by Damozel | I've never disguised my love for Al Gore. I loved Al Gore before it was cool. I always thought he was handsome, brilliant, prophetic, an engaging speaker, etc. etc., and I feel approximately the same way about him that Obama's fan base feels about him. Though I am glad he is not running in this disappointing circus of a Democratic election, I would be down with this scenario, allegedly now under discussion by 'party insider,' according to this Eleanor Clift article posted by Andrew Romano in the Newsweek blogs:
Al Gore on the second ballot: A scenario that a few weeks ago seemed preposterous is beginning to look plausible to some nervous Democrats looking for a way out of the deadlock between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It goes like this:
We love them both, but neither is a sure bet when it comes to electability. It's not about gender and race, each has more mundane vulnerabilities.
Hillary's negatives will drive white men to John McCain; Obama's inexperience will require a gut check on the part of voters. What if the super delegates decide not to decide, denying either candidate the requisite number of delegates to secure the party's nomination. Democrats want to win. The new rallying cry: Gore on the second ballot. (Newsweek emphasis added)
The piece explains the reasons why Gore might go along with it. I do not believe it, but just suppose.....
The last time a political convention went to a second ballot was 1952, but this is a year with so many twists and turns that nothing is impossible. Gore would be tempted on so many levels. He would only have to endure two months of campaigning, not long enough for voters to remember what they didn't like about him eight years ago. Gore has sat out the primary process, refusing to offer even so much as a hint of where his sentiments lie. Years of playing second-fiddle to Hillary in the White House no doubt precluded his endorsement for her. Surely he would happily take Obama as his running mate, ending the Clinton dynasty and positioning the Democrats for a potential 16-year reign at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. A Gore-Obama ticket would be unstoppable, the thinking goes, matching the presumptive Republican nominee, McCain, on national security and experience, while embodying a powerful message of change(Newsweek; emphasis added).
Not that I have a problem with Hillary---I love her--- and the way in which she's been treated makes me sick. But...I know what, put her on the Cabinet! Edwards too! Yes, then everyone would have something good! Hey, I can dream, can't I? Is it wrong that I dream of a Democratic party united around its greatest members? Naive, yes....but in these dangerous times, and after eight years of W, WHY can't we all just get along?
This article in Rolling Stone, written in Feb.2007, set out the reasons why Gore should run. I have been following Gore's progress with sufficient attention to feel pretty sure he isn't interested, but maybe he'd take it if his party begged him to come to its rescue? He's all about the public service, isn't he? Well, but.... He's where he wants to be. But maybe....?
Eleanor Clift explains how the scenario could unfold:
If Hillary's attempts to secure the nomination are seen as illegitimate, and they fail, yet Obama is not seen as a clear victor, Gore's name could be introduced. All it would take is a delegate perhaps from Tennessee, his home state, to raise a point of order, and with backing from five other state delegations, Gore's name could be put in play as a prospective nominee.
Anyway, I'm with this guy. At the time he was urging Gore to run, I would have advised Gore to run away---but now? My deeply divided party needs him now.
I realize these are the politics of desperation: wishing that Gore would swoop in to heal the rift. But these are desperate times and I am deeply disappointed....
Of course, the down side is that Gore is hated by the right almost as much as Hillary---and anyone who doesn't believe this needs to read some of the vitriol they poured on his Nobel win. The only candidate they don't hate is Obama, and that, my friends, is that they believe he is a lightweight McCain would have a chance of beating. According to the Times Online, they are set to attack him as a 'shady Chicago socialist.' So it isn't as if he isn't going to come in for his own share of vitriol if he gets the nomination....
RELATED POSTINGS
The New York Times Endorses Hillary
Global Warming 'Over-Hyped'? And How Much Hype Would be Just Right?
A Response to the Critics Acid-Raining on Gore's Parade
Comments