I've decided to open a topic where we can discuss the brokered convention scenario and post articles that deal with that. Let's try to keep those discussions within this thread. Here's my first entry:

Don’t discount Gore-led ticket

By Mark Tomasik

Monday, March 24, 2008

U.S. Rep. Tim Mahoney, whose district includes much of Martin and St. Lucie counties, is hoping he won’t have to attend the Democratic Party national convention in Denver in August.

If he does go, that will mean the Democrats still haven’t decided a nominee for the presidential election. And if neither Sen. Hillary Clinton nor Sen. Barack Obama has clinched the nomination by August, Mahoney says we may see a brokered convention, meaning the nominee could emerge from a negotiated settlement.

“If it (the nomination process) goes into the convention, don’t be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket,” Mahoney said.

A compromise candidate could be someone such as former vice president Al Gore, Mahoney said last week during a meeting with this news organization’s editorial board.

If either Clinton or Obama suggested to a deadlocked convention a ticket of Gore-Clinton or Gore-Obama, the Democratic Party would accept it, Mahoney said.

Mahoney, who is one of the superdelegates who gets to cast a vote at the convention, hasn’t endorsed a candidate. He said he doesn’t intend to endorse anyone because “I don’t see it as my job as a district representative” to endorse a nominee for the presidential race.

If neither Clinton nor Obama has enough delegates to secure the nomination by the time the convention starts Aug. 25, Mahoney will have to cast a superdelegate vote for someone. Superdelegates make up about one-fifth of the total number of delegates to the convention and are free to support any candidate for nomination. Most superdelegates are current or former elected officeholders or party officials.

As an uncommitted superdelegate, Mahoney said he has been wooed by Clinton and Obama for an endorsement. Clinton has been the more aggressive solicitor, Mahoney said.

Mahoney said he has met twice with Obama. He has met more often with Clinton. Two weeks ago, Mahoney attended a cocktail party at Clinton’s house in Washington, D.C., he said. Mahoney told of how impressed he is by Clinton’s commitment to helping people and her human touch. When Clinton learned that Mahoney’s daughter is interested in horses, she called the girl to encourage her interest, Mahoney said.

While Mahoney hasn’t committed to either contender, he clearly likes Clinton and her stance on issues. He praised her for having a grasp of matters of importance to Floridians, especially homeowners insurance reform. (He also made the point that Sen. John McCain, the apparent Republican presidential nominee, is the only candidate in either party not to support national reform of homeowners insurance.)

Mahoney described Clinton as being “incredibly bright, very personable” and having “an unbelievable grasp of policy” during his meetings with her.

Mahoney said he had intended to skip the convention because “I have better things to do in my district” than attend what recently has become a glorified pep rally. He will stay away if his superdelegate vote isn’t needed. Meanwhile, he’s lobbying to get the results of the Jan. 29 Florida primary vote to count.

The national Democratic Party and its chairman, Howard Dean, stripped Florida of its delegates as punishment for violating party rules by moving up the state’s primary date from March to Jan. 29. Dean banned the Democratic candidates from campaigning in Florida. Still, a record 1.75 million Democrats voted in the Florida primary. Clinton won by 17 percentage points.

A recent statewide poll of registered Democratic voters by the St. Petersburg Times and its television partner showed that the campaigning boycott of Florida had little effect on Democratic voters’ choices in the Jan. 29 primary. The poll showed that 56 percent said the lack of campaigning had “no effect at all” on their vote. Also, 77 percent of the people polled said that it is “very important” to them that the results of the Jan. 29 primary count.

Mirroring our editorial board’s position and the poll results, Mahoney said the Jan. 29 results should be counted and the full slate of delegates should be seated at the convention.

“The delegates have to be treated fairly and responsibly and given full weight,” Mahoney said.

The St. Petersburg Times poll showed that one in four state Democrats might not vote for the party’s nominee if Florida delegates aren’t given a full say in the presidential nomination. That would seem to indicate that all Florida Democratic candidates for office in November could be in jeopardy of losing support.

Mahoney dismisses this notion, saying the issues are too important for Democratic voters to either sit out the election or vote Republican. Democrats need to first clean up the mess they made in Florida and honor the votes of the Jan. 29 primary before they try to convince voters they successfully can govern the nation.

