Al Gore Could Still Be the Democratic Nominee
As probably all my readers know, Al Gore, former US Senator from Tennessee and Vice President for 8 years under Bill Clinton, is the man who should have been President. He beat George W. Bush in the national popular vote in 2000, but lost the decisive electoral vote after a US Supreme Court decision essentially handed Florida to Mr. Bush. Since then, Al Gore has become perhaps our world's foremost spokeman for addressing the climate/environmental crisis. His The Assault on Reason is one of the greatest, best-thought-out and most essential books I've read in many years. His film An Inconvenient Truth won an Academy Award. And Mr. Gore himself was awarded a Nobel Prize for his efforts on behalf of our world.
I wonder how many Americans wish he would have run for President again in 2008. How many would prefer him to either Clinton, Obama, or McCain? I guess it's a moot point now.
Or is it?...
Al Gore can still be the Democratic nominee this year, and here's how.
You may recall my recent blogs about visiting former President James Garfield's gravesite and home in northern Ohio. But here's something I haven't yet mentioned about Mr. Garfield. Until the Republican Convention in 1880, James Garfield wasn't even a candidate for President. The three major Republican presidential candidates were Ulysses S. Grant (Civil War hero and two-term former President who was not re-nominated in 1876), James G. Blaine (Senator from Maine, backed by the Half-Breed faction of the Republican Party) and John Sherman (Secretary of the Treasury under then-President Hayes, former Senator from Ohio, and brother of Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman). Garfield was at the Convention to support his fellow Ohioan John Sherman. But after 35 ballots (it was the longest lasting Republican Convention in history), none of the candidates had enough votes/delegates to win the nomination.
Garfield's name was introduced as a compromise, "dark horse" candidate who delegates from more than one side might be willing to endorse. Both Blaine and Sherman, who knew they could not win, yet didn't want Grant (whose administration had been riddled with scandals) to win, threw their support behind the new candidate. And surprise! Garfield, who hadn't even planned to run for President, was chosen as the Republican nominee. He went on to win the general election and move into the White House.
For more about the Republican Convention of 1880, please click here.
So what does all this have to do with Al Gore and today? Plenty, I think.... Granted, there are differences between then and now. For one, there were no such thing as "primary" elections back then (the first was held in Oregon in 1910). But the Democrats this year are in a similar predicament to that of the Republicans in 1880. If Barack Obama continues his pace, it is likely that he will remain 100 regular delegates short of securing the nomination. And since re-votes are not going to happen in Florida and Michigan (and even if they were), Hillary Clinton would have to win by a ridiculously huge margin in the remaining states to have a chance of securing enough regular delegates to be the nominee.
What if we get to the Democratic Convention and find the delegates and superdelegates to be so split that neither candidate can become the undisputed nominee? According to a recent Associated Press article by Nedra Pickler (in my local newspaper on 11 April) and a corresponding AP-IPSOS poll, "About a quarter of Obama supporters say they'll vote for McCain if Clinton is the Democratic nominee. About a third of Clinton supporters say they would vote for McCain if it's Obama." According to same poll, both Obama and Clinton are in a statistical tie with Republican candidate John McCain, if the election were held this month. Can either candidate afford to lose a significant number of Democrats to McCain in a race this close? I hope that none of the Democratic delegates would desire a Republican victory in November. Perhaps that could be averted with a dual Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket. But how likely is it that either will choose his or her biggest competitor as his or her running mate?
What if neither candidate, Obama or Clinton, has sufficient support at the Convention to be the uncontested nominee? What if it seems certain neither candidate can unite the party and win in November? Why couldn't Al Gore be nominated and selected - as the candidate all Democrats (and many independents) can trust, rally behind, and propel to a certain victory? Perhaps it's just a dream. It may seem unlikely. But is it possible? And would you be willing to trade a Clinton and Obama in the bush for an Al Gore in the hand?
Could it happen? Would you support him? I'm interested in hearing what you think.
Please check out these Al Gore works, available through my Amazon bookstore:
To visit Al Gore's official website: www.algore.com
To read Wikipedia's biography of Al Gore: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore
For more about a grassroots movement to draft Al Gore: http://www.draftgore.com/
Right now, I'm willing to do whatever it takes to get the Republicans out. I wish Hil and Obama could join forces, but I don't see it happening either. Gore or John Edwards would be just fine in my opinion.
God help us all.
Hugs,
Suzette
Reply to this
Let's see if by tomorrow night with the primary in Pennsylvania over who is the winner. I have a sneaking feeling it will be nearly a tie. I have read Al Gore's book, and it is one of the finest books ever written by a presidential candidate. I had hoped he would seek the office but he is probably (as most of us are by now) tired of politics and even more tired of the primaries that are splitting the Democratic party. I really feel the only hope against McCain is a ticket with both Clinton and Obama.
