No matter what you think of Democratic policies, with someone like Gore, at the very least, you would hope the country was being run by someone who understood the concepts and details behind those policies and could actualy speak a sentence without sounding uneducated. Besides, who else do they have? Hillary?

For 2008 election, Al Gore could be the real deal

Al Gore, where have you been all my life?

Oh, I don’t mean the alpha-male wanna-be, that scripted, stiff, uninspired candidate for president in 2000. I mean the self-effacing movie star with man-of-steel conviction from An Inconvenient Truth, who is trying to shake this country by the shoulders over the dire consequences of global warming. From the ashes of his overhandled “be everything to everybody” campaign rose the real Al Gore, a confident, wonkish, accessible intellect who has a supremely important question for inhabitants of Earth : How long can you tread water?

This is the man, with his charts and facts and rising seas message, that the Democrats should enlist in 2008.
[…]
America is ready for an adult like Gore to take charge and put the nation back on sensible footing: a footing where deficits do matter, where energy conservation is not sneered at as a “personal virtue” but is an aggressive national policy, and where science, facts and reality drive public policy, not the Christian Right’s neo-medieval agenda.
[…]
George W. Bush, with his wishful-thinking governance and “Russia’s big and so is China” understanding of the world, has handicapped our future by steering us into an interminable occupation, keeping us shackled to oil and adding trillions to our national debt. Putting things right, to the extent it is possible, and planning for the challenges ahead will take someone of enormous capability. Al Gore, the real Al Gore, is that man.

MORE



  1. moss says:

    Most folks in my family are traditional conservative Republicans. They’d vote Democrat — they’d vote for Al Gore — they’d vote for Hillary — cripes, they’d even vote for Kucinich if they could cut the neo-con-artists and religion freaks loose from control of the Republican Party.

  2. Gibson says:

    No. We need a fricken leader. Someone that we all respect. Yes, there can be a president that we can all respect and follow…even if we don’t like his party or politics. Someone we can all look to and say “that’s the President of the United States”. Someone to actually LEAD the country. Not this monkey frat-boy coke-snorter in there now who calls himself “The Decider”. Not even our last president. Not Kerry or Gore either.

    The last president who was like this was Reagan. I didn’t vote for him either election, but by God I fricken respected the man. He was the President! The last one to really be called that, and since then we’ve had these wish-washy, weak character people in office.

    Who do I suggest? I don’t know. I don’t know of anyone that can fill the role of a leader. For the past 18 years or so we’ve all been settling for whoever wins. No one has stepped up to the plate that I can get behind. Just forgettable presidents we’ve settled on…in the hopes that perhaps in another 4 years someone will come along we can look up to again….and then waiting again another 4 years after he (or she) never comes along. We’re living in the times of presidents that will be forgotten 125 years from now. These are the Millard Fillmores and Chester Arthurs of our day. Just footnotes. Where are the Trumans? The Reagans? Where’s Ike Eisenhower? Oh man, we need Ike back! I like Ike!

  3. AB CD says:

    Gore will stay popular unless he actually jumps into the race. Then people will remember it all over again.

  4. Miguel says:

    No. Gore is not an “intellect”. He failed in college, failed to make it through law school, failed in divinity school, showed his lack of intelligence in 2000 when he was shown up by Bush, for God’s sake, was coddled in Viet Nam, did nothing as a Senator or as vice president.

    He was too close to Enron in the leadup to Kyoto and was unable to even get the administration he was in to submit the treaty to the Senate.

    His movie has been shown to be more of the puffery and lying he displayed on the 2000 campaign trail, and he has appeared deranged since then.

    There is nothing behind the Gore facade. We don’t need a president like that.

  5. David says:

    @Gibson

    Reagan?!? Reagan is your pick for the best recent president. The guy was a B movie star who’s most famous picture costarred a monkey.

    Not to mention that he was the one who gave all those chemical and standard munitions to Iraq. While at the same time illegally selling arms to the Iranians.

    Does Iran Contra ring a bell. Seriously, if that’s the kind of leader you want then I shudder at the candidate you wind up voting for.

    @ Miguel
    You do a fine job of making plenty of accusations about Gore and yet you fail to offer any evidence backing a single one of them. Maybe do some independent research about the guy rather than listen to a bunch of idiots shout talking points.

