« This Week's Business News | Main | A Few Interesting Links »

Clinton vs. Gore 2008?

With the presidential race starting earlier than ever, there is more than the usual tendency to get bored with the candidates. With Fred Thompson apparently ready to announce and Al Gore polling better than any of the announced Democrats running, there is the promise of a bit of excitement yet to come. I think Gore would be a tougher opponent for Republicans to beat than Hillary Clinton, but I still hope he gets into the race. I like watching the fireworks.

According to a recent poll of New Hampshire likely voters, if Al Gore entered the 2008 presidential contest, he would beat Hillary Clinton 32 to 26percent, as well as easily beat all other Democratic candidates. Rumors arefloating around that Gore is seriously considering another run. I would love to see Al Gore get into the race if for no other reason than to see how the Clinton campaign would react.

The Washington Times quoted David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research center, which conducted the survey, saying "Gore is the only Democrat, including Hillary, who can instantly melt the field." Wow. Gore could instantly "melt the field." The global warming puns could write themselves.

I don't mean to make light of the impact Al Gore would have on the race. Al Gore would be a formidable opponent. He is not the same Al Gore that ran in 2000. Commenting on his "$100 million makeover,"Ellen McGirt recently wrote, "At 59, he's an Academy Award winner, a bestselling author, a front-runner for the Nobel Prize, and a concert promoter who turned out to be a bigger rock star at this year's Grammys than the rockstars themselves."

A contest between the "unbeatable candidate," as Hillary Clinton was recently dubbed on the Today Show, and the "rock star" Al Gore would be apolitical junkie's dream come true.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/22153.

Comments (31)

It would sure make for a mo... (Below threshold)
Paul Hamilton:

It would sure make for a more interesting contest than what we have now. Obama made a big splash but then faded. Hillary is just out there with her gobs of cash, but from my conversations with other Dems, her appeal as a candidate is limited. Gore evokes a lot of fond memories, but before I could support him again, he'd have to prove to me that he'll put on a decent campaign compared to that mess in 2000.

For the moment, I'll stick with Richardson, but if Gore starts getting serious, I'll at least give him a look.

"Gore evokes a lot of fond ... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

"Gore evokes a lot of fond memories"

What kind of fond memories?

8 yrs of the most corrupt immoral president in our history is what brings fond memories to democrats?


Richardson , Gore what's the difference?


Democrats are still a party of criminal frauds.


Democrats are still... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

Democrats are still a party of criminal frauds.

Can you hit ANY note except this one, Rob? Really, do you think that hammering the same broken nail again and again and again - without any varation or shading - makes you look smart?

I had a guy in high school who had a one note response to everything that was asked of him:

Anyone: "Hi, Frank, how was your day?"

Frank: "Your mother should know."

Anyone: "Frank, did you do the homework for math class."

Frank: "No, but your mother did."

I saw this guy at the 10 year high school reunion and he was no different - and he thought he was clever. Do you think your clever, Rob?

Wait, let me answer for you:

Rob: "It's the party of perpetual frauds that's not clever."

Anyone: "Rob, do you think it will rain today?"

Rob: "Any day where the party of perpetual frauds are in office is a rainy day."

Find a new line.

Hansel2, your Frank example... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Hansel2, your Frank example reminds me very much of the lefties screed of "he lied", "Bush is a liar", "Bush is a corrupt liar." Before you cast a stone, read some of the comments from your side. They have the same message, over and over again.

Clinton will be the candidate. Not just because of the money, but the democratic inner circle whats it that way. Waiting for the dirty tricks to start. The Clinton's are reprobates, but they are formidable. ww

Thanks for proving me cor... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Thanks for proving me correct hansel. It's not a line dummy , IT'S THE TRUTH!

Bothers you doesn't it?

This is no different than your idiot leaders cying about talk radio and whining about briinging back the "FAIRNESS..WAAAAA! DOCTRINE". You just can't stand to hear the truth or anything that you don't argree with(same thing) and you just proved it.

"Do you think your clever, Rob?"

Funny, those were the same words used by one BJ Clinton when cornered by Cris Wallace about his complete failure to get Bin Laden or do a thing about the countless terrorist attacks.

