NationStates Jolt Archive

Former U.S. vice president Al Gore seems to be in the spotlight these last few days as a possible presidential candidate in 2008. Although he has not announced he is running yet, many see him as a potential alternative to Hillary Clinton seeing as he was against the Iraq War from the start and is trying to help a lot with the environment, seeing as his new movie on global warming has been released in select theaters.

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

Didn't he say something along the lines of 'I'm not going to run again, I'm 58 years old, I've run 4 times and I'm sick of it?'

Well, I think it's fair to say he would get more support than Clinton will. He does have the penis in his favour.

Didn't he say something along the lines of 'I'm not going to run again, I'm 58 years old, I've run 4 times and I'm sick of it?'

Well, I think it's fair to say he would get more support than Clinton will. He does have the penis in his favour.

Clinton has some balls...

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

When I'm putting together my list of criteria of what I want in a candidate, that consideration comes in pretty far down the list. It sounds like "electability," a word that causes an instant rise in my blood pressure because it gives the Democratic party candidates like John Kerry.

Of the two people, I like Gore more. I'd even put him in my very early top 3 I'd like to see in the primaries. Hillary I'd vote for in the general, but she'll never be in my top 3 in the primaries, mostly because of her stances on things like the Iraq War and her dismissiveness toward younger people (of whom I am no longer a member, alas) and their rights.

I believe Howard Dean and Hilary Clinton will run in '08 for the Democratic ticket. Al Gore...possibly, though he hasn't mentioned anything yet.

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

Counterquestion: why is the most powerful nation on earth incapable of finding someone better suited for the job than the candidates we have seen in the last few decades ?

This all raises a good question: Who will the Republicans run in '08?

Nice theory except that when Matt Laurer interviewed him on his giant fuel burning tour to promote his green flick he said he had no plans or desire to run. He could be telling a big whopper though.

Counterquestion: why is the most powerful nation on earth incapable of finding someone better suited for the job than the candidates we have seen in the last few decades ?

It takes a baboon to want the job nowadays. The best baboon is still a baboon.

I believe Howard Dean and Hilary Clinton will run in '08 for the Democratic ticket. Al Gore...possibly, though he hasn't mentioned anything yet.
Dean won't run--that was the deal he signed on for when he took over the DNC. Right now, the people most expect to run are Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, Joe Biden, Evan Bayh, Mark Warner, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, John Edwards, and probably John Kerry. There are probably some others I've missed, but that's a pretty significant list. I'd like to see Gore get into the race, as well as Brian Schweitzer, Governor of Montana.

Dean won't run--that was the deal he signed on for when he took over the DNC. Right now, the people most expect to run are Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, Joe Biden, Evan Bayh, Mark Warner, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, John Edwards, and probably John Kerry. There are probably some others I've missed, but that's a pretty significant list. I'd like to see Gore get into the race, as well as Brian Schweitzer, Governor of Montana.

Who do you think has the best chance of winning the ticket?

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

I think Joe Liberman would do a much better job than either Hillary or Al. He is a true centrist, not a psudo-centrist like Hillary or left like Al.

I think Joe Liberman would do a much better job than either Hillary or Al. He is a true centrist, not a psudo-centrist like Hillary or left like Al.
Lieberman is going to ahve a hard enough time holding onto his Senate seat--he's got a stiff challenger in the primary in Ned Lamont, and a lot of his constituents are tired of his Republican-lite schtick.

Who do you think has the best chance of winning the ticket?
At this point, you might as well ask me for the winning lotto numbers for tonight--it's too far out to have a clue. I can tell you who I don't think has much of a shot, but I could easily be wrong about it. Biden, Bayh, Richardson and Kerry are non-starters I think, and I don't give Edwards or Clark much of a shot either. If Gore gets into the race, he shakes up the dynamic a lot, and becomes an immediate frontrunner, and probably knocks Feingold down a notch, and Feingold is the darling of the progressive wing of the Dems right now and Gore could supplant him. Clinton is the establishment darling, though Warner could challenge her on that front--he's a moderate from a purple state and he's shown an ability to win elections. And then there's the possibility that someone could come out of nowhere like Dean did in 2004. So it's too early to say.

seeing as his new movie on global warming has been released in select theaters.

Select of course meaning 'tasteless and unpatriotic'.

This thread is pointless because the GOP is going to kick the Democrats back to their New England Ivory Towers in '06 and '08.

I think Joe Liberman would do a much better job than either Hillary or Al. He is a true centrist, not a psudo-centrist like Hillary or left like Al.

Nah, Its not going to be Lieberman. Its going to be the other Senator from CT, Chris Dodd. He's my sleeper pick.

Hillary and Gore hate each other, I'd pay money to see that debate.

Although it would be funny if Lieberman were nominated Dem candidate and Mitt Romney were nominated for the Rep candidate. A mormon vs. A jew for the presidency of the U.S. Whoda thunk it?

As much as I'd like to think Hillary can win, I'm doubtful she will. It seems many people in this nation aren't ready for a woman president...why? I don't know. I would vote for her if she was the Democratic nominee. hell, I'd vote for whoever was the Democratic nominee. The Republicans have just screwed up this nation. Also, I think the Democrats will take back at least the House in the elections in November.

I was just wondering if anybody has heard of the new KFC deal?

$2.99 for a 'Hillary Bucket' - Two small breasts, two large thighs and a hell of a left wing.

I was just wondering if anybody has heard of the new KFC deal?

$2.99 for a 'Hillary Bucket' - Two small breasts, two large thighs and a hell of a left wing.

As much as I find that statement wrong. I must admit it's funny :D

Select of course meaning 'tasteless and unpatriotic'.

This thread is pointless because the GOP is going to kick the Democrats back to their New England Ivory Towers in '06 and '08.

1. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
2. The concept of patriotism is a load of bullshit.

I was just wondering if anybody has heard of the new KFC deal?

$2.99 for a 'Hillary Bucket' - Two small breasts, two large thighs and a hell of a left wing.

Ahahahahahah-Old.

That joke is years old.

Do you know why jokes become old? Because people keep telling them. Do you know why people keep telling them? Because they're funny. Believe it or not, humor does not revolve around what you personally heard a couple of years ago.

Didn't he say something along the lines of 'I'm not going to run again, I'm 58 years old, I've run 4 times and I'm sick of it?'
But then he did the typical politician thing of saying basically, 'never say never'.
I think it was, 'I'm a recovering politician and could relapse easily'.

I think it's a combination of a few factors.
One is that the press are bored and trying to find a new angle on things. Pushing Gore might make for a juicy bit of in-fighting amongst the Dems, and political in-fighting always makes good copy.

Might not be the press putting it out, but some GOP people (what am I saying? The press are GOP people!), who are hoping it'll cause some bickering amongst the Dems - at a time the Dems need to be together and hitting GOP while it's down.

Gore may be testing the waters just to see the reaction. His family has been involved on politics for decades, so it's in his blood. He can't stay away from it.

Some Dems might not be that happy about Hillary running. She's very polarising and they might afraid she'll lose them the presidency for another term. So maybe they're putting out feelers to Gore and the public to give themselves another option.

Could be a combination of all four. Could be I'm talking out of my arse and it's something entirely different.

I was just wondering if anybody has heard of the new KFC deal?

$2.99 for a 'Hillary Bucket' - Two small breasts, two large thighs and a hell of a left wing.
Hear about the GOP party bucket? - full of right wings and arseholes.

I'd vote for neither. I'd rather see someone like Barack Obama run for president in '08.

Obama is too young. Gore is too left wing, Hilliary is way too much of a bitch.

I'd like to see Bayh get in, though I find it unlikely. Still it could happen. He did good for us here in Indiana while he was Governer.

Hear about the GOP party bucket? - full of right wings and arseholes.

There are two types of arseholes in the world. There are perfect ones and then there are those of us with hemorrhoids.:D

Hear about the GOP party bucket? - full of right wings and arseholes.
better joke would be.

Right Wings and small nuggets.

Hear about the GOP party bucket? - full of right wings and arseholes.

The wit and thought that went into that, you must be a product of the Massachusetts education system.

Once again, for the slow crowd: Hillary Clinton will not run for President in 2008. If she does, I will streak the DNC.

The best possible candidate the Democrats could hand the ticket to would be Rohm Emmanuel. Gore said he didn't want to do it, and he's too busy with the whole Manbearpig thing.

The wit and thought that went into that, you must be a product of the Massachusetts education system.
hahahaha! That's rich!
You make a lame joke and when someone returns the favor it's witless and thoughtless. :rolleyes:

If Gore or Billary get the nod for the Dems we can expect at least four more years of Republican a president....Dont the dems want to win ? WTF is wrong with them ?

A Dem cant win unless he/ she is close to center..left wing politics are wayyy beyond what the average American wants . If they float any more left they get 25 % of the vote . You cant accomplish anything unless you win an elction...Clinto nwon because he's close to being a conservative and centrist on most issues . I even voted for him once !...Bob Dole ? ...gimme a break !

When will they learn that being the party of c
Cindy Sheehan types and Michael more makles them a FRINGE element...people will NOT vote for the fringe ..not even enough to get them elected dog catcher .

Gore is nuts...he and Dean have set back the party about ten years in a bad way .

And are you telling me HILLARY CLINTON is the best youve got ?

If thats the case you are doomed ... if your a Democrat..republican backers are actually sending her money ! They want her to be the candidate...:rolleyes:

hahahaha! That's rich!
You make a lame joke and when someone returns the favor it's witless and thoughtless. :rolleyes:

Irony: A meaning (often contradictory) concealed behind the apparent meaning of a word or phrase.

Can we do Nader this time or will that throw the election again?

If Gore runs, it would be waaay to similar to Richard Nixon's politcal career for my liking. Think about it, Nixon started as VP, ran once for president, got cheated out of winning by some faulty vote counting, and then ran 8 years later, winning this time. Except for the last part, does this sound familiar?

Liberman's a terrible idea. He's opposed to free speech (just like Tipper Gore, actually).

And Al Gore has already demonstrated that he'll lose even when facing a candidate no one really likes. Might as well let Kerry run again.

I thought if one had run as a Candidate for the Presidency, one could not run again? Or am I mis-remembering something?

I thought if one had run as a Candidate for the Presidency, one could not run again? Or am I mis-remembering something?
Nope.
Nixon? Lost in 1960.

I thought if one had run as a Candidate for the Presidency, one could not run again? Or am I mis-remembering something?
You're misremembering. You can only serve two terms, but that's the only restriction on running (assuming you fit the rest of the qualifications).

Nope.
Nixon? Lost in 1960.

Oh yeah. Christ, I wonder what I'm thinking of then...


*Wanders off, deep in thought*

If Gore runs, it would be waaay to similar to Richard Nixon's politcal career for my liking. Think about it, Nixon started as VP, ran once for president, got cheated out of winning by some faulty vote counting, and then ran 8 years later, winning this time. Except for the last part, does this sound familiar?

So who's Gore's Spiro Agnew?

I thought if one had run as a Candidate for the Presidency, one could not run again? Or am I mis-remembering something?
No, it just very rarely happens. In the States once you've lost you're forever tarred as a 'loser', and who wants to vote for a 'loser', eh?

Doesn't make much sense, really. Look at Gore - gets more votes than the eventual winner but loses in a dubious and controversial way. Then there's Kerry - wins more votes than anyone else in history, bar one person.
Yet they're both viewed as lame ducks, never thought of as contenders ever again.
It seems you're only allowed one shot at the title, that's it.

If Gore runs, it would be waaay to similar to Richard Nixon's politcal career for my liking. Think about it, Nixon started as VP, ran once for president, got cheated out of winning by some faulty vote counting, and then ran 8 years later, winning this time. Except for the last part, does this sound familiar?

Yeah, but notice the part of '8 years later, winning'.

the only difference is Gore would actually make a good president.

Liasia']Clinton has some balls...
America doesn't support balls.

Former U.S. vice president Al Gore seems to be in the spotlight these last few days as a possible presidential candidate in 2008. Although he has not announced he is running yet, many see him as a potential alternative to Hillary Clinton seeing as he was against the Iraq War from the start and is trying to help a lot with the environment, seeing as his new movie on global warming has been released in select theaters.

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

If you put a gun to my head and made me choose...Gore or Hillary, I'd ask if the gun were loaded. If the answer was 'yes', I'd choose Gore. :)

Counterquestion: why is the most powerful nation on earth incapable of finding someone better suited for the job than the candidates we have seen in the last few decades ?

Because people who would make truly great leaders aren't properly broken in yet by their corporate masters. Only sniveling weasels who have sold their souls to lobbyists are eligible for major public office. *nod*

Dean won't run--that was the deal he signed on for when he took over the DNC. Right now, the people most expect to run are Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, Joe Biden, Evan Bayh, Mark Warner, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, John Edwards, and probably John Kerry. There are probably some others I've missed, but that's a pretty significant list. I'd like to see Gore get into the race, as well as Brian Schweitzer, Governor of Montana.

I'm such a John Edwards fanboy.

Lets look at the record for the Democrats:
1964: Johnson ( southern moderate) wins with 60% of the vote
1968: Humphrey ( liberal Northerner) losses with 42% of the vote
1972: Mcgovern (liberal Norhterner) losses to Nixon with 38% of the vote
1976: Carter ( moderate southern Governor) wins with 50.3% of the vote
1980: Carter runs against Reagan for reelection and only gets 41% ( Reagan wins)
1984: Mondale ( liberal northerner) only gets 41% of the vote (another loss)
1988: Dukakis ( liberal northerner) losses with 47% of the vote
1992: Clinton ( moderate southerner) wins with 43% of the vote
1996: Clinton reelected with 49% of the vote
2000: Gore a Southern liberal....well...it's complicated
2004: Liberal northerner John Kerry losses to Bush with 49% of the vote

My advice to the Democrats is to lose the baggage of nothern liberal elitists. Should either Clinton or Gore run they will do better than sombody like Biden...but Hillary and Al seem to be allied with the far left increasingly over the last year. In a nation where only one Democrat in the last 40 years has cracked 50% of the vote....they need to stay away from the crazy liberal fringe. Al Gore's global warming video is an example of how the michael moore fringe is shoving him into their pocket.