  6. Mike says:

    I’d rather have Kerry as president than that whack-job Gore.

  7. Frank IBC says:

    Al Gore is the Hal Lindsey of the 00s. The Late Great Earth In the Balance. Howard Dean is the Democrats’ answer to Rush Limbaugh.

    If my choice for President was limited to the Democrats, these would be my preferences:

    1) Joe Lieberman
    2) Tim Kaine
    3) Hillary Clinton
    4) Barack Obama
    5) Bill Bradley
    6) Richard Gephardt
    …..
    997) Al Gore
    998) Howard Dean
    999) John Kerry

  8. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    There are quite a few very capable people who could make great Presidents in both parties. The problem is that the extremists have hijacked the Republicans and sowed disarray into the Democrats. Anyone who wins the Presidency will almost automatically lead a country where half the population hates him (her) even before taking the oath,

    No President will be seen as a legitimate winner until we have real election reform. And there will be no election reform as long as the extremists control so much of the Republican party. I should mention that the Democrats are also capable of election machinations, they just manipulate elections by buying votes, not by stealing the ballots.

    Would Al Gore make a good President? Sure. But so would so many others including John McCain, Hillery Clinton, or even Lindsy Graham.

  9. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    The Democrats don’t have any equivalents to Limbaugh, Novak, or O’Reilly. When Howard Dean speaks his opinion, it is his opinion and easily recognized as such.

    When Limbaugh, Savage, O’Reilly, Hannity, or even Ann Coulture speak, they don’t speak as opinion; they speak as fact. Even if they have to invent something to make it fact.

    If that is your best shot, boy did you just show how disparate the neo-cons really are.

  10. James Hill says:

    Could one of you left-wing heel clickers explain something to me:

    What happened to Hillary?

    I was under the impression that your party was much more organized than to let stories like this slip into the mainstream. Granted, even Ray Charles could see that Gore is setting himself up for another run, and I’m sure this story could be traced back to one of his supporters, but back in the day (’92) this kind of thing wasn’t talked about in public.

    “Al, you had your run… and you lost. I know you didn’t really lose, but you didn’t become President. It sucks, I know, but it’s time for someone else to run.”

    Help me to understand, what ever happened to an organized DNC?

    (Note: The answer has to do with Dean and the split in Democratic party leadership between his guys and Clinton’s guys. I’ll be interested to see if any of you get it right, considering you can’t even bring yourselves to accept that Reagan, while a B movie actor, was still a better President than “Peanut” or “Bubba”.)

  11. James Hill says:

    The Democrats don’t have any equivalents to Limbaugh, Novak, or O’Reilly. When Howard Dean speaks his opinion, it is his opinion and easily recognized as such.

    When Limbaugh, Savage, O’Reilly, Hannity, or even Ann Coulture speak, they don’t speak as opinion; they speak as fact. Even if they have to invent something to make it fact.

    Well put, Fusion.

    And your entire statement, which I see as a fact, really pisses you off, doesn’t it?

  12. ECA says:

    In the last election,
    THERE wasnt a button for ‘NONE OF THE ABOVE’.
    Please give me a selection voting between the BEST of 2 evils ISNT a selection.

  13. Mike says:

    Dead people seem to always vote for democrats.

    The first election reform I would like to see would be for states to adopt an instant run-off voting scheme to help make third parties more viable. The current system is too heavily rigged for the two main parties.

  14. Mike says:

    What exactly is the point of a “none of the above” choice? If you don’t like any of the candidates, then don’t vote in that particular race.

  15. Frank IBC says:

    Mr. Fusion –

    Given that the reason that Al Gore lost in 2000, is because of the US Constitution’s requirement that the President (and Vice-President) be elected by the Electoral College, rather than by direct popular vote, how come no Democrats other than Hillary Clinton have called for the abolition of the Electoral College?

    The Republicans don’t have any equivalents to Dean. When Rush Limbaugh speaks his opinion, it is his opinion and easily recognized as such.

    When Dean speaks, he doesn’t speak as opinion; he speaks as fact. Even if he to invent something to make it fact.

    Haha… you see how silly your rant sounds?

  16. Frank IBC says:

    That picture of Al Gore is somewhat dated, Uncle Dave.

    How about a more recent photo?

  17. Hawkeye666 says:

    The only difference between Reagan and Bush Jr. was Ronnie was smart enough to keep his mouth shut when he needed to. But that is it. The people who really ran things during his administration are many of the same as now, but it does seem like power and greed has corrupted them far further this time around.

    And at least neither Clinton nor Carter tried to goose-step us all to Armagedon.

    What we absolutely must have to survive is a sane, rational, middle-of-the-road leader who is strong enough to speak the truth and smart enough to sdo so with scary the masses into another bout of denial.

  18. Jeff says:

    Gore has said he’s done with politics, and frankly I believe him.

    That said, I saw Truth last night, and while I was skeptical that Gore had anything to contribute to anything, I was blown away. He’s a smart guy. His movie is almost all science, and very little about him. Judge him all you want, but I think if you went to see the movie you’d have a very different opinion about him.

  19. faustus says:

    face it… there isn’t a democrate capable of being president. period. republican either for that matter. when are you ppl going to wake up? hillary it the biggest power grabber since nixon. it was her that funneled contracts throught the governors office through the rose law firm. it was her in the slimmy deals with tysons, it was her in the middle of the s and l deals, it was her that tried to grab and nationalize the health care system, grabbed the fbi records on her political enemies. none of that stuff ever lead back to bill no matter now much it kept right wingers up at night tring to stick it with him. she was even responsible for good ole’ al gore getting on the ticket knowing the boob would do as he was told when he was told and not get in her way… he didn’t then and i doubt it he can or will now.

  20. Miguel Lopes says:

    Remember what happened to JFK? My prediction is if Gore threatens too many interests, he’ll meet the same fate…

  21. Frank IBC says:

    Miguel –

    Yes, JFK threatened Castro, and and was in turn assassinated by the Castro-loving Lee Harvey Oswald.

    Al Gore, on the other hand, went along with Clinton in turning over Elian Gonzalez to Castro. And in turn, he lost Florida later that year.

  22. Frank IBC says:

    Actually it’s a bit of a myth that Hillary tried to “nationalize” or “socialize” the health care system. ClintonCare actually was a plan to force everyone in to huge (privately-owned and operated) HMOs, which in my opinion, would have been worse than both our current employment-based healthcare and government-run healthcare.

    Did I like her healthcare plan? Definitely not. Do I consider Hillary a “power-grabber”? To some degree. But she is one of the few potential Democrat presidential candidates who actually has a clue as to what the typical American voter wants, and actually has a chance of winning the votes of more than just the Democrats’ current lunatic-fringe “base”. And to her credit, she has been one of the few Democrats who has had the courage to call for the abolition of the Electoral College.

  23. Bob says:

    I don’t think Gore could pull it off in 08 and I pray that the Dems don’t waste their nomination on Hilary. If I had to name a hopeful today, I’d have to go with Joe Biden.

  24. malren says:

    I hope and pray that the Democrats try to front Al Gore as a candidate again. I’m unhappy as hell with Bush, but he’s gone come ’08. I’m hoping to be able to vote for Giuliani, or if I have to, McCain.

    I’d love to see Al Gore try to run against either of them.

  25. Mike Barr says:

    #20- Of course Al Gore is a smart, believable man. After all, it was Al that once stated: “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

    Why shouldn’t I believe him when he states that “China is on the cutting edge of evironmentalism?”. Nevermind that even official Chinese newspapers don’t agree with him. http://tinyurl.com/z5w8e

    Yes, let’s trade one man who can’t tell the truth with another. Makes sense to me.

  26. traaxx says:

    Great another Globalist/Free Trader. Everyone is still going Democrat versus Republican………. The paradiam has changed and no one has noticed. Today both major political parties are going Global/Free Trade, for the US citizen it doesn’t matter whether it’s business or government that controls the Global / UN system. It’s no longer conspiracy talk, it’s happening, the European Union, the North American Union. Only blind and brain washed refuse to understand.

    Today it’s a choice is between Nationalist or Globalist. If you are a Globalist then begin to adjust to a future living a hut with no food and your children crying for food and no chance for education or improving their position in the caste system we have in the US, or should I say NAU. You’ve seen it on TV, Newsweek, Time and National Geographic. If you want to live it, then just keep voting Demo versus Republican.