Clever ? Whatever. Just stating the obvious as someone who happens to be registered democratic and can't be blown off as some sort of right wing this or that. That is what bursts your bubble , that however ignorantly I voted democratic for nearly 20 years , I am calling you a liar when you are lying as well as the rest of your bretheren or your masters.....

THE CRIMINAL DEMOCRAT PARTY OF PERPETUAL FRAUD.

Come on hansel , prove me wrong. Rather impossible since they are hard at it 24/7/365.

WildWillie,Almost ... (Below threshold)
Allen:

WildWillie,

Almost the same as hearing "Clinton did it" over and over, SSDD, that's all.

Allen, Clinton "did" what? ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Allen, Clinton "did" what? Don't come to a gunfight with a knife. BDS is overrun by your party. For 7+ years I have heard he is, stupid, devious, secretive, liar, corrupt, criminal, drug addict, deserter, drunk, etc. Every day one of the above comes out of your sides mouth. Every day. So, Allen, Clinton did what? ww

Well, since the Gorebellied... (Below threshold)
kim:

Well, since the Gorebellied Fool is a criminal fraud then he's a great fit for the Party of Criminal Fraud. Wait, so is Clinton.

Paul, what about this Richardson? Is he criminal or fraudulent enough for them?
======================

Before you cast a s... (Below threshold)
Stevenrobb:

Before you cast a stone, read some of the comments from your side.

I'll agree with hansel on this. I've read many posts from our side and while there are some are one note wonders, they at least offer substance.

Rob gives us only crazy, lunatic ranting along with links to Newsmax, hardly a middle of the road source. Honesty, if he had something else to offer the debate, it would be welcome. But nearly every one of his posts is filled with one-note ranting, profanity and hatred. To support him gives him weight that is undeserved, and it shows those who support his rants as lightweights themselves.

Great Stevenrobb,A... (Below threshold)
nehemiah:

Great Stevenrobb,

And the person you choose to agree with . . . hansel2. What kind of convoluted standard you're using to measure who is a lunatic/crazy ranting I can't comprehend.

Well, I'm simply responding... (Below threshold)
Stevenrobb:

Well, I'm simply responding to what I see on this post. I'll admit I can't account for knowledge of his blogging history.

But regarding Rob, you have to admit he's over the top.

WildWillie,Besides... (Below threshold)
Allen:

WildWillie,

Besides getting a BJ in the White House, I don't know what he did. But I sure remember reading a lot of posts from the right that said "Clinton did it". Maybe you or someone on the left can explain what that means.

And if, and I say IF, a Demo wins the White House in 08, I'm sure there will be many posts that will say "Bush did it". So like I said, SSDD, thats all.

Hey, Steve, did you ever pr... (Below threshold)

Hey, Steve, did you ever provide that proof that polls are accurate that I asked for in a thread several days ago?

I suspect not.

Lefties love to make grandiose statements and then run away when proof is requested.

By the way, which party was it that had the member found with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer?

The one notes from both sid... (Below threshold)
suhnami:

The one notes from both sides are BORING. tit for tat tit for tat. For every Jack Abramoff there is a William Jefferson. So what? Politicians are corrupt. Both sides. Deal with it. This holier than thou thing is lame. Bringing up one example of your target party's corrupt member while disregarding the 50 corrupt members of your own is willfully ignorant blind party loyalty. Judging by low approval... ratings for...well... everyone (unless you choose to disregard the ones the are damaging to your magical corrupt free party) pretty much shows that people of REASON are tired of the shmendricks on both sides. This post won't matter though, so... here we go... yet again.... I blame myself for not having the power to just disregard the repetitive diatribe.

I blame that [email protected]#$%^& for th... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

I blame that [email protected]#$%^& for the surge in the Scortched Earth approach to losing elections. He and his supporters have done more to falsely undermine the credibility of our election system than anyone and is therefore one of the biggest domestic threats to our Democracy in recent times.

The one notes from both sid... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

The one notes from both sides are BORING. tit for tat tit for tat.
-------------------------------------------------
This meme is also boring. It is a typical moral equivalency arg that has been brought up over and over again to show how neutral or objective one is. This is similar to the arg that one cannot tell the difference between the Soviet Union and America.

Both Gore and Clinton are p... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Both Gore and Clinton are phonies. That 's probably why the left loves them.