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/mar/24/mar...ore-led-ticket/

It'd be great if it really could happen. I agree with you, EM, that it would have to be done right. There would be a lot of people who would feel robbed if Obama or Clinton lost the nom because of Gore, unless neither can get to the magic number on their own. Until then, the drama continues... :blink:

It's a bleeping soap opera, really. Today the flap is about Hillary's "lies" regarding that trip to Bosnia in the '90s. In a few days it'll be something else. :rolleyes:

I can't blame Gore a bit for not wanting to be involved in all this nonsense.

Why is it always Hillary or Obama, no one seems to touch McCain. What is he perfect???? I think not. :angry:

And what's up with this annoying McCain ad???? :angry:

I don't blame him either. You've practically got to walk across hot coals to get to the Presidency. He was wise indeed to stay above the fray.

And it's getting to the point where supporters on each side are vowing to vote Republican if their candidate doesn't get the nom. My BIL was talking yesterday about how angry he was about what Obama's preacher said. I said it was no different than was Ferraro was spouting off. He was also mad about how disorganized the Texas caucases were at his polling place. He said if Obama gets the nom, then he's voting for McCain. :spikey: :!: :blink:

Gore may be a welcome unity/compromise candidate indeed. :Y: :clap:

I don't know, AGIML. Here McCain is sitting pretty while the Dems duke it out. I wish they would focus on the issues until we have a nom. Better yet, they should turn focus to McCain and why HE SHOULDN'T be President. But from what Hillary has said, she thinks he'd be great if she doesn't get it. :angry:

I'm sure there are plenty of things in McCain's life and past that will prove he isn't this great guy that should become our next president. I find him to be quite obnoxious, untrustworthy and a sneaky litte shit that will never get my vote. :angry:

I don't trust McCain either and I will NEVER vote for him. I'd choose Hillary before I go Repug.

I bet there's plenty of dirt to be dug up on McCain - too bad that lobbyist story didn't catch enough fire! And I certainly don't want someone who's going to keep us at war for another 100 years!!

Right now, I think Obama is our best chance of bringing about peace. He has tried his best to run a positive campaign but Hillary continues to want to fight down in the dirt, imo.

I would love to see a Gore/Obama or Obama/Gore ticket!!

Of course I would love to see GORE/OBAMA. That has been my dream ticket for over a year, but it would take a miracle.

I sure as hell don't want another four to eight years of republican hell. No thank you. Of course, Hillary is better than ANY repuke, prefer Obama, though.

I will not vote for any ticket that has Hillary on it.
Any president candidate who would pick Hillary as VP better have a whole army behind him every single minute because HIllary would stab them in the back, poison them and who knows whatelse
Accept no crumpets and tea from her.
She would stop at nothing to attain the throne she thinks she was born the right to.

And tell me, where in a Gore/Hillary ticket (as if Hillary would bow before Gore, that too is a laugh), but where did Obama go in this scenerio?
I shudder to think.

Is anybody hearing this ridiculous idea from Evan Bayh about choosing the Democratic nominee by electoral college? He, of course, is a big Clinton supporter and believes that since she's won "all the big states", this is somehow fair compared to Obama's lead in more states, pledged delegates and popular vote.

How desperate is that?

Of course, Bayh will be her VP pick. This is why he dropped out of this race.

The Dems are going to have to tread very lightly on this one. Already supporters of H or B are so angry they claim they won't work for the other in the fall election. A compromise is clearly the best choice. And certainly the person with the most credibility is Al Gore. Just hope people will see sense.

That is totally unAmerican

If there is anyone worse than Hillary and Joe Lieberman in the party,it would be Evan Bayh.

They should hold treason trials and hang them if convicted for crimes against the constitution

That confirms I will vote for McCain before I vote for Hillary

Because it is ludacrist to think Obama wouldn't win NY and California and the other blue states

I think Hillary should be impeached from the NY senate, but that's just me

There will be riots and then Bush can install the martial law we have all heard whispered and then like my ancestors in Nazi Germany, the death chambers for all who don't vote for Hillary.

ReElect, I'm not crazy about Hillary but I've decided, if it comes down to Hillary (which I doubt) and McCain, I will vote for Hillary. I cannot bare the thought of 4 -8 more years of Republican hell. Not that I trust Hillary with a 10 foot pole, but I don't trust McCain either and he'll continue this Bush war and break America.

I really don't see how Hillary could possibly win at this point. It seems the most she could do is keep Obama from getting 2025. And if the brokered convention happens, then there's a chance for Gore. I don't want him to come in and take it away from Obama, but if Hillary won't give up and Obama can't get it, then by all means, bring in Gore. And I definitely think Gore would NOT run with Hillary.

