I REPEAT: Gore/Clark 2008

[berni_mccoy]

The balance of domestic and foreign policy, diplomacy and military is exactly what we need. And with the south returning to a more blue nature, these two would continue that rally and flip the entire country. America is ready for, no, NEEDS, the next great Presidency and this would be it.

Start the campaigning now.

[madmusic]

1. They'd get my vote.

[exlrrp]

100. Mine too

This should have been the combo in 2000. I consider Lieberman to be the worst choice for Dem VP ever.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

2. Berni, That Is My Ticket! Thank you for posting!!!!! eom

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. That's my favorite team

Imagine the cabinet they would have?

[alteredstate]

4. How about Edwards/Clark for 2008?

but I agree that Gore/Clark would make a great team.

[Horse with no Name]

41. I love Edwards

He just isn't ready for the top of the ticket yet.:shrug:

[dysfunctional press]

43. NO WAY do i want little johnny edwards anywhere NEAR the 2008 ticket.

not enough experience, a dlc'er and a bilderburger...

definitely NOT my cup of tea, and he would NEVER get my vote.

[exlrrp]

101. Me Neither

I like Edwards but he's not the right guy for the job.

[CJCRANE]

5. Works for me n/t

[H2O Man]

6. At this point,

I can't think of a stronger ticket.

[Tatiana]

91. If Gore says no, Clark/Warner looks pretty tough to beat, IMO. n/t

[H2O Man]

97. I think Clark

adds to any ticket.

[Dinger]

7. Excellent Ticket, Whether It Is Clark/Gore Or Gore/Clark

Either one has a beautiful ring to it!

[noahmijo]

8. I would prefer Clark/Gore but I would take Gore/Clark in an instant

I've been saying that any combination of the two would actually encourage me to get up and work the campaign like I did for Kerry/Edwards. I swore I would never work that hard again for a nation that doesn't deserve it.


That ticket though would totally change my mind especially after last week's results.

Incidently I wouldn't mind seeing Clark/Edwards in case Gore prefers to Clark's advisor on environmental issues :)

[tk2kewl]

9. I agree wholeheartedly!

[ThomWV]

10. That's A Ticket I've Been Behind Since 2003

[WA98296]

11. LIKE IT! Let's talk them into it.

[zonkers]

12. Solid. 2 "what you see is what you get" guys. 2 intelligent men.

[durrrty libby]

13. That would be Sweeeeet! n/t

[Cooley Hurd]

14. Two southern Dems, one decidedly more liberal than the other...

...one with 8 years of executive branch experience, one with 34 years of military experience. Both are brilliant. One was actually elected President.

This ticket would be the winner in 2008 - perfectly balanced. McCain & Guiliani wouldn't have a chance aginst them.:thumbsup:

[wellstone dem]

20. Which is more liberal?

I've looked at both and they each have pretty progressive views.

[Cooley Hurd]

25. Gore, but I agree, both have very progressive creds...

:thumbsup:

[Catch22Dem]

15. Repeat it all you want. You wont get any disagreement from me!

I think it's GREAT!

[Lefta Dissenter]

16. you betcha!

[LZelig]

17. Sounds good, though...

Clark would make a good president (or Sec of Defense).
Bill Clinton a good Sec of State.
Edwards, Atty General
Obama, Dean, Feingold, etc. so many choices.

[midnight]

77. I like all your suggestions.

Edwards as Atty Gerneral. I like Gore/Obama for pres./v.p.

[txindy]

18. Excellent pairing.

:applause: :patriot:

[savemefromdumbya]

80. would Clark want to be VP?

[txindy]

81. Beats me. He's never mentioned it to me.

:+

[Quixote1818]

84. Clark want's to serve his Country

If he thinks he can do that best as VP that is what he will do.

[liberalmike27]

19. Mine is

Hillary/Obama.

Hillary gets the women's vote, and Obama brings the blacks out with their 9/10 suppport for Democrats, in force. Those who are prejudiced are already going to be voting for Republicans anyway.

Let me just state that I'd rather have someone much more liberal, and my views are yellow-dog-democrat, or true-blue-democrat, which is now called the Green Party. Damn China, took the name people's party, which makes it look bad.

I think Jeb will emerge soon as a Republican contender, and McCain will once again be deep-Bushed. I don't think Gore is interested.