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28944
Why We Went to War in Iraq

When he was in office and responsible for protecting us, Al Gore was absent from the war on terror. As Vice President, he was part of an administration that failed to respond to the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993; that cut and ran when al-Qaeda ambushed US Army Rangers in Mogadishu; that called for regime change in Iraq when Saddam expelled the UN weapons inspectors but then failed to remove Saddam or to get him to allow the UN inspectors back in; that failed to respond to the murder of US troops in Saudi Arabia or the attack on an American warship in Yemen; that reacted to the blowing up two US embassies in Africa by firing missiles at an aspirin factory in the Sudan and empty tents in Afghanistan; that refused to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden when it had a dozen chances to do so; and that did not put in place simple airport security measures, its own task force recommended, that would have prevented 9/11.

In short, to every act of war against the United States during the 1990s, the Clinton-Gore response was limp-wristed and supine. And worse. By refusing to concede a lost presidential election, thereby breaking a hundred-year tradition, Gore delayed the transition to the new administration that would have to deal with the terrorist threat. As a result of the two-month delay, the comprehensive anti-terror plan that Bush ordered on taking office (the Clinton-Gore team had none) did not arrive on his desk until the day before the 9/11 attack.

Yet, it is characteristic of Gore's myopic arrogance that he would wag his finger at the Bush administration for its failure to anticipate the 9/11 attack. "It is useful and important to examine the warnings the administration ignored," Gore writes in his self-referentially titled new book, The Assault on Reason. As if to underscore his own hypocrisy - he then adds: "not to 'point the finger of blame'...." Of course not.

Hey, Steve, did you ever... (Below threshold)
Stevenrobb:

Hey, Steve, did you ever provide that proof that polls are accurate that I asked for in a thread several days ago?

No, I didn't. Know why? I never made the claim polls are accurate.
I have a description of the exact path of that conversation back on that post. It had to do with Kim's claim that Jim's poll was inaccurate, my claim that she doesn't believe any polls, and her claim that that was not true, and that a 2004 poll about Iraq was accurate.

You're baiting a conversation that doesn't exist, so try to actually read rather than assume. Once again, not my place to prove her link accurate or innacurate.

Looks like Steve is here to... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Looks like Steve is here to distract the discussion. He should be ignored since he has nothing to contribute.

Well, LAI, I gotta admit I ... (Below threshold)

Well, LAI, I gotta admit I kinda posted the off-topic thing, I wanted to see if Steve would admit that he's never gonna even attempt to prove that polls are accurate. Since there's no proof of their validity, I guess we can now disregard any and all polls that Steve posts.

My apologies for temporarily hijacking the thread.

c-c-g, np. I didn't... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

c-c-g,
np. I didn't see where you hijacked the thread. I have seen steve 's posts before. His posts are contentless and basically cheap tactics to divert the thread. He doesn't have anything to contribute. The progressive posters on this thread cannot seem to defend the liberal culture of corruption (as exhibited by Gore/Clinton), so they have to distract.

Allen, please be a little i... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Allen, please be a little intellectually honest and admit your side had been WAY over the top with constantly slamming Bush and his administration.

I believe the reference you make about Clinton is when he called a news conference, looked into the camera and said, "Now listen to me. I did not have sex with that woman, Lewinsky." All his staff supported his remarks and his wife also. Then it turned out he did. So maybe that is the Clinton did it, remark. I don't see the comparison. ww

Also, I think Rob 's point ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Also, I think Rob 's point is correct and that 's why it irks the liberal left. The authors below pointed out the diversion tactics of left, which seem to be practiced by a few progressives on this blog.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/02/invested_in_defeat.html

http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2007/06/28/stabbed-in-the-what/
Does the constant drumbeat from the left predicting failure or saying outright we've already failed have an effect on the people's morale and consequently their support for continuing the effort in Iraq? Are they seriously trying to deny that this hasn't been a deliberate effort to sap the confidence and will of the American people? I think they are. And the way they are doing it is by changing the subject to one where they posit themselves as victims of the right wing smear machine not as perpetrators of actions that by any standard has given aid and comfort to the enemy - who, after all actually counted on the left to perform in this manner since it was the only possible way they could be victorious.

That's LAI,steve w... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

That's LAI,

steve wrote:
"I'll admit I can't account for knowledge of his blogging history."