    If you want a future or you want your children to have a future you better start paying attention and voting for the Nationalist.

  27. Donovan says:

    @11
    I don’t know about “heel clicker”, but I’m a pretty staunch Democrat. To answer your question, the Democratic party has never been that strongly organized or internally coherent. There is a pretty serious split in the party between the so-called “centrists” who tend to look to the Clintons as the proper path and the so-called “liberals” who feel that the party is betraying its progressive roots when it moves to the center and look back to the New Deal and Great Society as our proper path.

    Disclaimer–I identify strongly with the centrist wing of the party.

    I don’t know that it has that much to do with Dean. He really got adopted by the liberal wing of the party and didn’t do much to discourage them. The Repbulicans capitalized on this to portray him as a whackjob. But when you look at his record as a governor, a different picture emerges. On things like heath care and gun rights he was right in the center. I was never a Deaniac, but I think we could do worse.

    @24
    I feel that Hillary has gotten a pretty raw deal. She made real mistakes in the 1990’s, chiefly with her health care plan which was not well thought out or well executed. I think she learned from all that and would make a pretty good President. She is pretty moderate on social issues, which appeals to me. Unfortunately, she has been so badly tarred with the “liberal whackjob” label that I don’t see it happening.

    General Comments
    I have mixed feelings about the re-emergence of Al Gore. To be honest, I liked the old Al Gore more than I do the new one. Nevertheless, he is a very smart guy and a respite from the.. how shall I say it… less intellectual, more instinctive approach of President Bush would be welcome.

    One thing I wholeheartedly agree with from the article is the criticism of the media. The coverage of the 2000 election was awful. More coverage of genuine issues and less of gaffes and who sighed during the debates is badly needed. I’m not holding my breath.

  28. Frank IBC says:

    traax –

    If I could get some of what you’ve been smoking, I wouldn’t care if I had to live in a hut.

  29. Odyssey67 says:

    If Gore runs, he wins.

    He will walk away with the Democratic primary, as he is a visionary hero to those people now. Then, in the general election against almost any Republican likely to face him, his opponent will constantly have to justify supporting Bush and his wars, whereas Gore declared his unequivocal opposition from the start. Factor in that most of the country wanted him has president in 2000, and that the rest have either learned their lesson (the Naderites thinking it made no difference to support Gore or Bush) or regret their previous choices for other reasons (probably 25% of moderate Republicans), as well as the fact that implied doubts about his competency will gain zero traction, and the recipe for a Gore win is clear. All the rest is, as they say, wishful thinking.

    And, quite frankly, I think he’d be an excellent choice. He was the better man in 2000, and maybe even 2004 as well (had he run).

    Yet the thumb on the scale for me now is that, with all that’s happened to all of us since 2000-01, I have no doubt that Gore – of all people – will be less swayed in office by ‘politics as usual’ than any other politician out there. Playing that game is what cost him the first time around, and he knows it. So, if he runs – a big “if” – there’s no way it won’t be on his terms. I’d also guess that only God will be able to help the unenlightened Clinton/Lieberman-like triangualtors who try to get in his way once he’s in office. The massive Ship of State that is the U.S. is way off course, and there’s no chance of setting things right if all hands aren’t on board, pulling hard, and in unison. I think Gore will happily enforce the kind of party discipline that the Dems haven’t seen since FDR, and will have the street cred to do it. But more importantly, the real forces driving the Democratic party these days want exactly that. And being on the same page is a powerful thing.

    It’s Gore’s for the taking. I hope he does.

  30. pseudolus says:

    “Help me to understand, what ever happened to an organized DNC??

    The democrats have been fractured into the DNC and the DLC. The DLC are republican lite. They are in love with the military-industrial complex because they need their money to survive. They will do nothing but showboat over traditional democratic values then sell us out by voting for the bakruptcy bill, the medicaid bill, the patriot act, nafta/gatt, etc etc. Until campaign/election reforms are instituted, the U.S. government will be a shithole of revolving door lobbyists, kleptocratic croneys and patronage for incompetent toadies.


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 3893 access attempts in the last 7 days.