More Arguments for Gore/Obama '08

[Politico]

More arguments for Gore/Obama emerge:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_neurosco_080423_the_case_for_gore_ob.htm

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid60249.aspx

---------------

I repeat once again, for the umpteenth time in the past half year, that Democrats will lose in November unless they nominate Gore. Hillary's negatives are too high and have passed the tipping point where they cannot be brought back to an electable level. On the flip side, Obama's inexperience is too much to overcome up against a seasoned vet like McCain. After another month of the Clinton/Obama bloodbath, do not be surprised if McCain is posting a ten point lead on both of them in states that went strongly to Gore in 2000.

After the circular firing squad comes to a momentary conclusion upon the close of the final Democratic primaries, the Democrat powers that be will realize that they have forced upon them self two choices:

- Lose in November
- Win in November with Gore/Obama

Since Obama will still have a lead in pledged delegates and the number of states won after the primaries end, the choice will ultimately become Obama's:  Does he want to lose in November as the Democrats' candidate for president...or does he want to win in November as the Democrats' candidate for vice president? Does he want to take a risky gamble, putting the party and nation at risk, or would he rather wait his turn and embrace once more the man who should have become president eight years ago instead of Bush?

After the necessary extensive polling is done, it will be crystal clear that only Gore/Obama can attract both the Clinton and Obama crowds. In other words, Gore/Obama is the only path to unity and therefore victory. Obama will make the right choice and nominate Gore himself in order to finally put the final nail in Clinton's campaign. Bill and Hillary will have no choice but to finally embrace the change of leadership.

[JSojourner]

I totally agree.  But it's not gonna happen.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Gore is the most dangerous candidate the Dems could field. Even though he's moved left since he ran in 2000, most Americans probably don't know that.

[Padfoot]

I thought we killed all these crazy Gore ideas back in October but it appears that the nutters are still out there.  This type of nostalgia for the '90s is the same thing that's enabling Clinton to continue stringing along.  I'm really getting sick of it.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I thought we killed all these crazy Gore ideas back in October but it appears that the nutters are still out there.  This type of nostalgia for the '90s is the same thing that's enabling Clinton to continue stringing along.  I'm really getting sick of it.

Yeah.. the 90's... wouldn't that the last time the Democrats won a Presidential election

[Padfoot]

I thought we killed all these crazy Gore ideas back in October but it appears that the nutters are still out there.  This type of nostalgia for the '90s is the same thing that's enabling Clinton to continue stringing along.  I'm really getting sick of it.

Yeah.. the 90's... wouldn't that the last time the Democrats won a Presidential election

and they aren't going to win again if they keep using the same old playbook and harping on should haves, would haves, and could haves.

[Politico]

I thought we killed all these crazy Gore ideas back in October but it appears that the nutters are still out there.  This type of nostalgia for the '90s is the same thing that's enabling Clinton to continue stringing along.  I'm really getting sick of it.

Yeah.. the 90's... wouldn't that the last time the Democrats won a Presidential election

and they aren't going to win again if they keep using the same old playbook and harping on should haves, would haves, and could haves.

Do you really think a Gore/Obama campaign would be "using the same old playbook"? If Gore was more of the same, another Clinton bot, he would have endorsed Hillary Clinton months ago. Instead, Gore has steadfastly remained publicly neutral and is rumored to be privately opposing her nomination.

I believe and think that Gore/Obama would be the boldest Democratic ticket in decades. You've got both the comeback story and the first African-American aspect - one helluva combo story that would keep people talking for months, right up until Election Day. You've got a groundbreaking environmental platform along with a ticket made up of prescient and courageous leaders who opposed the invasion of Iraq from day one, unlike the ticket of Kerry/Edwards or Clinton/Anybody. Furthermore, Gore's extensive networking connections in the business world and academia will ensure that the Democrats have the best and the brightest economic advisers in the world. To top it off, nominating Al Gore destroys McCain's strongest (and potentially ONLY) selling point, his experience. Al Gore would be the candidate who who spent eight years as the nation's vice president, eight years in the US Senate, eight years in the US House of Representatives, and nearly two decades in the private sector. John McCain would be reduced to being a US Senator who has simply spent decades, perhaps one too many, in the US Senate. Additionally, the more experienced candidate, Al Gore, is significantly younger than McCain, but at 59 years old Gore is not "too young" (Let's not forget McCain is almost 72 and Obama is only 46 - quite old and quite young for the presidency). If you think Hillary has been tough on Obama, you do not want to see what McCain and the Republicans will have in store for him if he becomes the top of the ticket. With Gore at the top of the ticket, and Obama waiting in the wings, I think McCain has an extremely hard time selling the benefits of choosing him over Gore. As a result, I foresee the national dialog being mostly about the issues instead of the superficial. That is a debate that Gore will win over McCain.

These are the tickets that I think would be best for the nation and the Democratic Party:

Gore/Obama '08
Gore/Obama '12
Obama/Warner '16

[Padfoot]

I thought we killed all these crazy Gore ideas back in October but it appears that the nutters are still out there.  This type of nostalgia for the '90s is the same thing that's enabling Clinton to continue stringing along.  I'm really getting sick of it.

Yeah.. the 90's... wouldn't that the last time the Democrats won a Presidential election

and they aren't going to win again if they keep using the same old playbook and harping on should haves, would haves, and could haves.

Do you really think a Gore/Obama campaign would be "using the same old playbook"? If Gore was more of the same, another Clinton bot, he would have endorsed Hillary Clinton months ago. Instead, Gore has steadfastly remained publicly neutral and is rumored to be privately opposing her nomination.

I believe and think that Gore/Obama would be the boldest Democratic ticket in decades. You've got both the comeback story and the first African-American aspect - one helluva combo story that would keep people talking for months, right up until Election Day. You've got a groundbreaking environmental platform along with a ticket made up of prescient and courageous leaders who opposed the invasion of Iraq from day one, unlike the ticket of Kerry/Edwards or Clinton/Anybody. Furthermore, Gore's extensive networking connections in the business world and academia will ensure that the Democrats have the best and the brightest economic advisers in the world. To top it off, nominating Al Gore destroys McCain's strongest (and potentially ONLY) selling point, his experience. Al Gore would be the candidate who who spent eight years as the nation's vice president, eight years in the US Senate, eight years in the US House of Representatives, and nearly two decades in the private sector. John McCain would be reduced to being a US Senator who has simply spent decades, perhaps one too many, in the US Senate. Additionally, the more experienced candidate, Al Gore, is significantly younger than McCain, but at 59 years old Gore is not "too young" (Let's not forget McCain is almost 72 and Obama is only 46 - quite old and quite young for the presidency). If you think Hillary has been tough on Obama, you do not want to see what McCain and the Republicans will have in store for him if he becomes the top of the ticket. With Gore at the top of the ticket, and Obama waiting in the wings, I think McCain has an extremely hard time selling the benefits of choosing him over Gore. As a result, I foresee the national dialog being mostly about the issues instead of the superficial. That is a debate that Gore will win over McCain.

These are the tickets that I think would be best for the nation and the Democratic Party:

Gore/Obama '08
Gore/Obama '12
Obama/Warner '16

Any ticket with Gore at the top will be overshadowed by the 2000 election controversy and his outspoken and somewhat controversial position on global warming.  America is tired of looking backwards which is why Obama is so popular.  Putting Gore on the ticket only causes polarization on the issue of global warming and reminds people of the mess that occurred in 2000.  Not a very good strategy if you ask me.

Plus theres the fact that Gore has said repeatedly that he is not running and does not want to run for president in 2008.  Those who continue to bring his name up are only deluding themselves into thinking he will be the Democratic candidate this year.

[Nym90]

A Gore/Obama ticket would give me an instant orgasm.

Unfortunately, that won't be happening from any source.