(cross-posted at Daily Kos)
2006 is coming to a close, and in 2007, political discourse is going to be dominated by discussion about the candidates for president. In the netroots, the only candidate that is seen as anything near a ‘consensus’ candidate this time around is former vice president Al Gore. Although he has reintroduced himself to the general public this year via his accessible documentary on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, he’s long been a favorite amongst us as a candidate for president in 2008. In the most recent dKos straw poll that includes Gore, he garners 57% of the vote, with all other candidates trailing far behind.
In recent statements to the press about the possibility of running, this is what Gore has to say about 2008:
“I am not planning to run for president again,” Gore said last week, arguing that his focus is raising public awareness about global warming and its dire effects. Then, he added: “I haven’t completely ruled it out.”
What has become clear to me is that Gore would be a great president – but he does not seem to be enthused with the idea of having to campaign for the job day in and day out. Nevertheless, many folks in the grassroots and the netroots would love to see a Gore presidential campaign. Ever since he was ‘defeated’ by George W. Bush in 2000, the vice president has become a progressive in the best sense of the word. He was one of the first to speak out against pre-emptive military action in Iraq, and he’s spoken out similarly against the Patriot Act. Of course, we are all familiar with the long-time work possible Democratic candidate for president that I truly feel comfortable supporting at this point in time. When I had a chance to see him campaign with Gov. Ed Rendell, Sen.-elect Bob Casey, and Rep.-elect Patrick Murphy a week before the election, I told him that I’d like him to run in 2008.
But, as we head into 2007, I’m going to stop considering Al Gore as a potential presidential candidate until a viable draft movement exists…because drafting the vice president into the race is the only way that he will seriously consider entering the race. And as of right now, I don’t see such a movement existing.
Why do I say this? If one does a Google search of Al Gore 2008, there are plenty of sites that state a desire for Al Gore to run in 2008. Some sites are a collection of links, others have forums, and a few have petitions where people can put their name. But overall, the Gore supporters, from my vantage point, are highly disorganized. There is certainly the passion – which is great – but there is not a clearly-organized infrastructure in place for a Draft Gore movement to effectively step in and really push for the vice president to enter the race. But one’s desires only become reality if one takes action, and I have seen very little of that. With the presidential field likely to be fleshed out in the next few months, there has to be a clear push to get Gore to run soon. I disagree with Markos’ belief that Gore can wait until December 2007 – a year from now – to declare he’s running. No matter how much grassroots support there is for Gore, there is no way he can round up the political talent, the money, and the ground game necessary to start having an impact on the race early on. The main ‘draft’ movement in the 2004 presidential election cycle that worked – the one which encouraged retired Gen. Wesley Clark to enter the race – failed largely because Clark didn’t have the money or the organization to compete effectively once he officially declared. And he entered the race in mid-September of 2003.
To reinforce my point, I’d like to reference Chris Bowers, who had this to say about a potential ‘Draft Gore’ movement back in April of this year:
What is going on here? Is there anything behind this Gore “movement” besides howling at the moon? Why is there so little action? Gore ’08 after Gore ’08 diary goes up on Dailykos, and yet most of the websites I find on this page haven’t been updated in the last month. Gore ’08 after Gore ’08 diary goes up on Dailykos, and yet there are no substantial Gore groups over at MySpace. There is no email list of any size. There is no fundraising. There certainly is no staff, even on a volunteer level. Basically, there is nothing. All there seem to be are diaries on Dailykos.
[…]
Draft Gore in 2008, but only do it if you mean it. Back up you words with real action. Don’t whine to me about how I or some other leadership element is keeping you down or preventing this from happening. Give over your persecution and get to it. The Draft Clark movement wasn’t damaged in the slightest because Markos didn’t include Clark in his Cattle Calls until a week after Clark officially announced. Instead, the people behind that movement, who included my brilliant comrade Matt Stoller, did something. Hell, they did a lot of something. They were the white-hot burning core of a new wave of progressive activists who shook the very throne of power in DC. They were a perfect example of why people pay attention to blogs now, and why what we do here does in fact matter. Actions like those are why it is now possible for Ned Lamont to make a serious run at Joe Lieberman. They were netroots activists. Are you?
I am a Gore supporter. I’d love to see him run in 2008. I would be first in line to get a ‘Draft Gore’ movement in functioning order…if I could. The fact is, given my current obligations with regards to my academics, my job, and my focus on a permanent job after college, I cannot devote the necessary time to building that movement. It’s not from a lack of passion or a lack of motivation that prevents me from doing so. Cold, hard reality prevents me from doing so.
This brings me to my challenge to anyone in the netroots community: do you really want Al Gore to run? You can wish for him to run all you want, but it is abundantly clear that if there is no strong grassroots movement to draft him, he will not run. If you do, it’s time to start organizing and making a genuine effort to get Gore into the race. If this is something you really want to occur, make it happen. With 2006 passing, you only have 2007 to work with – and it’s starting tomorrow. And if there continues to be a complete lack of action on drafting Gore, there is no reason to consider him when one looks at the current field of presidential candidates when deciding who to support.
So what will it be?
Right on. I’ve been preaching this for over a year — Gore will only run if there is so much support he would be unpatriotic not to answer the call.
Thanks Psi for putting this out there.
I’m sure there is plenty of support. The problem is that it’s not organized into a cohesive movement at this point. And given that it’s been 8 months since Bowers’ blunt assessment of the ‘Draft Gore’ non-movement – and nothing’s changed since then, as far as I can tell – I’d have to say that there’s a very slim chance as of now.
In May, 2006, DraftGore2008 PAC was established, alongside a campaign website and growing community. We wrote a campaign plan, raised over 1000 $5 contributions, and set out to gauge initial support in early primary and caucus states (I spent a month in Iowa alone.) Dozens of blogs and even traditional media, e.g., Alterman, promoted our campaign, particularly during the summer (when it seems many in online communities were too involved with the Lamont campaign to notice.)
So what happened? After the initial bang, support died out. I couldn’t even get the organizing committees filled. Everyone suddenly wanted to focus on the 2006 Congressionals, and funding dried up. Kind of hard to run even a draft campaign on hope alone.
As you can see from your poll, people talk a lot about drafting Gore, but they don’t want to actually do anything about it. And frankly, it’s an unbelievable amount of work. Even the campaign filings alone are a nightmare (we’re actually behind because we lost all of our first set of data, the one with those 1000+ $5 donations, when our campaign database crashed last summer, and are still reconstructing. Finance reform, btw, sucks for small campaigns funded by lots of low dollar contributors.) But a draft campaign cannot be organized online alone – you have to have staff in the field, and to do that, you need to raise money – we calculated at a minimum that we needed to raise $1.5 million, in order to compete in a mere 20 states.
I love Al Gore – I was a paid staffer (dep. field director in CT and ME) for him in both 1992 and 2000, and think global warming is the most important issue facing the world today. But a handful of people cannot run this alone. Personally, I’m greatly conflicted, as I was a very early Edwards supporter (2002) when it became clear Gore wasn’t going to run in 2004. I agreed to become the campaign manager for DG08PAC, believing that “if we built it, he would run”. Well, we ended up nearly losing everything, so much so, that I now have a newfound appreciation of John Edwards’ emphasis on poverty (did you know that TANF recipients in California are fingerprinted before receiving benefits? War on poverty? Try war on the poor, and sadly, Al Gore was a major proponent of “welfare reform” back in the ’90s.)
I haven’t given up completely, but I want to work this silly season, not bang my head against a wall. Not to be immodest, but I’m a damned good field director, and I don’t want to see that ability squandered, as it was in 2006, when I could have been staffing a Congressional campaign, not flogging a nearly dead draft horse.
Anyway, I now think Gore is getting his own campaign together, using MoveOn.org and AlGore.com as his springboards. He’s doing it nice and low-key, as he should. Whether he actually needs a “draft” campaign, other than for “cover”, is not exactly clear anymore, at least in my estimation.
he has really internationalized himself by his work on global warming.
if I had to choose between making a global historical impact and attempting to run for a US prez in ’08? the latter process usually succeeds in diminishing a good person, as it does in inflating hollow characters.
He’d definitely have a bigger global impact if he were in the position as president, though. At this point in time, it’s hard to be in a better position to do so.
but that’s assuming that half of the job of the next US prez won’t involve trying to restore the image of the US as a credible leader around the world, in addition to one in his or her own country. And should we ask that of a man, who plainly, for all his brilliance, does not do charisma?
I know there’s years to go and who knows what position this country is going to find itself in..in March 2007, even.
There are other folks aside from the netroots that will ultimately weigh in on this.
If you’re President, you can get people to do charisma for you. Yeah, you have to give speeches once in a while, but he could start by appointing a Secretary of State and a UN ambassador who aren’t out-and-out lying SOBs.
He doesn’t want the job or seem to. If he was going to be a serious candidate for President, he should be the one getting his butt in gear instead of the netroots people still begging him to run almost a year after they started talking about it. Gore has seen the support and knows many would like him to run but if he is not going to put forth any effort, why bother. I supported him in 2000 and still believe he won but I do not think he can win again with his current attitude.
Fair enough.
Ditto for me. If he really wants to run – I’d support him all the way. But he won’t be able to handle the race if he’s not committed from the gut to it all.
If you ask me, not wanting to run is one of the things about Gore that strikes me as qualifying him for the job. The people who tend to be elected President are people who kiss a lot of butts, make a lot of promises, and sometimes do some pretty nasty things to get there. And it’s not like he needs the job; if we were to choose Edwards or Obama or (FSM forbid) Hilary, he would go on doing what he’s doing now, raising awareness of global warming.
I think he would be a good President once he got into office. I think he would answer the call if he’s drafted into service. The question is, is there enough political will to draft him?
“not wanting to run is one of the things about Gore that strikes me as qualifying him for the job.”
been thinking the same since Cuomo.
but you’re talking about major changes to the American voting poltical conciousness. Not that they shouldn’t happen, but is it feasible in less than 2 years?
Moyers is the only one who could ride that dark horse on the short track.
These are interesting times we live in. A few short years ago you might not think so. Now I’m not sure what the voters are going to be in a mind to do, especially if His Nibs continues to occupy the White House for two more years (ack, ptooey).
It would most likely be the ultimate in people powered politics if Gore did run. Ordinary guys in the street would have to get up and demand it. It might not take so many of us as you’d think, but it would still take quite a bit.
It’ll be interesting to watch.
What I don’t want is a late arrival of Gore into the race, if it will confuse support for another progressive candidate, as opposed to Hillary, for example. If he’s going to run, he needs to do so now. I don’t think he can enter as late as a year from now and win, unless Hillary has dropped out and the race is far, far different from what it looks like now.
I’m another person who thinks Gore would be a good president, and that part of him would like to be president. But I don’t think he has the stomach for the politics of a race. Without that, I am concerned that he wouldn’t run a good race, and we need a great “racer” for our side.
I’d give him closer to 3 months to come to a firm decision, not 6 and certainly not 12 months.
Cold, hard reality prevents me from doing so.
Cold, hard reality prevents me from doing so.
Cold, hard reality prevents me from doing so.
Cold, hard reality prevents me from doing so.
There is no such thing as cold, hard reality. There are only actors (and non-actors).
No. He’s a good man but at this point a bit past his use by date. Seriously, he’s got a bigger stage now, why ago through all the sturm und drang to be president? He’s already been, done that.
Should read: been there, done that.
Two some, positive facts about Gore:
On the negative side, someone may uncover the name of his year-2000 running mate and leak it to the press.
and you forgot, alot of Nader voters may do the right thing this time too don’t you think?
Idiots that voted for nadar will do it again just cause they are idiots.
I cannot agree with you on that as far as the 2000 election goes. People wanted a change from the duopoly we have. I don’t think that makes them idiots. I think that makes them people wanting to make a change in our corporate welfare run government. I still believe we need more than the current two party system. I just don’t know that there will ever be enough people that want that.
Thank you
Happy New Year too!
Happy New Year to you too Leezy :o)
He’s already gotten the full-campaign smear, first Dem style, then Rove-style: The dirt has been dug. Thus, he’s less likely to have a major hidden problem that would pop up after the nomination.
I just want to say that we should NEVER underestimate the corporatocracy for their ability to “go negative” on anything!! They can dig up more stuff and find ways to make it negative. We all got succered into supporting Kerry by thinking that his military service would exempt him from attacks in that area. That didn’t work out so well.
Just a couple of days ago, I saw some talking head on FAUX comment on Edwards statement about needing to ask the American people to be patriotic about something other than war. His reaction was to say that it was just another way of talking about tax increases. It doesn’t have to make sense (ala Max Cleland as a clone of Osama). It just has to stir the base.
I’m not saying Gore shouldn’t run – just that anyone who runs needs to be prepared for the onslaught.
runs…would it be the fired-up, inspirational campaigner that we see in “An Inconvenient Truth”…or the Gore of 2000 that allowed himself to be “reinvented” by Democratic Party hacks?
Would he be willing to say, “My message is strong enough that I don’t need to pander to any group” and choose a running mate based on their ability to do the job…or would we face another Lieberman-esque choice?
I’d like to see Gore run, if only to put/keep the issue of global warming on a national platform. (There’s a great diary over at dKos on how global warming is affecting maple syrup production — just the thing to read over your New Year’s brunch.) If he runs, it’s likely I will support him with time, talent and treasure. But I don’t want him to run if he’s going to return to the “political weathervane” of the past.
And if he doesn’t run, I hope he would take a position in a Democratic administration as either EPA head or perhaps a special “environmental czar” position…
William Tecumseh Sherman:
“If nominated I will not run; if elected I will not serve.”
Al Gore:
“If you want to nominate me I will run; if you want to elect me I will serve.”
No fire in his belly for this job.
If nominated he will lose; if elected he will fail.
That’s what I think, anyway.
Listen…I cannot think of many people that I have known personally in my life who could hold up to the demands of this job, and I have known a LOT of strong men and women. It requires a special sort of executive talent and a VERY strong physical, emotional and mental setup. (Unless of course you are a poseur/front man like Preznit Butch, at which point all it really takes is no capacity to feel regret or shame. Sociopath as Preznit.)
Number one, Al Gore does not appear to me to have the right talents to get the job. Number two…neither does he possess those that would allow him to execute it well. I do not believe that he is a ruthless man, and in that snake pit of trillion dollar wheelers and dealers that we laughingly refer to as the Federal Government you had damned well BETTER be able to act ruthlessly or they will cut you off right at the knees before you even manage to successfully settle into the Oval Office. He is better off right where he is, and so are we.
Plus…it appears that he knows this.
On what evidence?
On the evidence of his own actions.
GOOD on him.
Being Presidential timber is not necessarily a positive character reference.
Good on him.
Personally, I like to think of him as the world’s youngest elder statesman.
Not a bad gig….y’might even get something done that way.
Word.
AG