Allen wrote:
"I don't know what he did. But I sure remember reading a lot of posts from the right that said "Clinton did it". Maybe you or someone on the left can explain what that means."

Speaks volumes.

Do you really think your leaders are any more knowledgable ? Honestly you guys , do you really want to know?

You have just shown us you have no intention of seeking the truth or wanting the facts. You said it yourselves , you don't know.

I'll agree with hansel o... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

I'll agree with hansel on this. I've read many posts from our side and while there are some are one note wonders, they at least offer substance.

I'll bite.

When?

When conservatives griped about Clinton, they had specific reasons, not "he's dumb! BUSHCHIMP!!! LOL!!!"
-=Mike

I hope the Goreacle does ge... (Below threshold)
John in CA:

I hope the Goreacle does get in the race. First, he's a known loser.

Better yet, I hope the democratics nominate him as their candidate. I see him as the easiest to beat. He's been way too visible the last few years. There's some great material out there for GOP campaign ads.

Imagine an ad with his red, enraged face screamin, "He lied to us, he played on our fears!". Then show the Goreacle making his pronouncements on the threat from Saddam and WMD.

Then, in the Presidential debates, surely global warming will come up. A year from now, AGW will be even more discredited than it is getting now. Any one of our front runners should be able to blow the Goreacle's AGW alarmism right out of the water.

As an added note, I find it humorous as pundits talk about the GOP presidential candidates distancing themselves from Bush. Yet, the Goreacle, Clinton's VP, sprinted away from him as fast as he could.

Oh, forgot to mention, the ... (Below threshold)
John in CA:

Oh, forgot to mention, the Goreacle didn't even carry his own state. Even Mondale carried his state in Reagan's landslide victory.

You have just shown... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

You have just shown us you have no intention of seeking the truth or wanting the facts.

This kills me. As far as my brethren here admitting they don't know the history of my blogging here, that's what I call honesty - something people like you are sadly lacking - and something your President runs from like the plague.

And still, Rob, I've yet to see anything out of you but the same tired crap. I suspect you're a 12 year old, because only someone that age could be as much of a one-note wonder as yourself.

You want substance? Read REAL newspapers - not crap like this ultraconservative propaganda you people laughably use as your "substantial references." Frontpagemag? You mean, the paper that posts Ann Coulter articles? Losers - and what's worse is you don't even know what you are.

This site will be an interesting footnote in the history of this country when schools and colleges offer classes with titles like, "The Bush Era: Examining fear, conformity and ignorance in the conservative blogs of the early century."

Read REAL newspapers ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Read REAL newspapers
-----------------------
like the NYT who have been caught red-handed lying at least a few times. That 's the liberal paper of record. No wonder the progressive left doesn't really know the concept of truth.

Shut up stupid. You maki... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Shut up stupid. You making a fool of yourself again.

"I suspect you're a 12 year old, because only someone that age could be as much of a one-note wonder as yourself."

What do you have in your head, shorting out sticks of 4mb sdram?

You suspect? You prove yourself incapable of speaking the truth with the above statement knowing I've been registered democratic nearly 20 years. SO now you look more like the one that is 12 years old.

I've done wasted countless hours on incorrigibles like you so what does that tell ya?

Now this is going to require thought , can ya handle it?

This "Tired Crap" is simply the truth and that's is what you are tired of hearing.

Frontpagemag? Never heard of it moron.

"Read REAL newspapers"

As apposed to what? Imaginary Newspapers?

That is your problem , you only read what you have beeb brainwashed with you dummy. You have been given and reading the same old tired shit and your head is polluted.

I've never read newspapers , watched the news or any political BS up until a few years ago. So you see , I was not biased one way or the other regardless of having voted democratic for years. So as soon as I started to pay attention , it was only a matter of minutes and I new who the lying frauds were. I could pick them out with a 95% accuracy just by looking at them and hearing them speak a few words. It was so laughably obvious.

Those pathetic lying frauds were the same idiots I had been ignorantly and blindly voting for for years.

"and what's worse is you don't even know what you are."

Do you ever tire of being wrong? making things up , saying things that are no where near the truth , knowingly?

I know exactly what I am. I AM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. And you from what I gather ...you are a just a Democrat.

Not much difference between... (Below threshold)
spurwing plover:

Not much difference between the WICKED WITCH and THE GREEN MEANIE is there?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy