|
From my vantage point up north, I have been very impressed with Al Gore's activities and particularly this latest speech of his which tied together the sins of this administration in such a cogent fashion. Since the 2000 debacle, I had simply assumed that Gore had no political future and that theories that he might actually be persuaded to run in 2008 should be dismissed as naive and fantastical.
Then I started to think about Richard Nixon. No, I don't mean to insult Mr. Gore by the comparison, but in terms of historical context, there are some intriguing parallels: both Gore and Nixon served as Vice-President under a popular two-term President. Both of them ran for president at the end of Eisenhower's and Clinton's terms. Both of them lost (I know, Gore won the vote but he's certainly not the one in the White House is he?). After JFK won in 1960, it looked like we "wouldn't have Dick Nixon to kick around any more". And yet, eight years later, he resurfaced from political oblivion, got nominated as the Republican candidate, and decisively won the presidential election. The ugliness that followed is not relevant to the point I'm making here, which is that it's not unprecedented for a failed presidential candidate to try again and succeed. Rare, but it does happen.
Still, it does seem unlikely that the Democratic Party would consider nominating someone who seemingly "failed" already. Yet who among the current crop of candidates cuts a better figure as preidential material than Al Gore? I guess he might be perceived as "too liberal" by much of the American people, although all things considered, he's not far out at all, he's in fact beyond the spectrum and comes across as a modern JFK Democrat, talking about various "new frontiers" (the environment, internet, green technology etc.).
It's funny, I never used to think much of Al Gore. I may have been a bit prejudiced because as a young punk rocker, I was unimpressed with his wife Tipper's campaign against "obscenity" in pop music with the "Parent's Music Resource Center". If anyone remembers Jello Biafra, he got off some pretty good rants against her, as did the late Frank Zappa. At the time, I had no idea who Al Gore was, other than the senator husband of this mad lady with the uproarious name "Tipper Gore". Thinking back, I don't recall Al ever getting very involved in the inanity, it was mostly Tipper's circus.
Watching the 2000 primaries, I wasn't rooting for Gore. In the early days, I was hoping to see a McCain vs. Bradley race. Sadly, that's not the way things went. I lost interest once it became a Bush vs. Gore contest; it was one very smart but boring guy versus one amicable but retarded guy, or at least that's how it looked back then... nobody fully realized yet just how bad Bush would be. Obviously, if I'd been an American I would have voted for Gore, but without much enthusiasm ("this guy's no Kennedy" I would have thought). In retrospect, compared to the cadaverous Kerry, Al was a sparkling fountain of charisma.
Nowadays, he's loosened up considerably, kept busy on many fronts, and is indisputably one of the most articulate voices on the progressive side. Considering the mounting evidence of his coolness (cameos on Futurama, Sat. Night Live, his book, the documentary about him, and his amazing speeches, each better than the last), if I were a US citizen I wouldn't hesitate now to elect him president were I offered the choice.
But does anyone here truly believe such a thing is possible? Or likely??
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
