JMS Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1725678,00.html Wednesday, Mar. 26, 2008 Is Al Gore the Answer? By Joe Klein Unlike Barack Obama, Bill Clinton does not believe in "the fierce urgency of now." The former President has an exquisitely languid sense of how political time unfurls. He understands that those moments the political community, especially the media, considers urgent usually aren't. He has seen his own election and re-election—and completing his second term—pronounced "impossible" and lived to tell the tale. He remembers that in spring 1992 he had pretty much won the Democratic nomination but was considered a dead man walking, running third behind Bush the Elder and Ross Perot. He knows that April is the silly season in presidential politics, the moment when candidates involved in a bruising primary battle seem weakest and bloodied, as both Hillary Clinton and Obama do now. It's the moment when pundits demand action—"Drop out, Hillary!"—and propound foolish theories. And so I'm rather embarrassed to admit that I'm slouching toward, well, a theory: if this race continues to slide downhill, the answer to the Democratic Party's dilemma may turn out to be Al Gore. This April promises to be crueler than most. The two campaigns have started attacking each other with chainsaws, while the Republican John McCain is moving ahead in some national polls. At this point, Clinton can only win the nomination ugly: by superdelegates abandoning Obama and turning to her, in droves—not impossible, but not very likely either. Even if Clinton did overtake Obama, it would be very difficult for her to win the presidency: African Americans would never forgive her for "stealing" the nomination. They would simply stay home in November, as would the Obamista youth. (Although the former President is probably thinking: Yeah, but John McCain is a flagrantly flawed candidate too—I'd accept even a corrupted nomination and take my chances.) Which is not to say that Clinton's candidacy is entirely without purpose now that she is pursuing a Republican-style race gambit, questioning Obama's 20-year relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah "God damn America" Wright. Democrats will soon learn how damaging that relationship might be in a general election. They'll also see if Obama has the gumption to bounce back, work hard—not just arena rallies for college kids but roundtables for the grizzled and unemployed in American Legion halls—and change the minds that have turned against him. The main reason superdelegates have not yet rallied round Obama is that the party is collectively holding its breath, waiting to see how he performs in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Indiana. He will probably do well enough to secure the nomination. But what if he tanks? What if he can't buy a white working-class vote? What if he loses all three states badly and continues to lose after that? I'd guess that the Democratic Party would still give him the nomination rather than turn to Clinton. But no one would be very happy—and a year that should have been an easy Democratic victory, given the state of the economy and the unpopularity of the incumbent, might slip away. Which brings us back to Al Gore. Pish-tosh, you say, and you're probably right. But let's play a little. Let's say the elders of the Democratic Party decide, when the primaries end, that neither Obama nor Clinton is viable. Let's also assume—and this may be a real stretch—that such elders are strong and smart enough to act. All they'd have to do would be to convince a significant fraction of their superdelegate friends, maybe fewer than 100, to announce that they were taking a pass on the first ballot at the Denver convention, which would deny the 2,025 votes necessary to Obama or Clinton. What if they then approached Gore and asked him to be the nominee, for the good of the party—and suggested that he take Obama as his running mate? Of course, Obama would have to be a party to the deal and bring his 1,900 or so delegates along. I played out that scenario with about a dozen prominent Democrats recently, from various sectors of the party, including both Obama and Clinton partisans. Most said it was extremely unlikely ... and a pretty interesting idea. A prominent fund raiser told me, "Gore-Obama is the ticket a lot of people wanted in the first place." A congressional Democrat told me, "This could be our way out of a mess." Others suggested Gore was painfully aware of his limitations as a candidate. "I don't know that he'd be interested, even if you handed it to him," said a Gore friend. Chances are, no one will hand it to him. The Democratic Party would have to be monumentally desperate come June. And yet ... is this scenario any more preposterous than the one that gave John McCain the Republican nomination? Yes, it's silly season. But this has been an exceptionally "silly" year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walking Deadman Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Time: "Is Al Gore the Answer?" No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Please please please let that be the answer. pretty please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 First of all, that's never going to happen. Second of all ... there is no second of all because that's never going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsOrlando Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Al Gore is the answer, when it comes to lockbox strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Bait Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 his whole platform is a myth!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
81artmonk Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 I already heard an interview from a superdelegate who stated that that is a strong possibility! That at the convention, they just might select neither candidate (clinton, Obama) and go with someone else like Gore and have either Clinton or Obama be the running mate. Wouldn't that stir stuff up. I can't wait to see the democrat party emplode!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedlightG20 Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Interesting idea. I'm not particularly fond of any one of the three leading candidates from both parties... but the Gore/Obama idea is interesting. African-Americans and the white working class (as mentioned in the article) would flock in droves to that nomination. You would pit a promising but young and inexperienced leader in Obama with someone who was by Bill's side through the 90s. That would lay the foundation for a strong future for the democratic party for years to come. Too bad it won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helptheSKINS Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Is the question: Name a politician that came oh so close to becoming president then gained 200 pounds and grew an awful beard? If so, yes he is the answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashback Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 How does Joke Lein still have a job? No comment on the article, I just wanted to call him "Joke Lein" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Interesting idea. I'm not particularly fond of any one of the three leading candidates from both parties... but the Gore/Obama idea is interesting. African-Americans and the white working class (as mentioned in the article) would flock in droves to that nomination. You would pit a promising but young and inexperienced leader in Obama with someone who was by Bill's side through the 90s. That would lay the foundation for a strong future for the democratic party for years to come.Too bad it won't happen. Other questions Al Gore is the answer to: Who invented the internets? Who defeated ManBearPig? Who was 1/2 of the most uncomfortable public display of affection ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Bait Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Other questions Al Gore is the answer to:Who invented the internets? My grandfather worked on the government contract that created the internet. The internet was originally created to link all the libraries of the universities across the US Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 I already heard an interview from a superdelegate who stated that that is a strong possibility!That at the convention, they just might select neither candidate (clinton, Obama) and go with someone else like Gore and have either Clinton or Obama be the running mate. Wouldn't that stir stuff up. I can't wait to see the democrat party emplode!! I've heard it from a couple of different sources too. What makes it more likely is the polls showing significant Obama and Clinton Supporters voting Republican if their candidate fails to get the nomination. I was at first thinking it was impossible to have a broakered convention because you only need a simple majority to win the nomination, and there are only two candidates running. But if the some super deligates withhold their votes on the first ballot and the race continues to narrow; This could happen. Man what a show.