Actually, I would listen to a candidate that actually had nerve. I am tired of candidates that run into the center to be elected in both parties.

Gore was never a bad choice for the Presidency. He was shot in the foot by not being good in front of the camera and the media hopping all over him being boring, wooden and not charismatic.

Bush, who is a train wreck in front of the cameras was played as an "ordinary guy you can drink beer in the back yard with" even though that is patently untrue.

Despite the grand assertions by conservatives, Bush has frequently gotten a free pass for acting like a Texas yokel in front of the cameras because the press thought it was cute.

Hillary has always been a centrist, her decisions pepper both sides of the political fence.

Al Gore is not much further to the left than Hillary except in environmental policy.

There are very few REAL progressives and liberals left in this country.

Given the choice of the two I would have to vote for Al Gore.

Al Gore is fine I like him. He would be a good solid choice, for the democrats. Quite possibly better than Hillary from all the crap I heard here about her, that I did not know before, how she can't make her mind on stuff for one.

Former U.S. vice president Al Gore seems to be in the spotlight these last few days as a possible presidential candidate in 2008. Although he has not announced he is running yet, many see him as a potential alternative to Hillary Clinton seeing as he was against the Iraq War from the start and is trying to help a lot with the environment, seeing as his new movie on global warming has been released in select theaters.

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

Neither but if forced to pick, I would have to see what Gore's stand is on censorship. After tipper tried to get records censored, I am afraid of what could happen if Al got into office.

I am fine with warning labels on CD's, I dont want to see it taken any further.

Neither but if forced to pick, I would have to see what Gore's stand is on censorship. After tipper tried to get records censored, I am afraid of what could happen if Al got into office.

I am fine with warning labels on CD's, I dont want to see it taken any further.


Surely, he can think of better issues to tackle than this heh. Did he really tried to get cd's censored? I agree warning label is fine, no need to take it a notch higher.

Surely, he can think of better issues to tackle than this heh. Did he really tried to get cd's censored? I agree warning label is fine, no need to take it a notch higher.

PRMC was all Tipper.

I think that Gore killed his possible chances after the first time around, gaining all that weight and just dropping out of the picture. I dunno, it'd be a long shot.

I think that Gore killed his possible chances after the first time around, gaining all that weight and just dropping out of the picture. I dunno, it'd be a long shot.

It was his quest for ManBearPig.

It was his quest for ManBearPig.
"I'm really cereal guys!!!"

Hehe, yes, that was it.

Former U.S. vice president Al Gore seems to be in the spotlight these last few days as a possible presidential candidate in 2008. Although he has not announced he is running yet, many see him as a potential alternative to Hillary Clinton seeing as he was against the Iraq War from the start and is trying to help a lot with the environment, seeing as his new movie on global warming has been released in select theaters.

who would do better against the republicans in 08...Gore or Hillary Clinton?

If i had to choose between those two, Hillary would win. If Gore had ran again when Bush was going for a second term, he would have defenetly won, and we would be rid of Bush for good; but he didn't. Now if Gore ran, it would depend on who the Rep. choose. Last I heard, H. Clinton was gaining some support as a candidate.

If i had to choose between those two, Hillary would win. If Gore had ran again when Bush was going for a second term, he would have defenetly won, and we would be rid of Bush for good; but he didn't. Now if Gore ran, it would depend on who the Rep. choose. Last I heard, H. Clinton was gaining some support as a candidate.
Well, there are a lot of Republicans who would love her to be the nominee. That in and of itself doesn't disqualify her in my eyes--there are plenty of other reasons for me not to like her.

In 1993 Gore debated Ross Perot on CNN's Larry King Live on the issue of free trade. Public opinion polls taken after the debate showed that a majority of Americans agreed with his point of view and supported NAFTA. Some claim that this performance may have been responsible for the passing of NAFTA in the House of Representatives, where it passed 234-200.[13]


Gore is a strong supporter of abortion rights, free trade, and strong environmental policy. He was a vocal opponent of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[33]

I don't consider that too leftist. Overall, I think Al Gore is a centrist to center-right on several economic issues except for environmentalism (then again, global warming would hurt profit and competition in the long run, thus crippling one of the few economic systems that actually work well, capitalism). Al Gore is basically from the neo-liberal wing of the Democratic Party (also called the "New Democrats"). As much as I'd like to see how the first female President would be like, Al Gore, in my opinion, would do a much, much better job as President.

I'd rate Hillary Clinton as fairly socially conservative as well, just look at her speech in front of the Chamber of Commerce calling for a return to more traditional values or her protest against violent video games or video games with nudity.

Al Gore, however, is more of socially moderate to socially liberal while maintaining an economically capitalist policy. This is all my opinion however. Also, he has more experience since he is the First Emperor of the Moon and Inventor of the Environment. :p