I just received an interesting e-mail from one of our AGO organizers. She said she was watching CNN tonight and they discussed this scenario. Here's what she said:

Tonight on CNN, in a group discussion, the subject of what the Dems will do in the event that both candidates are fatally damaged by the campaign came up… and you KNOW what was said… that there’s a real possibility they’ll go to a THIRD choice… and AL GORE was mentioned in a very definitive way…


If anyone can find the video clip that includes that discussion, please post it!

That is really encouraging, EM!! Because I was sitting here discouraged. I got an emal from my mother saying that if Obama is the nominee, that her, my father, my aunt and my uncle will all vote for McCain and my parents are NOT Republicans. But they don't trust Obama and they think he's ruined Hillary's chances at being President.

And I'm sure there are just as many people who will vote for McCain if Hillary is the nominee, such as Clay.

So there is reason to be concerned. If half of the Dems vote Republican, we could be stuck with 4-8 more years of Republican hell. :!:

So I am sure hoping for a brokered convention...please, someone post the video clip if you have it. :dripple: Thanks.

It really is a mess, isn't it? I just do have to wonder, though, how supporters of Hillary and Obama would feel if a third person like Gore got the nomination. The only thing that makes me think it would be okay is that this is politics, and that's how politics works. The very fact that so many people who know about these things are talking about the brokered convention/Al Gore scenario makes me think that it would be considered acceptable.

I don't think Hillary and her supporters would accept it, because I'm pretty sure Hillary would be closed out. But I wonder about Obama. I keep thinking back to what one of our AGO organizers said a while back when he gave up on Gore and started working for Obama (this was about two months ago). He said he was at an event where both Barack and Michelle Obama were, and he got a chance to talk to Michelle, and she said to him that what Barack had really hoped would happen was that he'd be Al Gore's running mate (VP, with Gore as president). Now if that's true, I wonder how Obama would feel about that now that he's really gotten a taste of presidential victory?

I agree with all of you that this entire campaign season has been an abortion... and divided the party so deeply along so many sensitive lines...

McCain has really drawn a pass from the press too... he's not this knight in shining armor... he blows with the wind in order to kiss up to the powerpeople in his party... I was listening to AirAmerica radio this afternoon, and the overwhelming opinion is that McCain has been 'schmoozing' the press in order to keep them from being HONEST about his lack of qualifications... after all, within the past 72 hours, he's confused Shia and Sunni, and sounded more and more like he's studied from the "GWB book of Stupids"... Just what we need... more stupid... ARGH...

Think positive thoughts... perhaps this IS the new beginning for us!!!

(PS I also agree that Gore is so far above all of the mudslinging... understandable why he'd distance himself from the process!!!)

Oh, I hope that it's true, EM. Yes, a couple of months have passed and Obama may have gotten a taste of presidential victory, but Hillary still won't let up. If she continues to fight tooth and nail all the way to the convention, Obama may welcome Gore running at the top of the ticket. It would also give him time to get some experience as VP under his belt. And if HE approached Gore about it, his supporters would likely get behind him.

Now Hillary would be FUMING. But her supporters may welcome it, thinking that they'd rather have Al Gore as Prez than Obama.

This just might could work... :Y:

3 little words

Hubert H. Humphrey

I am not sure how many people here remember 1968 as it was happening (and not from history books or video tapes).

Hubert H. Humphrey

Hubert H. Humphrey was the one they came together on
After Eugene McCarthy, after Bobby Kennedy, after George McGovern(who attempted to get involved) after of course LBJ left the race

Hubert H. Humphrey was a great man, a great liberal and a great vice president
(and LBJ was 100times a better president, one with a great legacy than Bill Clinton ever was.(edit to add- IMHO of course, some would argue this, not me though).

By all rights, Hubert H. Humphrey should have been president.
no one was more qualified or abler.

The only difference between Al Gore and HHH is Al Gore already has won a race.

But when HHH was named the nominee (at the convention) it mattered little how great he was

Richard Nixon became President.
Because there were riots, there was blood, there was mischief, there were 2 sides

And HHH did not get seated

Some (myself included) have said 2008 is 1968 all over again
Except that some (myself included too :D ) said Al Gore is the ex-VP who did not get seated and came back 8 years later to be president

So in a way, Al Gore could be both Nixon and HHH in 1968

(as Gilda Radner said...never mind)

Comparing Al Gore to HHH is ridiculous. Humphrey supported LBJ's misguided war policies, and that's why there was rioting in the streets. The youth of America wanted McCarthy (or Kennedy, but he was already gone by the convention), not HHH. I don't consider him to have been a great man, not anywhere near the stature of Al Gore. Please don't equate the two.