What is the lure of having some military guy in office. I'd rather have anyone but a military guy, someone who is very reticent to going into conflict. How hard is it for anyone to make a decision to go into war? You don't need someone who has been in the military to do that.

[Kahuna]

27. Hillary gets the women's vote???? Got any proof to back up that

assertion? Because, I'm a woman, and I don't believe it's true. She certainly isn't my first choice.

28. what dreams may come...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

66. Please, not Hillary.

The women's vote? I don't know one single Dem woman who likes her.

[Oleladylib]

68. Ocelot, I would like to introduce myself ..I like her..Now you know at least 1. n/t

[Auntie Bush]

87. You wouldn't make that comment if you checked out Clark's

platform.

"How hard is it for anyone to make a decision to go into war? You don't need someone who has been in the military to do that."

No kidding...George did it easily. It's easy to get in but, IT'S HARD TO GET OUT or hadn't you noticed? And Clark warned bush* that defeating Iraq/Saddam is the easy part but holding the peace, forming a workable government and rebuilding is the hard part. He was so right! If he had won the Presidency in 2004 we wouldn't have been in this mess. If anyone can get us out...it's CLARK. He can get it done as painlessly as possible but there will still be lots of pain...thanks to dumb George.

We need someone with brains, that the world respects and military experience to get US THE HELL OUT OF THAT HELL HOLE. Do you really think a cube rat senator who spends his time agreeing with or warding off PACs and raising money would be better prepared than someone who spent their life in the Military. Inexperienced little boys don't win wars, experienced soldiers do.

[BurningDog]

90. While it may have been unintentional on your part...

I find your use of "the blacks", referring to them as a third party to this conversation, offense. Many of "the blacks" out there own computers and some of them might even be reading this thread.

I don't have a problem with the term Black to describe race, but use it as an adjective (e.g. our black voters), not a noun (e.g. So a Black walks into a bar...).

No offense intended.

[Clark2008]

21. I still think making Clark a VP is a waste of his talents.

If he's not president, he should be secretary of state.

I can't see why anyone would want to simply have him as president of the Senate - and he's said he won't be anyone's "Cheney."

Would I support this ticket, yes? But I would be disappointed that Clark's abilities wouldn't be put to good use.

29. agreed in totality.

[IA_Seth]

69. A 3rd, besides...

I don't think Clark woudl accept a VP slot, but I could be mistaken.

[MindMatter]

22. I believe Gore has learned his lesson

That the modern Republican Presidential candidate cannot be dealt with on the basis of rational logic, a fair exchange of ideas, an appeal to the best interests of our nation. The Republicans that are fighting for power are fascists whose only real driving purpose is to extract wealth from the public and put it into private hands. And I think Gore now knows that they will do anything in pursuit of that end.

You have to fight them blow for blow. But as Dean has shown us, there are a great many Americans who have been voting for these scoundrels, either because they didn't know any better or because they didn't see any better from the Dems. We can go straight to their base and win. Make the next Republican candidate have to defend in Wyoming the day before the election.

I do believe this would be a very strong ticket, arguably our best. Kerry still doesn't quite get it on several levels. He's a good man, but he would make all the same mistakes all over again. Hillary's negatives are way too high. There are lots of Dems that wouldn't vote for her, let alone the Republicans.

There are several others who could work on a ticket: Edwards and Obama come to mind, but I agree Gore/Clark is the dream team.

[Kahuna]

23. I could die a happy camper if that ever happened.

They are the very best we have to offer.

[Red Zelda]

24. Yes, yes, yes

Always wanted that ticket!

[WiseButAngrySara]

26. I like it! ....n/t

[graywarrior]

30. Sweet.

[Maestro]

31. I could live with that. -nt

[derby378]

32. With Russ Feingold's decision not to run in 2008...

...this is looking more palpable to me. All Gore needs to do is revamp his position on gun legislation and he might actually win in 2008.

He deserves a shot. By all rights, he should have been in the White House in 2001.

[Gregorian]

33. I voted for both of them, once upon a time.

These two have what it takes to energize everyone.

I think we need to focus on 2008. More than almost anything, it should be the backdrop. I talking of impeachment. To be honest, Darfur is far more important. And helping ourselves AND the world will not happen if we only have two years to work on cleaning up this horrendous tragedy that this group of criminals created.

