WWTBAM Bored

I got a flabbergasting E-mail today. I have voted twice in Democracy for America's Presidential preference poll based on my SelectSmart results and what the candidates have said in DFA's "vote for me" E-mail.

Today's message should have been from Christopher Dodds or Bill Richardson or somebody. OK, it was Kucinich. But here was an EXTRA!:

Something surprising is happening at Democracy for America; former Vice President Al Gore is leading the race for the DFA Presidential endorsement -- as a write-in candidate.

We know his current position on ONE issue: Global warming. Is he in or out? If he's in, he should fill out the same questionnaire all the other candidates did and fill us in on Iraq, immigration, health care, budget deficits, and so on.

At least good sense is prevailing over at DFA: And in the end, only an announced candidate can win the DFA endorsement.

He's not in, but he hasn't ruled himself out either. Here's three video clips he made a couple of weeks ago stating his positions on:

1. Health care
2. Oversight of the executive branch
3. Withdrawing troops from Iraq

http://current.com/people/algore

These are almost pseudo-campaign videos. Why he made them and released them now is anyone's guess.

There's a few schools of thought about him running should he choose to. If he wants to be on the ballot in the earliest primaries, November 2 is the drop dead date. However, some observers are speculating that he could skip the early primaries and get on the ballot for the Super Tuesday primaries (in February).

He has near universal name recognition, which means a traditional campaign isn't such a requirement. Plus, as far as a record goes, you do have his 8 years as vice president and his long career as a senator.

Also, I think his latest book - "The Assault on Reason" - sets out a lot of what he thinks is wrong with our media, our political system and where the two intersect (campaigns).

It's going to boil down to whether he thinks he could do more good from the inside or the outside, and whether he believes he could win the nomination.

The Draft Gore movement is quite strong and very active.

See their website. They're the ones that are attempting to keep Gore's name in the discussion. Gore hasn't said categorically NO yet. He has stated many times that he has no plans to run. These folks take that as a potential yes.

http://www.draftgore.com/

I like Gore but I like his freedom outside the political arena. If he would sell his house and move to a smaller one, that would help.

I am recently intrigued by Ron Paul. I doubt he gets near a nomination but the Republicans have lots of issues with the leaders. I'm not saying I dislike all of them, but the party has to hold its nose too much with Guliani and Romney at the for them to be happy. Paul may have to try for a Libertarian nomination again.

If I had to vote right now, it would be Clinton. Nothing to do with Bill; I like her experience and I think she would outwork everyone. But I don't have to vote right now, so I can keep checking on these other folks.

Ritterskoop wrote:I am recently intrigued by Ron Paul. I doubt he gets near a nomination but the Republicans have lots of issues with the leaders..

I heard Ron Paul on one of the Republican debates. He was asked if he'd support the eventual nominee of the party and he bluntly said no. That takes a lot of guts, it seems to me. Perhaps not much brains, though.

Ritterskoop wrote:I like Gore but I like his freedom outside the political arena. If he would sell his house and move to a smaller one, that would help.

Well, that would just means he's facilitating someone else being wasteful. What he really ought to do is tear the mansion down and plant some trees.

Out.

We're less than 90 days away from the Iowa caucus. If Al wanted to run, he would've jumped in a long time ago.

SportsFan68 wrote:I

Something surprising is happening at Democracy for America; former Vice President Al Gore is leading the race for the DFA Presidential endorsement -- as a write-in candidate.

We know his current position on ONE issue: Global warming. Is he in or out? If he's in, he should fill out the same questionnaire all the other candidates did and fill us in on Iraq, immigration, health care, budget deficits, and so on.

[/i]

This would be really interesting. First, he wins the Nobel Peace Prize based on his junk science movie and now he is considering running for the presidency using that same platform. And you thought the Republicans were using scare tactics!

Next to the Year 2000 Bug and Nigerian Lottery Scam, Gore has to be one of the great hoaxes every perpetuated on Americans.

15QuestionsAway wrote:He's not in, but he hasn't ruled himself out either. Here's three video clips he made a couple of weeks ago stating his positions on:

1. Health care
2. Oversight of the executive branch
3. Withdrawing troops from Iraq

http://current.com/people/algore

Thanks, 15QA. Very helpful.

I voted for Al Gore in the 1992 primary and for President in 2000. I now think he is a idiot or a calculating liar, based on the Global Warming positions.

I voted for him in the 1988 Primary. Back when he was still pro-family, pro-life, and pro-guns.

I think that Gore wanted to run but that wanted to see how the field shaped up. If the Dems had been bunched up with no clear frontrunner and Hillary had been hurt by her negatives, he probably would have stepped in.

This is the same general situation Fred Thompson found himself in when he decided to run on the Republican side.

However, Hillary looks strong and Gore would not be a favorite to win if he entered now. Plus, dragging Hillary through a lengthy primary campaign with lots more mudslinging would not help the Democratic party win the general election.

I look for Gore to use his status to translate into an advisory or even a cabinet position in a Democratic administration (Sec of State is a good possibility).

silverscreenselect wrote:However, Hillary looks strong and Gore would not be a favorite to win if he entered now. Plus, dragging Hillary through a lengthy primary campaign with lots more mudslinging would not help the Democratic party win the general election.

I sincerely hope he doesn't run. Not because I disagree with him on global warming (although I am not as alarmist as he is) but because it would bring back bad memories of 2000.

silverscreenselect wrote:I look for Gore to use his status to translate into an advisory or even a cabinet position in a Democratic administration (Sec of State is a good possibility).

How about head of the EPA?

...because of the growing but still not widely recognized fact of peak oil production.

Oil up to ~$92 a barrel, and not because of speculation, but because of:

*Lower than expected inventories.
*Decline in oil imports (really exports).
*Slowing of tanker traffic forecast for the coming months (fits in with decline in imports/exports above).
*OPEC secretary saying another 500K BPD increase is out of the question despite KSA's badgering, and the 500K BPD increase announced for Novermber being forecast not to be met.
*The military starting to speak of future fuel forecasts, not in terms of "oil", but in "total liquids".

This is coming, folks...the great key issue that the US, indeed, the world, will face...demand for petroleum continuing to grow while supply begins to wane...and NO ONE is talking about it.