I think you have misunderstood Hubert Humphrey

He was truly one of our great liberal people

Vietnam was a divisive issue, but then again, so was Bill Clinton

Let's not have rose colored glasses on.
Al Gore defended Bill Clinton when Bill shouldn't have been defended either

And don't forget, Robert McNamara later was proven to lie and LBJ quit with a broken heart
Had he after Bobby died come back, more than likely he was strong enough, he would have beaten Nixon. (IMHO)

And I for one happen to like LBJ, after all,without LBJ after JFK died, signing the bills Martin Luther King Jr. worked his life for, Barack Obama would not be running for President today.

But my post was on the politics, not about LBJ or HHH's policies.

The analogy holds.
Unless you use the other analogy to Nixon not being seated after a razor thin margin(some say stolen ) in 1960, who came back 8 years later during major upheaval in the nation and won the election

They "trust" Hillary but not Obama? Seems rather ironic, to me.

Yes, I would still support Clinton if she ends up the nominee...but I'll be pissed for HAVING to support her. But frankly, I wouldn't trust her to be Obama's V.P. If he was somehow forced to choose her as his V.P. to unify the party, I would have serious concerns about someone that ambitious being the #2 person.

Yes, it does seem ironic, but it seems when a person is for one candidate, that they are willing to believe everything they hear about the other candidate. The point my parents have made is that all of Hillary's dirty laundry has already been aired but that they don't really know anything about Obama? They hear all this Muslim crap and they believe it, plus they don't like what his pastor has said. And they recall the good economics we had while Bill Clinton was in office, which I agree with that.

But, I feel just the opposite about everything else. I don't trust Hillary. I think she is very calculating and seems to think she is entitled to the Presidency. I think it's great that Obama has so much grassroots support. If he gets into office, it would represent what the majority of the people wanted - not what the "establishment" wanted.

Here's another opinion :coolwink: piece reflecting on the damage to the party and where are Al Gore and John Edwards,and what happened to Richardson?:

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/carpenter/023

"And Mr. Richardson? Well, he's "the 62nd superdelegate to endorse Mr. Obama since Feb. 5, compared with fewer than five who have moved into Mrs. Clinton's column since then." He is also now a short-list vice-presidential pick, who's also now as bloodied as Barack Obama, thanks to a leading ... Democrat."


OK, couple things. IMHO, I'm perplexed at the blame for a divisive primary being laid at the feet of both Obama and HRC. Seems to me (That's an opinion) the HRC camp are the ones who started the scorched earth policy AGAINST another Democratic candidate. Obama either ignored the smears or had to respond in some fashion or let HRC dominate the MSM.

People want Al Gore to both endorse a candidate (Presumably Obama) to hopefully end the Clinton march to...wherever they think their scorched earth campaign is going to lead; AND become a nominee at a brokered convention.

He can't do both, can he?

Scenarios- and that's all they are, just scenarios:

Gore and Edwards are holding back to insure they back the leading candidate come convention time. According to the math, that would be Obama so why they would wait any longer is the problem with this scenario.

Gore and Edwards can't endorse because they've been asked by some in the Democratic party to hold out in case the convention is brokered. That assumes that an endorsement now would not look good if either became the brokered candidate. (I don't see Edwards at the top of the ticket and if the Democrats are looking to the future, I think Obama belongs in that spot. Unless you had a Gore/Edwards ticket with Obama in the AG spot, where I'd normally like to see Edwards. But, that way the succession could be up to 24 years. ;)


I do not believe that HRC would accept any brokered convention where she is not the candidate chosen. Here come the threats of lawsuits again. Really, what is the end game for this woman? Is she riding this out to make the convention brokered, lose in the brokering, then join a joint ticket with McCain, as some are suggesting? I can't see any of that sitting well with the GOP but then, McCain was not supposed to be the GOP candidate. Anyway, that's pie in the sky because then what would McCain give to Lieberman? (Please people, I did say "pie in the sky")


Basic question: Can Gore endorse if people want him to wait in case of the brokered scenario?

I don't think Gore should endorse anyone. Obama is doing fine on his own and look what it did for Richardson. I know Richardson has been mentioned as a possible veep for Obama. Do you think he would be selected now?

