in Vegas give Gore if he runs?

Anybody know?

[snowbear]

6. I'll betcha the Vegas bookies have all new numbers after the fundraising rpts come in..

What's going to happen if - - - - - (close your ears for a second SaveElmer )

.. but what's going to happen if Hillary actually comes in 2nd in the first big fundraising report since everyone jumped in?



(Everyone so far I mean.. hopefully Gore & Clark will also jump in soon)

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. If Gore runs, the gop will spend $1.35 on their own campaign.

& run some worthless shit like romney.

[illinoisprogressive]

7. I've read that is what he is watching for. Why he has not totally closed the door

If Edwards or Obama do not take off and beat Hillary then he is thinking of getting in to stomp her. I keep reading this so, this must be the true deal. If Obama or Edwards take off and become the projected nominee then he will not get in. But, if they cannot beat Hillary by September, he will get in to save us from a rule of Hillary.

[Dean Martin]

11. I'm all for that

Because to me, a Hillary presidency is pretty much a continuation of a Republican presidency. If she gets the nomination, a Republican wins no matter which one actually wins.

[paulk]

24. yeah, that kind of reasoning worked so well for the country

back in 2000....

[w4rma]

38. Things have changed since 2000. The Democratic base cares about primaries, now. (nt)

[paulk]

44. that's not the point

The point Mr. Martin makes is that there is no difference between an HRC presidency and a Republican one. It's the same nonsense we heard from Nader back in 2000 - that there was no difference between the parties. It's a lie, and a lie for which the country is still paying the consequences.

[Hieronymus]

8. I agree, Gore is a rock star right now ..

:hi:

[knight_of_the_star]

9. If he jumped in he would win the nom

Period. He's got solid cred in the party and outside as a sound man on the environment, and people would probably put him in if nothing else to say, "You know what, we wish he WAS in the WH when he should have been!"

[oasis]

12. Toast......... Hillary?

:toast:I'm most pleased to oblige you :toast:You ain't seen nothing yet.

Just wait until her inauguration.:toast:x1,000,000,000,000,000. :bounce:

[calimary]

13. I would think if Gore runs, EVERYBODY else is toast.

Hillary, Obama, Edwards, rudy, mccain, willard, nader, the whole lot of 'em. I think there's a real hunger for him out there - a yearning. Especially as people pause to think what might have been had they voted more wisely in 2000. I hope and pray he does. I think he's EXACTLY what we need.

[Apollo11]

15. Agreed - except that Gore won in 2000

so it would be more accurate to say "as people pause to think what might have been if the US Supreme Court had upheld the right of voters in Florida to have their votes counted."


Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore! :patriot:

Read Rolling Stone magazine: WHY GORE SHOULD RUN -- AND HOW HE CAN WIN
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13248532/why_gore_should_run__and_how_he_can_win

Get ready for Al Gore's next book - The Assault on Reason - out in May!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600877.html

Visit the following websites:
www.algore.com
www.algore.org
www.draftgore.com - Sign the petition! :)

:kick:

[Uncle Joe]

26. I believe some will be bagels with cream cheese.

:)

[calimary]

40. Or crumpets - with lots of little holes in 'em.

And burnt, at that.

:)

[Apollo11]

14. Bookmakers give Al Gore a good chance of winning

If you want to place a bet on the winner of the 2008 Presidential election, here are the odds you can get at www.sportsbook.com (look in Sportsbook - Live Odds - Exotics).

Hillary Clinton 1-1
Al Gore 3-1
John McCain 3-1
Barack Obama 6-1
John Edwards 8-1
Rudy Giuliani 10-1
Mitt Romney 10-1
Sam Brownback 10-1
Bill Richardson 12-1
Wesley Clark 20-1

So this would suggest that Hillary is seen as the most likely winner. This is probably because of all the media attention, and the assumption that Al Gore will most likely not seek the Dem nomination.


Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore! :patriot:

Read Rolling Stone magazine: WHY GORE SHOULD RUN -- AND HOW HE CAN WIN
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13248532/why_gore_should_run__and_how_he_can_win

Get ready for Al Gore's next book - The Assault on Reason - out in May!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600877.html

Visit the following websites:
www.algore.com
www.algore.org
www.draftgore.com - Sign the petition! :)

:kick:

[zonkers]

16. Gore should bet fifty million on himself to win --- then declare intent to run.

[Apollo11]

17. He could then promise to payback campaign donors after he wins

Or alternatively - pay down a tiny slice of the national debt ... :eyes:

[Guaranteed]

35. Wow- and that's for the GE, too. nt

[Doondoo]

18. I'd vote for Gore in a heartbeat

[wyldwolf]

19. The only ones who believe that are people who can't accept reality

..and that is from a Gore fan.

[BlueIris]

21. I can think of at least three other potential candidates who could toast her,

February Cali primary and all. But the Economic Freedom Foundation folks are going to toast her no matter what.

[mtnsnake]

22. The only place Hillary will ever be toast is here on DU

Out in mainstream Democratic America, you might be more than a little bit disappointed.

[Dr Fate]

37. And also in the Midwest & Southern States.

All the Republicans need is a white dude who can talk half-way straight and she is toast in those states. Even as conservative as they are- and recent DEM wins aside- they cant stand her there.

Ironically, it's one thing that a majority of DEM activists and Red-State residents have in common- no one trusts her or really likes her personality.

I know it is outrageous- but no matter how conservative she tries to act- they will always hate her inthose large geographical regions.

I actually see more enthusism for her at DU than from people I meet in person- but I do personaly know 2 people who are leaning towards supporting her.

Who knows- you may be right and we all may be in for a big suprise-if so, let's hope she makes it a pleasant one.

[SaveElmer]

42. Evidence to back that up?

Recent polls have her defeating or tying the top Republican contenders in Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, and Ohio, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, California, and Maryland...national polls have her consistently defeating Republican challengers as well as her Democratic competition.

Her approval rating is at 58%...while her negatives have been dropping steadily since the start of the campaign!!!

[PresidentObama]

48. SaveElmer, meaningless polls. Tisk, tisk.

I don't know how Hillary will do in the Southern and Midwest states, I know she has no chance in Missouri because of the strong anti-Clinton feelings here and plus the state Presidentially is leaning more then often towards the GOP. She'll have to wow Missourians to get their support. And I know a lot of Democrats who don't like her, and don't trust her for whatever reason.

Time will tell if she gets the nomination, and gets the chance to see how she'd do in these states. But I don't think we know for sure. Polls certainly aren't, at this point, a good indicator either. She's very polarizing to a lot of people, and she'll have to find a way to overcome that. She has the big money, and the media hype. Again, time will tell!!

[SaveElmer]

50. Meaningless polls?

They have far more meaning that hairs on the back of your neck...or the ever popular "I don't know anyone that supports Hillary so she is unelectable."

Polls right now have meaning in that she is now the frontrunner...that is undeniable. I have never claimed they a predictor of the final outcome...but they certainly put the lie to the meme that she is unelectable in these areas.

In fact Chris Bowers over at MyDD argues Hillary's strength is even greater than meets the eye when comparing her position in the polls now with past election cycles...

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/1/30/181044/219

[PresidentObama]

51. Polls are meaningless right now.

You've graciously said yourself because she is the frontrunner now doesn't mean she will be so in a year. It's an indicator of things right now, and a great campaign tool to measure how much they are connecting with voters and supporters. But we have a year, and we haven't reached anything of importance in this race minus the introduction of the candidates. Once we get to the debates, and so on and the race forms up if she is the frontrunner, then that will give meaning to these polls and she'll win the nomination.

I suggest you go and search for the thread I posted earlier about polls in Iowa that was written by Mark Mellman.

And I didn't say she was unelectable, did I? I said I don't know anyone who supports her. And I know a lot of Democrats locally and talk to plenty of others throughout the state who share the same situation of not knowing many who like Hillary. I don't think she'll win in Missouri because of the anti-Clinton feeling in this state, and a lot of Democrats seem to not be energized about her possible status as the nominee. Then again, to be fair, I know a lot of Missourians who weren't super energized about John Kerry in 2004 and whom liked others like Dean and Edwards.

[SaveElmer]

52. ...

"It's an indicator of things right now, and a great campaign tool to measure how much they are connecting with voters and supporters."

So they are not meaningless...right? :-)

And of course my original reply was in response to the poster who said she could not win in the midwest and south...with no evidence to back that up...I provided evidence that the opposite is apparently true

[PresidentObama]

54. Let me rephrase myself, meaningless in the long run.

And I don't think polls are evidence this far out. We will see if she even gets the nomination before we worry about her individual chances in each state in the midwest and the south.

[SaveElmer]

56. Ok I will accept that...

Though I do think the fact that she is ahead in two midwest and two southern states, all of which went red last time...is a pretty good indicator that she would be competitive there...

[PresidentObama]

57. Which three states?

I'm really worried about Ohio, it's so damn close to tipping our way in Presidential elections but they are trying to play politics with the gay marriage issue last time I heard to try and wedge it back to the GOP column. But I think if whomever is the nominee picks up all the states from 2004, plus NM and IA, and adds to it FL and a few others we'll have it in the bag.

[SaveElmer]

58. Well the latest polls...

That include a match up with Republican competitors show Hillary winning in Ohio, Iowa, and Arkansas, and in Florida beating McCain and in a statistical tie with Guiliani....

[incapsulated]

23. Nope. It just becomes a three way race

Between Gore, Hillary and Obama.

Don't know if that leaves much air for anyone else in the room, is all.

[rinsd]

25. Gore would only step in if Obama was not part of the picture

If it were only Clinton, I think he could target progressive Democrats uneasy with Clinton and that warmed up to him (pardon the pun) for his environmental efforts and anti-war (this war not all war) rhetoric. With Obama in the race as an alternative to Clinton, you lose that advantage.

But even that would be a tough task. His negatives are about as high if not higher than Clinton's. RWers hates him just as much as Clinton so all their sharp little knives will be out (something that is a supposed liability with Clinton)

[AX10]

27. How do you know this?

I'd prefer President Gore to Hillary myself. I'm still waiting for Clark to enter.

[zonkers]

29. How do I know this? Uh--er, uh homina, homina, uh... other phone gotta go!

[zonkers]

30. Actually, I just suspect that everyone who voted for Gore 8 years ago + all their

kids who are now old enough to vote + everyone who vote for Kerry who feels like tehy got burned + everyone who cares about the environment. Just seems like a lot of people would vote for this guy. Plus he seems to have a greater sense of self than ever.

[catgirl]

28. Burnt toast...

Gore should have a chat with Obama. He takes the nomination,
enlists Obama as his VP, and of course goes on to win. This gives
Obama eight years to polish up for his presidency.

I would love to see a woman up there, but not Hillary! Nancy Pelosi
would be great.

[Laurab]

33. I think that would be a great idea

Gore with Obama would kick ass!

[robinlynne]

31. I hope so.

[Control-Z]

32. Yep, what catgirl said. nt

[here_is_to_hope]

34. Gore and only Gore has me

jumping up and down...I will hold my nose after the primaries if need be but....Run Gore Run!

[sellitman]

39. Hold your nose?

I too hope Gore runs but we actually have some very good choices this time around. If Clark enters then even one more. There are some folks running I don't care for as much but holding ones nose doesn't enter my thought wave.

Just my .02

[here_is_to_hope]

45. I could get behind Clark/? but for now, I only

know who I would like to see win. Run Gore Run!

[RestoreGore]

41. And of course that's what this is really all about to people.

Petty political revenge. Yeah, good reason to waste millions of dollars.

