Would you support Al Gore if he jumped in?

[Delta]

Do you think he will? Discuss.

[udsweetpea]

I'm not sure he will. I admit I haven't been following closely on politics lately, but I would absolutely support him. We need someone who is as passionate as he is about certain issues.

[PinkMartini]

I wouldn't vote for him, but I do think that he might be the dem's best bet for winning in 08...

[Niobe]

In the Democratic primaries? No, I'm a really huge fan of Obama. And while this isn't enough to turn me entirely against Al Gore, I have always had a big problem with Tipper and the PMRC.

As the Democratic nominee? Yes, I'm still a bigger fan of Gore than any of the Republican nominees.

I think Al Gore presents a real challenge to the current Dem candidates. He has far more experience in Congress than Edwards, Clinton, or Obama, he was the former VP, and fund raising won't be any sort of challenge for him. He even served in the military during Vietnam. He's definitely got the experience and credentials for the job. I like him, I think he'd be a fine President, but on the issues, I'm just more in line with Obama.

Now, do I think he's actually going to run? I think it's still anyone's guess. He could enter the race very late and still do very well - exposure is hardly a problem for him. But he's got a lot of business things on his plate right now though, and who knows if he really plans to step away from all of that. However, if he really wants to make a difference in the environment, being the President would be a damn good way to start and I'm sure he's considered that fact.

I also think that Clinton and Obama would both make excellent VPs for Gore, if he were to run. That would definitely be something I could support as well.

[Delta]

I also think that Clinton and Obama would both make excellent VPs for Gore, if he were to run. That would definitely be something I could support as well.Yeah, but I cannot picture Hillary Clinton agreeing to be Gore's VP as they have a very strained relationship going back to when Bill Clinton was president. I can't picture her being VP to anyone, actually. I assume she'd rather just want to advance in the Senate as she'd probably have more influence there than as VP.

Gore was nominated for the Nobel Prize. If he wins that I can see it pushing him over the edge, and into the race.

This race is so fun, if a little bit silly.

If Fred Thompson gets in and wins the Republican nomination then it would be between 2 late-starters from Tennessee. Hee.

[imagirliegirl]

I don't think he'll jump in, but I would support him if he did.

[artist]

That's a good question!

First of all, let me premise by saying I haven't completely made my mind up yet about who I am leaning towards. Also, many of the candidates do appeal to me, but all for different reasons. Honestly though, at the moment anyway, I have been really liking Edwards. Actually, many Democrats I know (regardless of race or gender) are leaning towards Edwards. This is interesting considering how much media attention so far seems to be given to Hilary and Obama.

As far as what's drawing me more to Edwards (and earlier he was not the one I was necessarily more drawn to), I would say that I love what he has to say about issues of poverty and healthcare. I also appreciate the fact that he was willing to admit that he made a mistake in how he previously had voted for the war. (As opposed to backpeddling and trying to justify why he voted the way he did. Politicians are human beings and it is refreshing to me when they can admit they are not perfect or that they regret some decisions they have made.) I like his stance on Katrina. He comes across as truely passionate about his message as opposed to simply wanting to climb a political ladder and as a result either mudsling or cautiously walk on eggshells and not say anything radical in order to gain more votes. In other words, he doesn't just go with the "safe" answer; he remains idealistic and takes a stance at the risk of possibly not getting some moderate votes and therefore having the ability to energize the base. In addition to all of that, he is a dynamic and charismatic speaker who appears relaxed and he's not bad looking! :) (Don't worry, that's not why I'd vote for him. Besides, I think Obama is attractive too!) I think Edwards has the ability connect with the middle class and the poor through grassroots efforts and he also seems to appeal to the blogging/high tech/internet crowd which is going to work in his favor for the younger crowd. It's also interesting how he seems to be the one leading the way more in the sense that he says an idea or a plan, THEN the others say the same thing.

But I do still like Obama and Hilary and vote for either in a heartbeat. I also like Gore and would vote for him too. I don't necessarily think Gore will run, but if he were to, I probably still would lean towards Edwards. It's really hard to say though because part of my decision of course would depend on what Gore's platform would be and how that and his overall campaign would compare to everyone else running. I've always been a fan of Kucinich, mostly because I am an idealist and very liberal, but I also realize he has no chance in hell of winning! That being said, I hope Kucinich stays in the race for a long time anyway, kind of like how he did that last time he ran. During the 2004 race I liked that Kucinich and Sharpton stuck it out for awhile, mostly because they were so far left and radical, it kept the other candiates on their toes a bit more during the debates and so there was always someone to challenge the other candidates by having the guts to be truely liberal and not care really about winning. (Though Kucinich was the serious one and Sharpton was entertaining and funny to watch.)

At my neighborhood caucus (you know, all 12 or so people that actually show up ever time :) ), I went with Obama. I was torn though, in part because there had not been any debates or enough to really go on to make a decision. (I was contemplating actually between Obama and Hilary, though I still certainly liked Edwards and the others.) In my caucus, Edwards got the the most votes, though it was a pretty even/close split between several people. Gore actually WAS an option (as was of course the write-in option) and he did get votes too.

In 2004 I lived in a different neighborhood in the same city. When I attended the primary caucus then (which is different then the caucus I just described...that one of course has not happened yet), I actually went with Kucinich. I had been a Dean supporter, but by the time MN got to vote, Dean had dropped out of the race. It was basically a toss up between Kerry and Edwards all over the country. I didn't really have much of a preference either way between those two, and so I voted for Kucinich out of principle and to be idealistic. In my neighborhood (at the time), Kucinich actually got the majority of the votes! Also, that particular caucus drew in so many people that most people arrived late as a result of no parking spaces, people were having to convene in hallways sitting on the floor due to lack of space, and they ran out of ballots so people had to have makeshift scratch paper ballots!

You're right though that this election should be pretty exciting. It will be so interesting to have both parties having primary elections to nominate a candidate. The cool part about that though in my opinion is that with both parties having to do this, we will get to see more debates, see competition on both sides, and more fundraising on both sides. Tyically of course it's one party having the primary elections/debates/campaigning which is basically a group of candiates who overall agree on many issues, but out of necessity have to compete and often a lot of mudslinging and digging up dirt takes place. Meanwhile, the current president or VP gets to sit back and relax a bit and mostly focus on trying to run the country. By the time the other party has finally chosen a candidate, the whole country has already heard all about that person's flaws and weak spots, which is an advantage to his/her opponent. Then at this point, the general election campaigning begins and both campaigns need to fundraise. However, the current president/VP has the advantage of only needing to fundraise once since there was no need to fundraise for the primary election. Therefore, that candidate has the advantage of having to ask for money less often.

As far as everything I just wrote however (about the Democrats I talk to), keep in mind that I live in a very liberal neighborhood, in a very liberal city, and in a pretty liberal state. (Afterall, we have Keith Ellison and we had Paul Wellstone!) So, just because many people I know are currently drawn to Edwards does not necessarily say anything about the rest of the country.

[SMgal]

I've always liked Gore. I'm still not over his loss from 2000. I know he really blew the debates, but he's smart. I would definitely support him!

[bookworm]

Mmm. Maybe. I didn't like him very much in 2000 (I was hoping for a McCain/Bradley election....at the time I could have been ok with either of them (but that was before McCain went out whoring for W. Now he is Off The List.)), but he has grown on me.

[Jenyfer9]

While I like Al Gore and voted for him, I don't think that I would vote for him this time (in the primary... if he actually were the Dem canidate that's a different story). I think that he is better suited for a place that focuses solely on his true passion... the environment. I think that he would make an EXCELLENT advisor to the president, especially since the environment is bound to be an important matter in the coming years.

[Nigellas]

I'd love Gore/Kucinich - the ultimate "crunchy" ticket. :D

[ThreeYell]

Six months ago I would have been thrilled for Gore to get in. Now, like much of the progressive left (as Artist mentioned), I'm behind Edwards.

I'd happily vote for Gore in the general if he were the nominee.

[MLA]

I would definitely vote for him the general election and might even vote for him in the primary -- though I'm leaning towards Edwards right now.


This: fund raising won't be any sort of challenge for him.
I don't think is true. I think that trying to fundraise when Hillary's also fundraising will be a major challenge for him.

[Anna Low]

Absolutely. However, I don't think he will choose to run again.

[gayle]

I honestly do not think he will choose to run. That being said, I would completely support him, both in the primary and the election should he choose to.

He has far more experience than anyone else in the running,and, the issues that matter the most to him are dear to my heart.

I personally feel he has alot more to (currently) offer than Clinton, Edwards or Obama.

Sadly, I do not think he will choose to run.

[HeatherFL]

What gayle wrote.

~H.

[SMgal]

I saw Al Gore on Charlie Rose lastnight. Did anyone else see it? I'm not sure if it was a repeat episode or not, but it sounds like Gore is mulling around the idea of running for the primaries.

[imagirliegirl]

I don't think he'll run but I would consider voting for him if he did.

[wendalah]

I wish he would jump in, it would make things so much more interesting (I say this without sarcasm).