So, if there is any possibility of a brokered convention, Gore should just let everything play out and not endorse.

You all ignore the important question I keep asking

What will happen to Current the second a brokered convention goes to Gore?

What will happen to all the other things Gore does?

This can't be done after the fact

Is someone looking to blind trust his corporations?
Is someone looking to release all his papers?
Is anything in the works?

I don't think so, the papers would report it

Bill Richardson did not endorse Obama to not endorse Obama
Do you think he for one is enduring being called Judas?

I think Richardson was the nail in the coffin for Hillary

The polls are coming back, so is everything else

He is just too far ahead of Hillary to really think there will be a brokered convention

He thought enough to use the week off from school of his daughters and go on a family vacation
Shows the outcome is clear and he is not worried

Read Brooks in the NY Times today.
About the long defeat of Hillary's
It's over.

In regards to all Gore's businesses - Current, etc., I think he will know how to handle that if or when there is a brokered convention.

As for Richardson's endorsement being a nail in Hillary's coffin, I don't think she'll give up. I think she'll fight this all the way to the convention. And what concerns me is how divisive the party is coming. I've heard people on both sides say they won't vote for the other should they get the nom. So what happens if 1/2 of Dems vote Republican? I don't know about you, but I don't want to take that chance. I'd rather see Gore come in and join Obama. I think THAT would be the final nail in Hillary's coffin. I realize that it is virtually impossible for Hillary to get the needed delegates, but she is apparently ignoring that and is making it seem like she still has a shot.

I am seriously considering writing a letter to Obama and all the superdelegates, asking them to consider Gore as a Unity candidate should it go brokered because I am REALLY concerned that we're gonna get another 4-8 years of Republican hell and I don't want to see that happen. If I do compose a letter, I'll post it here.

If there is a brokered convention, it's not something that Hillary would "accept" or not. It's out of her control. The delegates are the ones in control at the convention, and if the delegates can't agree on a nominee in the first round of voting (that is, give a majority to either candidate), then the rules are that it goes into a second ballot, and third, etc., until someone gets the required number of delegates. And if that someone isn't either Hillary or Obama, there's nothing she can do about it except act like a poor sport. There's nothing illegal that she could sue over, nothing unethical that she can complain about. It's just the way it is, and that's that. I'm not saying she wouldn't have a right to feel bad about it, but nothing unethical or illegal would have taken place.

Earthmother, I really don't disagree with you.

It's just that throughout this primary, HRC has wielded the threat of lawsuits like a bat. While I don't think she could seriously get away with that at the Democratic convention, I wouldn't put it past her to try.

It would generate press, undermine the party a bit, and perhaps give pause to those who aren't familiar with the rules. In other words, it wouldn't be legit, but it would be a PR hammer, especially if the press went along. And boy, does the press seem to want to go along. :!:

At this point in time, I don't know what she wouldn't try. And that's a huge part of the problem with her.

She wasn't my choice as a candidate. But she did not have to go to the lengths she did. I'd rather she had taken a higher road. There is now no dignity in either her winning or losing.

I will not vote for any ticket with Hillary on it.
So I am one of the 1/4 of the democrats
And my dislike now for Hillary is so much, I won't waste my vote
I want my vote to be a negative one for her
Which means that only leaves McCain
Especially if he picks Charlie Crist
Because picking Crist would stop Jeb from being on a future Crist ticket
(being that both would be from Florida), and being that when you get right down to it, Crist voted against Bush more than Hillary ever did

So if its Hillary-McCain, Hillary is the worst choice
Hope the democrats are listening. Hillary is in second place. She has no say over the winner if she is the loser.
I don't know who is spinning this thing, but a lie is still a lie and Hillary is lying.

Hillary is still that Barry Goldwater disciple she was in college. Not a dem.
And that's not talking points. That is the truth.


texan-if Al Gore already knows how to divest himself of Current and everything else, then it means he is planning for this.
It is not so easy to divest oneselves, especially in what is a terrible market.
We should find out how all this would apply at a moment's notice

Remember- people now know way in advance when they "officially" are running, and half run for months before so they don't have to do these things
Being that Current is a media company, what happens once he announces to the content of Current?
Is it considered part of his campaign? Against his campaign? Will it change current?
These type things have to be looked at...it can be dangerous.

BTW-Obama won't be AG. Why in the world would a sitting US Senator slum down to AG? That is a slap in the face.
SCOTUS would be the only place besides President I would think Obama would take, especially if he already won the Presidency

Does anyone see how ironic this whole conversation really is?
Given what happened in 2000?
We it seems have to be taking the Bush position almost
That is why I don't buy it
It would make Gore the same as Hillary
Stopping at nothing
(I am not saying I think he is, I am saying what will be said).

And I think the super delegates will know by the latest June, if not earlier
what they are going to do

And see the latest polls in PA- Hillary is under 50 now, and the 25 point lead is just 10. What an upset that would be. Not that I expect Obama to win PA, but imagine if he did.

ReElect, don't you think that back when Gore was saying that he "hadn't ruled out" running for President, that he probably consulted with an attorney over how to divest of his businesses? I mean, he did seem to consider running for President, even though he said he didn't "expect" to be a candidate again.

He has probably done like a lot of us here - pondered the idea of a brokered convention but probably thought it was a very slim chance of happening. He certainly hasn't been "deviously plotting" to run for President.

IMO, this is the big picture. Obama can certainly win the nom - he is way ahead in the delegates, he's won more states and more popular votes, BUT - will he win the election??? There are Democrats who will vote for McCain if Obama gets the nom, just like you will vote for McCain if Hillary gets it. So, this way of thinking defeats the efforts of getting a Democrat in office. And I don't always agree with everything a Democrat may do or say, but I'd rather have one in office than a Republican. The only Republican I found likeable and trustworthy was Huckabee. I also like the idea of the fair tax, but I digress.

The point is, I'd rather have Obama on a ticket whether it be as VP or Prez, in a way that would guarantee a win against McCain, and I think Gore on the ticket would be the best guarantee. It would help bring the party back together, I think. And it would give the people a chance to see how Obama performs as VP and more likely guarantee him winning the Presidency later on.

I have no doubt that Obama is very capable of being President, but so was Al Gore in 2000, but he didn't win either. So I think we need to think about what strategy is best in getting Obama - and Gore in office. Just my two cents...

Wherefore, Gore? Inconvenient Al Makes Party Wait
by Jason Horowitz | March 25, 2008

History may record that there were three distinct windows of opportunity for Al Gore to play a decisive role in this year’s Democratic primary contest.

The first was in the days leading up to Super Tuesday, on Feb. 5, when it seemed Barack Obama could do no wrong and a critical mass of establishment endorsements was piling up in his favor.

The second occurred this month when Florida and Michigan seemed to rule out re-votes, delivering a crushing blow to Hillary Clinton’s hopes of catching up in the popular vote.

And the third—and perhaps most irresistible—will arrive in June, after the voting is over, but before the Clinton campaign can launch a final, all-out push to make Mr. Obama the unelectable candidate.

“If Gore were to weigh in, he would have to do so before the superdelegates begin breaking for either Obama or Clinton,” said a former Gore adviser, after laying out the various scenarios that might prompt the former vice president to get involved. “The superdelegates constitute the last true contest in this race. And for many, Gore is someone they talk to, listen to, and whom a lot of them admire and respect. Having him make a closing argument for either candidate would carry significant weight with some of these last-man-standing voters.”

In the meantime: attrition. Race, gender, McCarthyism, the stained blue dress—attacks on veracity, character, readiness and electability are now the stuff of the bitter everyday exchanges between the Clinton and Obama campaigns. Superdelegates, the officials and party leaders who may ultimately select the winner, are increasingly worried that the poisonous atmosphere surrounding the Democratic primary contest will make it impossible for the party to unify around a nominee.

“If I piss on your leg, and the next day I say I didn’t really mean to piss on your leg, but if you look down and see the yellow stain, you’re going to say, ‘Come on,’” said Steven Ybarra, an uncommitted superdelegate from California. “They’re both being idiotic about this stuff.”

Of the prominent, still-uncommitted Democrats, Mr. Gore is probably in the best position to call for cessation of hostilities, if not actually to deliver a deathblow to the wounded-but-potent Clinton campaign.

Uniquely among the fraternity of failed Democratic nominees, Mr. Gore has regained his standing within the party, and then some. His early opposition to the war in Iraq and tireless advocacy for combating global warming—a cause he basically personifies—made him a liberal supernova. He won an Oscar, an Emmy, a Nobel Peace Prize. He shed his suit and tie, started dressing in black shirts and jackets and cowboy boots, and took a job with Apple. His resistance to impassioned pleas leading up to the elections in 2004 and 2008 to run again only further cemented his reputation among Democrats as the unflappable Goracle.