Plus, and I'm not sure if this is even a point of concern, neither of these two disrupt our seats in Congress.

[Glimmer of Hope]

34. This is my top pairing too. I have always wondered if they are friends.

[ignatius 2]

35. Sign me up, that is MY dream ticket!

n/t

[solara]

38. Gore/Clark is an excellent ticket, Clark/Gore won't work

because I really don't think Gore is going to want to serve as Vice President again,. so if Clark won't run as VP and Gore won't run as VP..who to run with Gore? Edwards? Probably not he's been there and done that..

Also, I am a woman and I would definitely -not- vote for Hillary.. I just don't think she can win in '08 Hmm what about Gore/Kucinich? Too Liberal? Gore/Warner?

[ignatius 2]

52. Interesting question. If for some reason we don't have a Gore/Clark ticket

and Gore won't run, then maybe Clark,Obama. Obama is the man of the hour right now, but I do not think this country is even close to being progressive enough to elect a black person as president. Now VP, maybe. But for my hopes and prayers, I am wishing for a Gore/Clark nomination.

[indie_voter]

36. I agree! n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

37. THAT is THE PERFECT ticket for '08! Let's DRAFT THEM BOTH!

NOW!:bounce:

[cassiepriam]

39. I love it. nt

[Horse with no Name]

40. Beautiful ticket.

Personally I don't see Al wanting more than one term to get his policies on global warming going. Would leave a great opportunity for Americans to get to know Wesley Clark a little better and enhance his shot at the #1 seat.

[librechik]

42. I am so there

please everybody else go home.

[Blue_In_AK]

44. I could support that ticket wholeheartedly. :)

[robbedvoter]

45. I'd rather have Clark/Gore but I'd vote for this ticket!

I won't vote for any war enabler anymore! NONE of them. You voted for war, either your judgement is flawed or your integrity is in question.

[Fermezlabush]

46. 2 good men. The best.

[Octafish]

47. They'd get my vote.

Probably about 65-percent of USA's votes, too.

[Downtown Hound]

48. My dream team!

I firmly believe that ticket will win.

[rateyes]

49. Sounds good to me!

And, after 8 years of Gore/Clark....Clark/Pelosi.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

50. Hope Kick!

[dand]

51. Sounds really good to me,

Imagine, two sentient beings running the country, actually able to speak in full sentences. capable of reading a newspaper, I am really starting to get my hopes up.

[judaspriestess]

53. I'm smelling what your stepping in

this would work for me.

[focusfan]

54. I would vote for Al Gore in 08

I voted for him the first time in 2001:woohoo: 

[wcepler]

55. I agree 1000%

I agree 1000% That's EXACTLY the ticket I want. Even if the pugs dug Abraham Lincoln, they would still be trampled.

[Olney Blue]

56. AND I REPEAT: I would vote for this ticket!

[gully]

57. Gore/Obama - Gore/Edwards - Gore/my pet rock

Just gimme Gore!

[Lorien]

58. That's my dream ticket too. I wouldn't mind Gore/ Edwards either

but now that Feingold's out, Gore is the man!

[Vidar]

59. Works for me.

[Radical Activist]

60. I still want experience.

Political experience. Not an amateur on the ticket who has never been elected to any office, anywhere.

[dalaigh lllama]

61. a definite two thumbs up

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Greyskye]

62. This is my dream ticket!

I've been advocating Gore/Clark myself. Then Clark for POTUS in 2016!

[phiddle]

63. These are the most experienced and capable persons we have.

(No offense to any other candidate.)

[thinks4herself]

64. Awesome!

They'd be tough to beat I think.

[Karenca]

65. GORE/Clark K&R!!!!!! EOM

[Seabiscuit]

67. That's the ticket America NEEDS for 8 years!

Just to undo all the damage of the last 6.

K&R.

[Clarkie1]

70. It's a good ticket, but I think Clark/Gore would have a better chance of winning.

Put the highest national security expertise at the top of the ticket and you take away the issue from the other side. Clark has made global warming one of his top priorities, and like Gore he unnderstands the science behind it.

Also, I don't know if Clark wants to spend 8 years being VP. He has a lot of options for what to do with his life at this stage.

Gore/Clark would be good, but Clark/Gore would be better.