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 My grandfather worked on the government contract that created the internet. The internet was originally created to link all the libraries of the universities across the US Well a lot of people can claim to have invented the internet. The darpa scientists who invented TCP/IP. The congressmen like Gore who got the funding to connect different university libraries. But my vote goes to Rick Adams who started UUNET. He like your grandfather was a government contractor connecting MIT to U of Michigan, and Stanford to Cal Tech for the government. The problem being that School "A" was connected to school "B" and school "C" was connected to school "D", but school D couldn't talk to school A. So Rick Adams invested 20k of his own money and purchased a sun server. He then paid the government to connect to each of their individual networks so all the Universities could talk to each other. Soon the government was comming to him to pay him to allow Universities on his network. That's how the internet came into being. Rick Adams sold UUNET in the late 1990's for like 5 Billion dollars, at the time he owned 90% of the backbone of the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 If Al Gore is the answer, someone needs to change the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tizzod Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 "Let's say the elders of the Democratic Party decide, when the primaries end, that neither Obama nor Clinton is viable. Let's also assume—and this may be a real stretch—that such elders are strong and smart enough to act." I stopped reading after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Bait Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Well a lot of people can claim to have invented the internet. The darpa scientists who invented TCP/IP. The congressmen like Gore who got the funding to connect different university libraries.But my vote goes to Rick Adams who started UUNET. He like your grandfather was a government contractor connecting MIT to U of Michigan, and Stanford to Cal Tech for the government. The problem being that School "A" was connected to school "B" and school "C" was connected to school "D", but school D couldn't talk to school A. So Rick Adams invested 20k of his own money and purchased a sun server. He then paid the government to connect to each of their individual networks so all the Universities could talk to each other. Soon the government was comming to him to pay him to allow Universities on his network. That's how the internet came into being. Rick Adams sold UUNET in the late 1990's for like 5 Billion dollars, at the time he owned 90% of the backbone of the internet. very interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Interesting idea. I'm not particularly fond of any one of the three leading candidates from both parties... but the Gore/Obama idea is interesting. African-Americans and the white working class (as mentioned in the article) would flock in droves to that nomination. You would pit a promising but young and inexperienced leader in Obama with someone who was by Bill's side through the 90s. That would lay the foundation for a strong future for the democratic party for years to come.Too bad it won't happen. I'd laugh my ***** off. It would be as stupid as voting for Marion Barry again... oh wait...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECU-ALUM Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Al Gore getting the nod now would be like giving the Super-Bowl to a team that didn't even play in the game. "The worst idea in the long sad history of bad ideas."-- Jeff Goldblum "The Lost World" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 "Let's say the elders of the Democratic Party decide, when the primaries end, that neither Obama nor Clinton is viable. Let's also assume—and this may be a real stretch—that such elders are strong and smart enough to act."I stopped reading after that. I don't think that is how it would go down. The way it would go down is 100 of the 500 odd super deligates don't vote on the first ballot. At that time neither Hillary or Obama would have the required votes to take the nomination, and you would have a brokered convention. In a brokered convention the question for obma supporters would be could you support Hillary, and for Hillary supporters could you support obama. If the answer to both of those question for the majority of the deligates is No, Then they might look for a third candidate which could get a majority of the deligates such as Gore. It wouldn't be something imposed by the party elders. It would be the choice and compromise of the deligates for the current candidates. That's basically how Lincoln got the republican nomination in 1860. He was nobodies first choice, but in the brokered convention he became everybody's second choice his biggest asset being nobody was strongly against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyholetsgogrant Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 the answer is no. If you want to be president you have to run lik everyone else... -Grant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 the answer is no. If you want to be president you have to run lik everyone else...-Grant History is full of Presidents who were drafted as compromise candidates like Lincoln. Or given the nomination after not even campagning. I think it's unlikely to occur in 2008, but it wouldn't be the first time this happenned. As recently as 1940, President Roosevelt refused to run for President for a third term. He was drafted by the party at the convention after he didn't campagne. A convention which Roosevelt didn't even attend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Al Gore getting the nod now would be like giving the Super-Bowl to a team that didn't even play in the game. It reminds me of the Monty Python sketch about the "Summarized Proust Competition". It ends ... COMPERE: Well ladies and gentlemen, I don't think any of our contestants this evening have succeeded in encapsulating the intricacies of Proust's masterwork, so I'm going to award the first prize this evening to the girl with the biggest tits. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8rhIw_9ucA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyholetsgogrant Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 History is full of Presidents who were drafted as compromise candidates. I think it's unlikely to occur, but it wouldn't be the first time this happenned.As recently as 1940, President Roosevelt refused to run for President for a third term. He was drafted by the party at the convention after he didn't even run. A convention which Roosevelt didn't even attend. Lincoln was another example. Yea, I understand that, but it's a lot different now with the amount money spent and the energy put in this campaign. -Grant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Gore vs. McCain ... it would be like hitting the rewind button back to 2000 and erasing Bush from history. If we could also un-invade Iraq, un-inflate our currency, and un-pop the housing bubble, that would be great too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.