Mr. Gore declined, through a spokeswoman, to comment for this article.

“There is no Democrat who can dictate the nominee,” said Robert Zimmerman, a former fund-raiser close to Mr. Gore who is now supporting Mrs. Clinton. “However, Al Gore can play a unique role in uniting the party and bringing an end to the fighting after the primary and caucuses have concluded.”

“Certainly, if anybody has earned the right to do whatever he wants in political life after 2000, he certainly has earned that right,” said Alan Kessler, a former Gore fund-raiser who is supporting Mrs. Clinton for president. He added that an endorsement “might be perceived as a little bit unfair for him to do, because he is so influential.”

It is taken for granted by most Democratic insiders, with good reason, that if Mr. Gore did weigh in, it would be on the Obama side.

For one thing, he has a pained history with Mrs. Clinton, who he resented for superseding his authority in the White House. But Mr. Gore can also do math. He sees that Mrs. Clinton is trailing in pledged delegates, popular vote and states won. With her avenue to the nomination significantly narrowed, her best chance is to convince superdelegates that Mr. Obama cannot win a general election. Her final failure in this endeavor, from the perspective of an interested party luminary, might settle things. Her success assuredly wouldn’t.

“If it gets to the point where there is a real general consensus, among honest brokers of information, saying she is gaming the system—if that rises to a certain level—he may feel that he has to do something,” said one longtime Gore loyalist. “But it’s so wrapped up in his personal politics with her. He is not going to be capricious about this.”

Every one of Mr. Gore’s current and former associates interviewed for this story pointed to what they said were very real reasons for him not to get involved.

His intervention on Mr. Obama’s behalf, they say, would be seen by Clinton loyalists as a betrayal. If he acted but failed to settle things, he could cement his reputation as something of a jinx. (His endorsement of Howard Dean in 2004 was followed soon afterward by the implosion of that campaign.) And his presence in the race could overshadow the cause of Democratic reunification.

“He would think that any visible step he took to participate in the process would come with so much focus on him that it would cause a distraction,” said one.

To the extent that Mr. Gore makes his decision on that basis, one question he’ll have to weigh is whether he could possibly be more of a distraction from the party’s desired goals—presumably, to produce a nominee who can win in November—than the ongoing tug of war over a few hundred party insiders.

The Clinton campaign, after all, is basing its case at this point on the notion that Mr. Obama can’t win in a general election.

“They have been giving the electability and numbers argument,” said Alaska-based superdelegate Blake Johnson, describing the pitches he has received from the Clinton campaign.

Mr. Obama, meanwhile, is practically begging for the proceedings to be brought to a close. “He was trying to persuade me that it would be good if we all came together right now,” said Robert Rankin, an uncommitted superdelegate and California union veteran who supported John Edwards until he dropped out of the race. “To a degree, he has a point. But there are still 10 states left, and we need to hear from these people.”

Another question Mr. Gore would have to weigh is whether his endorsement would matter.

“I have known Al Gore for a long time and I have great respect for him,” said Pat Waak, the chair of the Colorado Democratic Party and an undecided superdelegate. “But I would say there are other considerations for me—each of us state party chairs have to figure out what is best for our own states.”

“Al’s done well since the election was stolen from him,” said Bob Mulholland, an undecided superdelegate from California. “But no, it wouldn’t be important to me. It might be important to other people.”

It’s all academic until Mr. Gore makes a move. And the party, for now, is still waiting for a sign.

“He enjoys the life he has, and he certainly doesn’t have to convince anybody what he is passionate about,” said Mr. Kessler. “But it’s not as though he has completely walked away from the party. It’s his party. I would look, at some point, if this thing looks like it is going to carry on till late August and to the convention, for Al Gore to step forward to sit down with the candidates and all interested parties to see if there was some way to work something out here.”

http://www.observer.com/2008/wherefore-gore-inconvenient-al-makes-party-wait ://http://www.observer.com/2008/wheref...kes-party-wait


What I find most interesting here is what I highlighted in blue--that Gore declined to comment about calls for him to run. Interesting . . .

Look, I've admitted I do not support HRC in the primary. Don't like her tactics, don't like her taking what started out as a pretty non-Rovian race and taking it to the gutter.

But, I will hold my nose and hope my stomach will behave until I'm out of the voting booth because I will vote for her should she become the candidate.

Why? Because of the Supreme Court, that's why. Then pray she does not appoint "triangulated" candidates to curry favor with the right wing and negate the needed liberal judges on the court.

There is no chance McCain would do that. He's going to be just about as much of a puppet as Bush and he'll do what the right wing tells him to do.

I just hope if that is the case the Democrats in Congress don't follow HRC off a cliff, taking us with them, if she should be the candidate and elected. She has never apologized for voting for the Iraq war and a I don't trust her on the Iran issue.

However, I think if HRC is the candidate, the odds favor McCain getting the presidency, IMHO. But I won't vote for him just because I can't stand HRC.

Also, I received today an e-mail from our official supplier of buttons, bumper stickers, etc., out in California, saying that one of our people out there (actually, it was the person whose actions made it so we had to stop the drives to get Gore on state primary ballots), had a long interview with Fox News today, explaining that Gore is the one the Dem. Party needs to keep the party from being torn apart.

I was also told that Jack Cafferty (CNN) had a poll today in which he asked people if a Gore-led ticket would be a good thing. You can read about it here: http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/...#comment-192511

Dang, I thought I was going to be the first one to burst onto the scene here with these links, but I see that Earth has already burst!

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/...-for-democrats/


http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/mar/24/mar...ore-led-ticket/

Until today, I thought you guys were ...well, frankly, crazy *lol* with your ideas of a brokered convention resulting in anyone, even our beloved and much-deserving and NEEDED Al Gore, other than the two remaining nominees, emerging as the candidate on the top of the ticket.

Yet now this is actually being discussed by at least one superdelegate, and from my state! Maybe it will be poetic justice and a Florida delegate will actually start a movement that results in Gore winning the White House! It would be absolute poetry if Florida could be key in getting Gore into the White House!!!!

If it were any other non-candidate than Gore, much as I don't like either of the two candidate choices on the ballots, I might have more than a little problem with someone who wasn't elected by the voters in the primary process actually ending up on the ticket. But, I'm sorry, we are talking about Al Gore, and that is DIFFERENT! He should have rightfully been in the White House for at least four of the last 7 years. And also, if somehow the delegates do conclude that neither of the two candidates is electable, then how much more unfair would it really be to replace them with Gore than this entire primary season has already been with Dean's FL & MI debackle? Heck, my party has clearly demonstrated that they don't have to go with the will of the voters when selecting a primary candidate, so let's really take that to a logical conclusion that actually BENEFITS the country, the world, the planet and, most important of all, that makes HANGINGCHAD HAPPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh. I am SO going to the convention. I'm going!

D*mn this Mahoney fellow for getting my hopes up about something that is never giong to happen *LOL*!

:lol:

...Buuuuuut...just in CASE it is even REMOTELY possible, book me a plane ticket, babies!

Can't decide if I should wear my "No delegates, no peace: seat the FL & MI delegates!" shirt or my "Put Gore at the ticket's top!" shirt. The latter would fit more easily onto a Tee. DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*praying VERY hard*

P.S.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"The fact is if neither candidate has enough votes on the first ballot at the convention then those delegates are released from their pledges and are free to draft another candidate from the floor. This is not robbery, it is simply recognition that neither candidate has a majority of the party’s support, and thus cannot be expected to unite the party to win in November. My feeling is that this is the DNC sending up a trial balloon to see if this proposal will garner the support of the party regulars as a solution to the August train wreck that is coming around the corner."

OMG, OMG, OMG, OMG, OMG!

Well, now you all, plus this article, have gone and DONE IT. You've gotten my ever-lovin' hopes back up about Gore, about our country, about our democracy, about our world, the planet, the whole nine yards, that SOMEHOW, some kinda crazy yet PRE-DESTINED way: GORE COULD WIND UP ON THE TOP OF THE TICKET!

Oh, heart medication! Needs some, want some, gotta have some! Pills, get me some pills immediately. Doesn't matter what type, I'll take whatever pharmaceuticals are on hand!

This is the first and only time I've felt EXCITED instead of utterly dismayed, depressed and outraged in a very, very long time.

Please, please, please let this NOT be an insane pipe dream! Please, God!

P.P.S. Thank you, Howard Dean, for screwing things up so royally, primary-process-wise, that now the candidate I actually WANT in the race might somehow end up as the nominee, fuggedabout the race, let's skip the middleman and go straight to the top of the ticket!


:clap: :good: :dance: :dance: :dance: :dance: :dance: :Y: :bow:

P.P.P.S. Someone, please, shoot me with a tranquilizer dart, I beg of you!

:dance: