‘You always have to worry about a relapse’

May 17, 2006

This AP story on [tag]Al Gore[/tag] covers relatively familiar ground, but it’s worth considering anyway.

Al [tag]Gore[/tag] is running to California, New York, Utah, Washington, France and points in between to promote “An Inconvenient Truth,” a film chronicling his elaborate slide shows to educate people about global warming.

But is the former vice president running for [tag]president[/tag] again? The answer, he says, is no. Some Democrats are not so sure.

“I’m a recovering politician on about Step 9,” Gore told The Associated Press. “But I’m on a different kind of campaign now — to persuade people to take action to solve the climate crisis, and it’s always easier when you’re focused on one thing.”

There are a couple of things to consider. First, the party establishment seems to be warming to Gore a bit. The story included a quote from Kathleen Sullivan, chair of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, saying, “For some people, it took six years of George Bush to wake up and realize that Al Gore was the real deal.” For that matter, Joe Trippi added, “If he’s the guy we see today, I think he’d be formidable.”

Second, the article, written by veteran political reporter Ron Fournier, didn’t include a single cheap shot. Nothing about inventing the Internet, nothing about Love Story, no references to Gore being “stiff.” I’m not prepared to say the media would finally give this guy a fair shot if he re-entered the political ring, but it was a pleasant surprise to see a snide-free piece.

Third, Gore must be making some folks on the right nervous, because they’re going after him.

And fourth, Gore’s denials apparently aren’t always as categorical as they seem. By way of Taegan Goddard, it seems the former Vice President recently had a slightly different message after an event in Atlanta, telling well-wishers, “Like I said, I’m a recovering politician. But you always have to worry about a relapse.”

If accurate, Gore’s remark suggests he’s at least thinking about it.

Given his name ID, God help us if he runs again and truly hasn’t become enlightened about what it takes to run successfully for President.

He certainly had absolutely no clue in 2000, and this was after years in the White House. Does he have a Sean Penn-level of ability to act authentically every day for a 2-year campaign season?

  • I would surely welcome Gore’s entering the presidential stakes but I have no illusions. The SCLM will crucify him, as usual, once he does. I don’t think they would waste the effort to do it now while he’s just an environmental pitchman. These are people who still think George Bush is likable.

  • “I’m not prepared to say the media would finally give this guy a fair shot….”

    I agree. The only things the media care about anymore are ratings and anything which leads to ratings (teeth, hairdo, mindless grinning, etc.)

    But given the recent revelations about the NSA’s interest in snooping on the major media, maybe they’ll temporarily give a break to any would-be politician who can sympathize with them. Bush’s spying on the media may have the same effect as Spiro Angew’s (Safire’s, actually) reference to “nattering nabobs of negatvism”. It sure would be healthy for the nation if the media could return to respectful cynicism about both parties, for once, instead of kissing up to what they (mistakenly) think of as “their own kind” – the rich and powerful.

  • My guess is that Big Oil is going after Gore because he is a clear and present danger to their bottom line. If people follow Gore’s reccomendations, they’ll cut back on unnecessary trips in their cars, minivans, and SUVs. They’ll start changing over to alternative energies. They’ll start thinking “green.” All, of which, are an overt threat to Big Oil. Reduced consumption causes prices to fall. Falling prices equate to falling profits. Falling profits leads to jittery investors. Jittery investors cash out their portfolios. Evaporating portfolios cause board-members to turn into rabid chipmunks—who then, in turn, fire Big Oil executives faster than you can say “self-serve 87 octane.”

  • Well to quote other Steve above me, I think the oil companies are hurting their own bottom lines with the help of Gore. People I think are starting to finally wake up and see whats going on around them. Granted, its not everyone, but it has to start somewhere. With gas at $3 a gallon right now, with no end in sight, people are beginning to look for alternatives already.

  • Can you know a man by his enemies? If so, will America be impressed that Big Oil attacks Al Gore?

    I wish he’d stop that ‘I’m not running’ jazz and let people speculate.

  • Al Gore the man might be able to win; Al Gore the handled, pandering candidate isn’t very attractive.

  • People are “getting it” – the other day, here in El Lay, I saw a Prius taxicab! A friend of mine whose job involves a lot of driving just traded in his Honda Passport for a Prius.

    I think Gore knows exactly what to expect if he were to run. The question is, does he want to put up with having to change clothes ten times a day after being hit by the slime machine? So if he does, I am sure he’ll campaign in wash-and-wear, and be ready on the other fronts as well.

    Gad, he’s so much better than the rest of the Dem alternatives – all of whom would be great cabinet members in a Gore Administration. Everybody knows he actually won in 2000.

  • I don’t understand how so many Democrats can hold two conflicting views at the same time. On the one hand, they call Gore a loser, and on the other, claim the 2000 election was stolen from him.

  • He’s tanned, he’s rested, and he’s ready.

    Gore would be everybody’s favorite Democrat.

    Everybody believes that Hillary will sweep the Democratic nomination since that’s controlled by liberal groups, and then march only to be crushed in a landslide by a Republican ABH (Anybody But Hillary). Hell, I’m a Democrat and I’ll never vote for Hillary.

    Al Gore, on the other hand, if he’s able to show himself to be genuine and be able to say unconventional things, and be his own man instead of marching lockstep to the Capitol Hill Dems, he would win.

  • Will Gore run interference with the SCLM for Hillary or will Hillary run interference for Gore – or will there be more than enough snide and snark for both?

  • I have always been an Al Gore fan and I hope he runs again and this time he listens to his own inner voice rather than handlers and focus groups.

  • Gore would have my complete support as long as he vowed not to run another 2000-style campaign. That campaign was lousy even if he did “win.” Setting campaigns aside though, I can think of no one I would be prouder to call my President.

  • I’m increasingly confident that Gore would run a much stronger campaign in ’08 than he did last time. What should have been obvious then–hell, *was* obvious to a lot of us–about how awful his whole approach was, has since been internalized by a large majority of the most committed Democrats. Shrummy, that piece of garbage, wouldn’t get any closer than Rummy to New Gore.

    I didn’t vote for Gore last time. (As a New Yorker, I felt I could indulge myself… though I still regret the decision.) This time, he wouldn’t be my first choice (Clark, maybe Warner or Richardson), but if the nominating contest shaped up to be Gore vs. Our Lady of Perpetual Triangulation, I’d back the Veep in about half a second.

  • LOL.

    “Our Lady of Perpetual Triangulation.”

    That’s why she’s never done anything important while in the Senate.

    So politically calculating that she was making faces at Bush’s first speech after 9/11 because she knew then and there that any hopes of the presidency evaporated in ’04. She decided that it would be best not to make any waves while she was in the Senate and bide her time for 2008 or beyond.

  • Playing the devil ‘s advocate: let’s say he decides to stay clean, no lapses. HRC runs and loses. I would settle for a Repug in the WH and Congress (both houses) controlled by the Dems. Is this too much to hope for?

  • Remember that in 2000 he had to put distance between the Clinton WH and himself. This put him at a bit of a disadvantage as well.
    I think Gore is our best hope in 2008.

  • I think he’s preparing to reprise his role in 2003, which was brilliantly-done.

    He drew all kinds of fire from the wingnuts. They got all in a froth about the idea of running against Gore. He gave the other contenders, such as Dean, some room to breathe, a brief respite from the attacks. Then, when a non-Gore front-runner emerged (Dean, in 2003), he endorsed him, and got out, mission accomplished.

    This time, he’s actually using his decoy time to accomplish something meaningful for his country, and his planet, and– since he really loves lecturing about this stuff– for himself.

    I’ve said before that Gore is the best College Professor we could ever have. He’s a natural teacher. It’s obvious he loves it– absolutely loves it. Gore missed his calling; he should have been a teacher. I still don’t think he’s any good as a politician. But he’s completely brilliant in the role he is now: teacher, lecturer, “man on a mission”.

    Please keep it up, Man from Carthage! You are serving your country and the human race in a way that is clearly best suited to your genius. Please don’t ever stop.

    This year, we actually have two decoys: Gore goes first, spends a few years not-really-campaigning, then, next year, Hilary can go play that same cat-and-mouse game with the wingnuts for a year! Oh and they will not be able to “keep their powder dry”, the VRWC will jump all over Hilary with slavering, rabid, instane single-mindedness. Then, as 2007 ends, she abdicates in favour of the real populist dark-horse candidate who emerges out of a statehouse in Montana, Virginia, or New Mexico, or somewhere. And that person goes on to become the next President of the United States.

    I think it’s a winner.

  • Good call, Goatchowder. One point of correction– you seem to imply that Gore got out of the running after endorsing Dean. Actually, he had announced that he would not run long before Dean’s rise. But, yes, I do see your point.

    And I’m all in favor of the dark-horse candidate from the statehouse in New Mexico. Richardson is an expert on both domestic and foreign policy. He personally negotiated the release of American hostages in the Sudan and in South Korea. Plus, he knows how to communicate on the stump, and is brilliant at retail politics (a major asset in New Hampshire.) And, oh yeah, he’s Hispanic– a demographic that the Kerry campaign took for granted while the Republicans made inroads. Warner would make a good veep– he’d help us carry Virginia– but Richardson should be the one at the top of the ticket.

    I don’t think Schweitzer of Montana is planning to run in ’08; he’s still young enough to postpone his national ambitions. An Obama/Schweitzer ticket in ’12 or (hopefully) ’16 would be a surefire winner– especially against Jeb Bush, who will probably run sometime around then!

    And I’ve strayed too far from the topic at hand . . . ahh, yes, Al Gore. I was proud to vote for him in 2000, when I lived in Michigan (the 2000 election was the first presidential election in which I was old enough to vote, and it served as a major political awakening for me– it turned me into the political junkie I am today!) And I’d much rather see him get the nomination than Hillary Clinton. But I’m afraid that too much of the American public has already made up its mind about him, and branded him as a “loser,” or as having a stiff personality. Additionally, while his recent environmental mission and his severe critiques of Bush policy might endear him to some (and certainly make him seem more human,) these phenomena also act as fuel for the right-wing attack machine. It will be that much easier to brand him as a “crazy liberal” now, even when he has valid points that would greatly benefit our country and the world if put into action. (It’s sad that the U.S. has reached a point at which genuine concern for the environment is viewed as an extremist position.) I’m just afraid Gore would lose again. Then again, maybe his problems as a candidate owed a lot to poor strategy. So, how about this: as long as Bob Shrum doesn’t get within 50 feet of the Democratic nominee, we have a chance of winning!

    • Comments are closed.