Hard to believe, but the buzz about almost-president turned movie star Al Gore is intensifying. In Vanity Fair, Graydon Carter promotes an Al Gore-Hillary Clinton ticket for 2008 and says: “As Democrats bicker about who might lead their party into the 2008 presidential elections, they should take a good look at the man who once led them and who has been right on just about everything lately.” Then again, a New York magazine profile of Gore was headlined “The Un-Hillary.” Word also is that Gore, a Google senior adviser since 2001, has made so much money on Google stock that he could pump a lot of his own dollars into another presidential run. Time magazine quotes Gore as saying, “I’m not planning to be a candidate again, ever. I have no intention of being a candidate.” But he also says, “I haven’t made a Shermanesque statement because it just seems odd to do so.”
Journalist Richard Ben Cramer, who wrote the campaign book “What It Takes,” isn’t buying Gore’s repeated claims that he isn’t planning to run for president. Here’s how Cramer answered when blogger Washington Post Joel Achenbach asked him if he thought Gore would mount a campaign: “Oh, he’s running. If he’s breathing, he’s running.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- DavidB on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- Monkeyhawk on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- Monkeyhawk on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- Monkeyhawk on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- DorisKing on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
18 Comments
Gore WON the popular vote in 2000 by half a million votes.
Had the recount been done according to law using the “intent of the voter” (like when somebody punches a chad for Gore and also writes in “Al Gore” under “write in candidate), he would have won Florida and the Electoral College too.
I don’t know why the Democrats wouldn’t want to run the man who WON last time.
Al Gore-Russ Feingold. Now that would be a kick-ass combination.
Hillary can make cookies for the fund-raiser and contemplate her sins from the land of who-cares-ville.
OMG–Here it is coming up on 6/6/06 and check out this site
http://www.bushisantichrist.com/
How did this idiot who failed at everything he ever tried become President of the United States after he LOST the election?
He had a little help from . . . SATAN!
Check out the website. It’s amazing!
TB, don’t you have to put a lot of stock in numerology before you can buy into what your link purports?
Still, it is eerie. :)
Then again (I’m laughing at myself), it was discovered a year or two ago, that 666 is not the mark of the beast. It’s 616. So where does that leave us regarding GW? Back to him just being a big zero.
From AP today:
WASHINGTON – Al Gore, the Democrats’ nominee for the White House in 2000, says he has all but ruled out running for president in 2008, saying the best use of his time is to educate people about global warming.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060604/ap_on_el_pr/democrats2008
I think others who are high up in the party would like to see him run, too. It’s up to Al and doesn’t sound like he really wants to. Who can blame him?
Al Gore lost in 2000.
America lost in 2000 and again in 2004. It will continue to lose until it sees Republicans for what they are.
That time may be rapidly approaching.
I would not blame Gore if he does not run. I can think of no politician who has had to endure more of the worst of American politics and the willful stupidity of almost half the American people.
And it may be that his current efforts are eminently more important.
Global warming is real and it will have to be somebody outside the bitter partisanship of current politics to address it and get people on board to solving it. As President, any effort Gore could make in this area would be default opposed by the nuts on the right.
Deja vu all over again – 40 years after. In 1960 Nixon lost a close election amid claims of vote fraud (Chicago). In 2000 Gore lost a close election under similar circumstances (Florida). 8 years later the “New Nixon” was elected.
Yup, Joe has his right-wing story, and he’s sticking to it, evidence be damned.
You and the left-wing conspiracy theories. Good Luck next time.
Maybe what the left needs is more cheats and election riggers like the Republicans do.
TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) — Ayatollah Ali Khameni, Iran’s supreme leader, has warned the United States that any “misbehavior” directed at Iran would serve to disrupt Gulf energy shipments.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/04/us.iran/index.html
Joe,
I don’t know that in some cases when the left says ‘the right,’ they necessarily mean the entire right.
Do we, on the left, really think that ALL right-wingers were involved in what very much looks to be election rigging? Do we believe that ALL Republicans in Congress were involved in this? Do we believe that ALL conservatives are in favor of election rigging?
I don’t think Joe is. I think he uses defensive words and statements because he feels HE is being attacked.
Joe, if it’s proven true that RKJ’s data is true and that the noted elections were dirty, will you feel responsible? Forget that your party was involved (only using an “as if” here), but how would you feel? I know I’d feel angry and betrayed. But maybe I’m just to the point where I could turn my back on a “party.”
I wouldn’t feel responsible, because I personally had nothing to do with it.
If election rigging has been done, I would want the person(s) involved prosecuted in a court of law.
This isn’t a party issue, it’s a criminal issue. But the people on the left and the leftist that post on this blog rub their hands with glee, because they feel this will benefit them personally in getting their ideology representative by the majority members of government.
That is why you hear attack phrased from the left like “culture of corruption” applying that all Republicans are corrupt.
The leftist look at anything as a political issue for advantage that can be taken to advance their ideology in government.
I look at people who break the law as criminals, not as members of political parties or ideologies.
See, Joe, that’s what I thought. It’s a bad human habit we all have. And we do all have it.
It really isn’t ‘the Republicans’ or ‘the Democrats’ in so much as it is what a few do or have done. We’re not fair to ourselves anymore than fair to others when we do that. And I’m as guilty as the next guy/gal.
Gotten thicken the skin, that’s all, and try not to take anything personally unless it’s truly meant to be.
Waaahhh! They stole the election! They STOLE it! Waaahhh!
“The leftist look at anything as a political issue for advantage that can be taken to advance their ideology in government.”
Well, slap my ass and call me sally, but doesnt that sound like karl rove and bushco?
“The leftist look at anything as a political issue for advantage that can be taken to advance their ideology in government.”
Is that why Bush and the Senate are taking up the so-called “Protect Marriage” banner today?
“Slap my ass and call me Sally.”
Hehehe, thank god you’re on this WEBsite.