[imlost]

71. Much Agreed. prefer Clark/ Gore, but I love Gore/Clark too. n/t

[ShaneGR]

72. Clark isn't a politician, he's a strategist...

And he has no success in campaigns. I'd definitely pick him for Secretary of State or National Security Advisor though.

[BlooInBloo]

76. He'll be both after 8 years of learning from Gore down the hall.

[Rainscents]

73. Perfect ticket!!!

I'll go for it!!!

[BlooInBloo]

74. I repeat: 2nd-ed

[buddysmellgood]

75. I'm for Gore. I want the carbon tax phased in.

[nonconformist]

78. That's my DREAM TICKET. nt

[SPKrazy]

79. Good News!

We've got time to field good candidates before 08.

Gore
Clark
Edwards


Three that I'd vote for in a heartbeat

Clinton/Clinton?

[trayfoot]

82. Gore in '08!

I will enthusiastically support Al Gore and a variety of VPs: Clark, Edwards, Murtha, Obama, Biden, Kerry. But most of all ------- AL GORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Nothing Without Hope]

83. Oh yes, that's PERFECT: Gore/Clark. Wonderful!!!! K & R n/t

[Quixote1818]

85. Kerry should have picked Clark for VP two years ago. nt

[HardRocker05]

86. i'll second that. nt

[GreenTea]

88. Dean...with Clark or Edwards!

[0rganism]

89. AND I REPEAT: put CLARK at the TOP of the ticket

Governors and generals are the candidates who win presidential elections. Putting Clark in the 2nd spot wastes his assets.

By some miracle, fate has handed the Democrats a liberal, poltically-aware general from a southern swing state who happens to have an advanced degree in economics, and you want to stick him in the VP slot? Nooo....

[bobbie]

92. They'd be a helluva team. I just dunno if Clark would take 2nd.

...

[wiley]

93. Bill Clinton would win in a landslide.

Gore, Kerry, Edwards and Senator Clinton all could bring a lot to the table, but Americans don't want to sit down at the table with them at this time. A Clark/Edwards ticket would win big (not an Edwards/Clark ticket, however) and would make a McCain/Guiliani ticket look mean spirited and false, as both those men possess those two characteristics in abundance.

I see Clark/Edwards or Obama or Bayh as a great four year transitional presidency that would put the country in great hands while the damage of the corrupt, fiscally and ethically insane, elitist, labor and working family hating, religion pimping Republicans could begin to be repaired. I think Americans want a four year ticket this time around. In 2012, when the Senate and House are run predominantly by even more new Democratics(and less pork sucking dealmaking racist and sexist Republican crooks) the Democrats should decide who they want to run for a possible eight year President. Obama or Clinton or Feingold or Dean or Ford or Spitzer or Sherrod Brown would have a great chance of winning in 2012. The country may even be willing to take Kucinich seriously at that point.

We need to have a progressive ticket that is pragmatic and competent and accessible in 2008.

We really need to be alert for a new type of ticket like Romney/Giuliani or McCain/Lieberman in 2008.

I would very much like to not see Gore or Kerry or Edwards or Biden run for President in 2008, but if they beat Clark or Clinton or Bayh or Vilsack (who could save the Democrats from too early committing to a candidate), I would somehow try to support them despite the belief that Democrats would not win the White House.

[arewenotdemo]

94. yes!

[Phrogman]

95. Gore handles global warming and Clark undoes the military mess...

Its the only logical choice.

[Apollo11]

96. In Gore We Trust

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

After reading all of the above posts, 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
:-)

[FernBell]

98. k&r

[ScreamingMeemie]

99. It pains me to admit that my dearest MrG would probably stay home

as an Independent. I love Mr. Gore, but many have a bad taste in their mouth with regard to the 2000 elections.

[atomic-fly]

102. I want that.

[we can do it]

103. The Best Team for Me!

[mod mom]

104. Excellent choice (and great for the environment as well)!

[michaelpush]

105. BILL CLINTON / EDWARD KENNEDY

If Clinton could run again, that is...

[YOY]

106. My dream team!

I hope so with all of my heart.

Clark would offset the folks who think that a McCain campaign would mean the falacy that Republican sensitivity towards veterans is greater.

Part of me wants to get all the footage of McCain licking *'s ass in one spot beforehand. McCain will run in 2008. We need more than a good defense against him.