Sunday, June 10, 2007

Al Gore for President Redux?

It wasn't
'We, the conglomerates.'
It wasn't
'We, the corporations.'
It was
'We, the people.'

The Last Temptation of Al Gore (link to Time Wednesday, May 16, 2007)

"Let's say you were dreaming up the perfect stealth candidate for 2008, a Democrat who could step into the presidential race when the party confronts its inevitable doubts about the front-runners. You would want a candidate with the grassroots appeal of Barack Obama—someone with a message that transcends politics, someone who spoke out loud and clear and early against the war in Iraq. But you would also want a candidate with the operational toughness of Hillary Clinton—someone with experience and credibility on the world stage. "

Steve Pyke for TIME (link to Time Wednesday May 16, 2007)

  • Fact: The majority of United States' Citizen Voters chose Al Gore as President in November of 2,000 with a margin of victory of over 500,000 votes.

  • Fact: Al Gore won the popular vote with the second highest vote total in history.

  • Fact: George W. Bush became President because the Supreme Court ruled 5:4 to stop re-counting votes.

  • Fact: That was Seven years ago. Millions of Americans are holding their heads and thinking, "I wish I had voted for Gore!"

This post is a reflection of my opinion and is not intended to represent the position of RCDC.

Lowell Fulk posting as RockDem


finnegan said...

It would be interesting. Better than the alternatives, anyway (IMO).

Good to see you're blogging again.

Anonymous said...

Winning the popular vote doesn't mean seem to forget that our founding father knew voters were TOO IGNORANT to elect our President, hence, the wisely created the Electoral College.

You forgot this fact:

The media called the election in Florida so early, thousands of voters in the panhandle (read: between Eglin AFB and Pensacola NAS who would have thrown Bush way over) simply chose not to vote.

All you have to know to see a demonstration, Lowell, is merely look back to the last election between you and Lohr, where the voters disregarded Lohr's poor attendance at both elected and appointed positions and actually voted for him over you.

Lowell Fulk said...

I think perhaps the radio talk show host you're using as reference has his story intentionally mixed up.

Weren't the polls in Florida closed (and across the country) by the time the pundants began making their predictions?

Carter was heavily criticized for conceding in his race against Reagan before the polls closed in California and the west coast causing (many believe) Democrats to give up and stay home which may have resulted in lost seats for D candidates in some west coast races.

They simply couldn't have called the race early enough to have affected the Florida vote because precincts don't begin reporting in until after they close. The more densely populated areas didn't have a final count to report until after the panhandle polls had closed. To have had an effect on the panhandle, the results would have had to been called before (well before...) eight o'clock EST. The earliest predictions I remember began well after nine.

If you have a link to your reference I'd love to see it. I have no fear of being shown I'm wrong. Been wrong before... Not often, but it has happened. ;O)

Regarding "ignorant voters": I wouldn't begin to think of the folks in Northern Rockingham County in such a way. I failed to win their trust. I needed to convince 38 people per precinct in the 26th to change their mind, and didn’t quite get it done. But that’s how it works, the candidate must convince the voter.

I do believe that voters have fallen out of love with GWB and the far right and are willing to look at Gore (who has matured very well as a potential candidate) with a fresh perspective.

I believe a Gore/Warner ticket in 2008 would be very attractive to a nation weary of partisan deadlock.

That’s my dream team anyway. Gore/Warner in 2008, the Right Team, at the Right Time…

Tom said...

The reasons for the Electoral College and the founding fathers' notions about how it would work out are far more complex than just thinking the voters were too ignorant. But, that's another debate....

A more important discussion for the future, how would Al Gore restore America after the bushwhacking we've endured? Can Gore do this better than Clinton, Obama, Richardson, or the others?

On a strategy level, will Gore just sit back and wait to be drafted as the savior who can unite the party? Can that happen with the new dynamics of the primary schedule and the crowded field?

Same questions for Warner. He's pretty coy about his intentions.... VP, Senator, Governor redux. I personally think a second term as Governor would be great for the Commonwealth and great for the Democratic Party.

So, Lowell... how about Gore/Richardson in '08?

Lowell Fulk said...


Since your post I have read up on Richardson and there are many issues where I find agreement with the Governor (Richardson).
I can say that I would campaign wholeheartedly for a Gore/Richardson ticket. And there is much to find attractive with such a matchup. However, please keep in mind, my first loyalty is with Mark R. Warner.

zen said...

I think Gore is the right man, and a Gore/Warner ticket sounds just about right on too.
It's not necessarily about what Gore could do better. Rather genuine leadership, is what inspires the people to do better. To see hope and prosperity, rather than fear, in our future.

It was good meeting with you again Lowell—and your wife. I'm glad to finnegan for leading me to your post.

Lowell Fulk said...

Good seeing you too Zen. This evening was very enjoyable.
And I'd like to thank you for weighing in with your thoughts and opinions on the different blogs and threads. You contribute much to any discussion in which you choose to become involved.

Tom said...

Bill Richardson brings a wealth of state, national, and international experience to any Democratic ticket. He's competent and (I think) scandal free. And his Hispanic background would be a big plus in many states.