But as you say this probably wouldn't happen unless both of them agree to this. We still have until the first of June to end the primaries and until the convention in August. I love your idea and maybe this time if by some miracle they nominate Al Gore he might win. Let's keep our fingers crossed.
Reply to this
I agree with you Elena.. but I think he hasn't run because he feels he can accomplish more were he is. Not being in the political arena gives him a freedom he wouldn't have otherwise. But I think he is the best candidate for the job. And I think he would be better at foreign policy as well.
Reply to this
Suzette, Elena, and Chris...
You've all made good points with which I tend to agree.
The Assault on Reason, for those who do not know, is about far more than politics, and far more than the environment. It's far bigger - and I daresay the greatest book ever written by a presidential candidate, on several levels.
Reply to this
....better than a republican, yes......oh Lordy!! ...i hope we aren't THIS desperate!!
Reply to this
Actually I think we may be more desperate than we think right now. Gore lost, Kerry lost and it's now eight years of Bush, the worst president we have ever had. Think of five years of war in Iraq, billions spent on this and all the lives lost, not only of our own soldiers but the Iraqi people who are dying every day from constant attacks by insurgents who hate us being there and hate each other as well. I have just spent three hours today realizing the treachery of our foreign policy in Iraq and the Middle East. Oil, heroin and terrorism. This is what they have given us. You don't get this kind of info in the daily papers. But this came from a diplomat who has lived in Turkey, Pakistan and has traveled extensively in almost every Middle Eastern country. Don't get me started.....
Reply to this
I'd wished he had run for President right from the start... and have been disappointed he has chosen to not run at all. And if something happened and he was chosen during Convention I would vote for him so fast it would make your head spin.
I have not been nor am I now excited by any of the Democrats in the race. I will vote Democrat only because I couldn't image voting Republican. But I would be very much more enthusiastic if it were Gore... That's my say...Amen...
Reply to this
Why, because he is a much much stronger candidate than either HIllary or Obama.
We need brains and more intelligence in our administration and he has it. Read his book and realize what JC says about it. Reason really has been assaulted in this country for too long. My son who is a graduate of U. of Chicago thought this was one of the best books he has ever read on our politics.
Reply to this
...okay, it looks like i'll be making a trip to the library in the next few days. ...i saw "The Inconvenient Truth", but not read anything of his. ...i've always had a "skin-crawly" feeling about the guy. ...don't know why. (maybe something from my past lives....) ...i'm willin', atleast.
Reply to this
I would have voted for him in 1988 - but he'd already dropped out of the Democratic race by the time Ohio's primary came along. Later, as VP, he always struck me as wooden, a statue, with his real identity obscured. After he dropped out of politics, I think he was finally free to put aside image, to a large degree, and be more real (and appealing). I think now that Al is comfortable in his own skin, he'll make an even better president than he would have in 2000. And he would have been a far better president than Bush (and - dare I say it? - perhaps Clinton) even back then.
Reply to this
john, if i wasn't so tired right now, i'd write an essay on why i would want gore for president. he's been one of my heroes for more than 20 years.
i've campaigned for him him before, i'd do it again in a heartbeat.
i love this blog.
Reply to this
darn! do i have time to read this copy of "the assault on reason" i just picked up at the library before your next blog?
Reply to this
i wonder if he wants to run again?
Reply to this
He may have found running distasteful. But if they hand him the nomination, I think he'd be willing to swallow the travails of being a candidate for the short stretch of time between the Democratic Convention and the November general election - in exchange for the grand prize of the ultimate bully pulpit from which to push significant change.
Bet he won't select Lieberman as his running mate again....
Reply to this
soupy sales?
Reply to this
lol...
I'd like to nominate Al Franken.
Reply to this
i LOVE al franken!
Reply to this
You'll love the book! It's not a quick read - but it's well worth wading through and sucking the marrow from....
Reply to this
I want to thank everyone for your comments so far. Sometimes I feel I speak too much and don't listen enough. So this time, I'm going to try to let all of you do the majority of the talking.
One last word from me for now: Today is Pennsylvania's primary election. Whoever you support, get out there and vote! Please....
Reply to this
i inappropriately dragged mandi kicking and screaming to the polls today. you know how much she hates politics...
no comments... hmmm... not even snippets of song lyrics? *laughing*
Reply to this
Good for you... and Mandi!
For some reason the only song lyrics popping into my mind now are from a Barry Manilow song... lol.
Earlier, it was Paul Simon's "You Can Call Me Al." And in between, when I was in the car, it was Bill and Al's campaign song by Fleetwood Mac, "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow...."
Reply to this
Not going to happen.
Reply to this
We could get lucky and have his help getting this country back on track environmentally. [Dugg this]
Reply to this
I've often lamented the fact that 2004 was not a rematch, of sorts. I truly felt that Gore could have kicked Bush's tail, that year.
And, while I have a lot of respect for Obama, and adore Clinton, I would totally support Gore as a candidate, too. We could sure use someone to kick our butts into shape, environmentally.
I keep feeling I have more to say on this. But, I'm kind of multi-tasking.lol Waking up, posting a blog comment, smoking, and travel arrangements tale a lot of brain power. Whodathunkit? I'm sure I'll be back...
Reply to this
Al Gore would be the best!
Reply to this
Well that takes some of the fun out of John.. if you just sit and listen... because we enjoy the banter and the even exchange of ideas and opinions. I hope you change your mind and jump back into the fray.
Reply to this
I will later... when I have more time.
Meanwhile, let me interject this bit of fun:
Reply to this
i want obama 1st
if not, then al gore second.
and hillary never ever under any circumstances. the way she and bill are baiting race in the campaign disgusts me. slime is as slime does.
of course al has his baggage too - his The Assault on Reason neglects to mention he was instrumental in giving our airwaves to the corporations.
Reply to this
Smith, you don't even live in the U.S. Which means you won't be voting.
Reply to this
Actually I think he can vote as a foreign national... any one that's a US citizen can vote.. Otherwise our soldiers inIraq wouldn't be able to vote either.
Reply to this
Yeah, I guess you're right. Damn strange. Your vote counts in Mexico but not in Michigan. You gotta love it.
Reply to this
"Your vote counts in Mexico but not in Michigan" was so good a line, I had to break my silence.
I think the votes of all American citizens, wherever they may be, should count.
Rockin' comments so far - on all counts!
Back into my shell now....
Carry on!
Reply to this
Reply to this
Reply to this
Thanks for sharing, Smith. You always have a way of making these discussions interesting.
Of course I've heard some Hillary supporters accuse Obama of playing the race card, too.
At least Al Gore gave us the Internet, right?
Reply to this
It's the economy stupid!! No matter who wins the chief issue among voters is the economy today. Why is everything about money? Obama still has $20,000,000 and Hillary is broke. Now we have to wait two weeks until Indiana votes. Yaaawn.
Reply to this
The Obama camp has to be worried. He can spend twice as much as her in Ohio, outspend her in California, spend four times as much as her in Pennsylvania - and still lose all these big states by double digits (well, 9% in California). No wonder his supporters don't seem extremely interested in enfranchising Florida and Michigan. Spent twice as much as her in Texas, too - though he only narrowly lost that state....
Maybe it's early morning silliness... but why is the Beatles' song "Can't Buy Me Love" playing in my head?
Reply to this
early morning silliness is good for the soul.
Reply to this
How much silliness is really good for the soul? I woke up in the middle of the night with "All you Need is Love" going through my head. So I went to a wonderful talk by Randy Schutt. I could blog this but won't. I don't have to. I will write a long comment. Randy is the author of a book "Inciting Democracy", a practical proposal for creating a good society. I had a long talk with him after the talk. He is vice-president of Peace Action Cleveland and offered perspectives on war, pacifism, Just War
Doctrine and nonviolent action. He thinks that this is a more ethical and effective alternative to war. So if you want to know more about Cleveland Peace Action go to www.peaceactioncleveland.org and remember all the peace initiatives that are going on right now. Remember war is hell--both for the soldiers who fight it and the civilians who live where it is being fought. The Iraq war is a perfect example of the mess that military force can make of a country, directly killing thousands of innocent civilians, injuring ten of thousands more, and displacing and traumatizing millions, while destroying critical infrastructure --such as roads, bridges and electricity generation, water purification, and sewage treatment plants-- that makes civilized life possible. Creating a civilized, democratic society out of the chaotic disaster that Iraq has become will be extremely difficult and take a very long time, even under the best circumstances.
I have had a lot to think about this week. Jay Ruoff who has spent many years as a diplomat in the Middle East has given me a whole lot of insight into the situation there. Why are oil, heroin, and terrorism our chief imports? Why is our military budget now over six hundred billion dollars. Read the New York Times front page article from Sunday, April 20th. It is eye opening. The retired generals are being supported by the Pentagon and the military defense corporations as perks to give their views on Fox and other TV stations. It is 11 pages long and I am going to forward it to you, John. Take a look at this and understand they are getting rich on reporting their views on Iraq.
We are going through an election year. Where is this all going to end? I guess nobody knows but someone should care.
See you all in the funny papers.
Reply to this
If you really want to hear a great rendition of the Beatles song go to the humor section on www.peaceactionclevelang.org. Also listen to the president's speech on nuclear warfare.
Reply to this
Very informative and interesting.... Thanks for sharing this, Elena. And as soon as I have a chance, I will check out www.peaceactioncleveland.org.
Reply to this
Dugg this!
Reply to this
Thanks, sweetcherry!
Reply to this