[fuzzyball]

43. Yes, Gore is the ONLY candidate who cou;ld derail the HRC

juggernaut. Obama & Johnny E can't do it. The governot
of NM has a better chance but not enough.

[PresidentObama]

49. Obama and Edwards can't do it?

Really? We'll just see about that!! If HRC does when the nomination it won't be some landslide but probably very narrow. We have a lot of qualified contenders, and I call bullshit on this notion that she's the current frontrunner so far out that that means she's this unstopable juggernaut. Clark will give her a run for her money, Richardson probably could do fairly well, Gore would overshadow her easily, and Edwards and Obama have a good chance at getting frontrunner status if they get their eye on the ball.

It's anyones race to win, and not Hillary's race to lose.

[fuzzyball]

59. Hillary Clinton is way ahead in polls because of 3 reasons

1. She is a centrist (rather than a leftist) where the most votes are
2. She is married to the best campaigner in the US with a battle
proven campaign team
3. She has a 2:1 advantage in money over her opponents

Her lead will increase as time rolls towards the convention. She
will have more than enough delegates sowed up by convention time.

The ONLY thing which could stop HRC juggernaut is if she pulls a
Muskie. That is very unlikely with her tightly scripted media events.

[ProudDad]

61. Centrist???

The only thing in the middle of the road are yellow lines and dead armadillos.

Poll after poll has indicated that the American people are still basically left-liberal in their leanings.

If the Dems could ever field a real honest to god populist, they'd win!

The only thing in your post that's (unfortunately) true is that she's got most of the early money. Money, money, money -- that's what your Hillary's all about.

[fuzzyball]

62. Well...Hillary is to the left of center if that will make you happy...

and from everything I have seen the voters are spread in a typical
bell curve fashion. The most density is in the middle half, with 15%
on left quarter and 15% on right quarter. Obama is to the left of
Hillary. As for Edwards, it is difficult to pin him down. If Obama
becomes the nominee, you will see commercial after commercial from
the GOP listing his votes in the Illinois senate & US Senate. Those
votes are very popular on DU but won't be popular with the so called
Reagan democrats. IMHO Edwards will get more votes than Obama in the GE.

[stuntcat]

46. I hope I wish

I'm scared he's too good to be elected. I've lost hope altogether though, Jeb Bush will probably be the next Prez

[catgirl]

47. Oh Paleeeeeeeze!

It's a dark world you're in if you think Jeb Bush
is going to be the next prez. You better get some
counciling quick! Bring Restore with you.

[stuntcat]

60. "it's a dark world"

lol I'm afraid it is, very dark from here on, counciling won't even help Me, I've decided what's real and it's awful ;-)
I'll still keep voting though.. I'll even go on my knees and Pray for Al Gore!!

[Strawman]

53. I don't think her campaign organization would just collapse

Even if we want it to. For whatever this kind of forecasting talk is worth (and I don't think it's worth all that much honestly), she's probably the lead horse no matter who else is running. I just think the Clintons can call in more chips from influential Democrats than anyone else imaginable. It doesn't mean they're invincible or unbeatable, but they're most defnitely formidable and most definitely not "toast."

[PresidentObama]

55. Of course it wouldn't collapse.

The Hillary well oiled machine will still be there with big money donors and her team will still be behind her Gore or no Gore. But think about the many candidates you've heard of winning when they were outspent 7-to-1, 6-to-1. Why did they win when the other campaign had the bigger advantage or more money and a better campaign? It all comes down to messages. If you have this candidate with lots of money, and a great team, that doesn't mean they will win if they are going against this start up candidate with little money and a rookie team. My point in this, without rambling, is it'll come down to message. Because if Gore gets in he'll have a great team, and money just like Hillary. So then what? It'll be about message. And I think Gore will touch base a lot better then Hillary will.

If Gore gets in, I think he wins. Hands down. Why? Because he never lost, and the Democrats realize this. And they love his message, and tone.