Is it time yet for AL GORE?

[democrat2thecore]

For the sake of the party? For the sake of AMERICA?
Just asking.

[Jed Dilligan]

1. It's done BEEN time. nt

[Armstead]

2. Yewp, but he isn't gonna come

[sunonmars]

3. Its too late

To be fair, if he was going to do this, he should have done it months ago.

[tokenlib]

4. It's time for him to be the statesman and grownup....

..and tell the Clinton campaign to cut the crap...

We should be talking issues, not the I'm better than you are patronizing stuff.

[sunonmars]

5. ooooh very one sided

What about Obama's crap.

[tokenlib]

12. This goes beyond Obama...

This goes back to how the whole world revolves around the Clintons. They care more about themselves than the party or message of the party. This week has crystalized years of growing doubts about the Clintons. On issues and behavior--their judgement is flawed. I have reached Clinton fatigue.

[LSparkle]

9. Yep, and Al sure has PERSONAL experience in that area

Talk about being used ... A VP promised real power then turned into a potted plant ... A team player who had to run against his own record because of his running mate's personal failings ... Another reason I can't stand the Clintons -- they absolutely hung Al Gore out to dry because they cared more about their own power than loyalty to those who had helped reach the White House. (And I say this as a person who felt uneasy voting for Bill Clinton but was reassured by the presence of Al Gore on the '92 ticket.)

[McCamy Taylor]

6. Umm..only if the Dems explode at the primary convention.

[democrat2thecore]

7. By then - it may be too late

I fear a bloodbath that will leave the eventual nominee a sitting duck for (probably) John McCain.
That cannot happen.

[Dhalgren]

8. Which, at this point, is not outside the realm of the possible...

This is the most sicken spectacle I have ever seen in inner-party politics - and I have been active in the Party since 1972...

[democrat2thecore]

16. I agree - worst since '72

I, too, have been heavily involved since 1972. I agree this is becoming (if it hasn't already become) the nastiest party contest - since probably the late contests/pre-convention of '72 when Humphrey tried to take away McGovern's California delegates and there was a sizeable "Anybody But McGovern" sentiment. The party was so fractured. This looks like another no-win situation for Clinton OR Obama after the nomination.

-edit for punctuation

[Alexander]

10. If nobody gets a majority of delegates, I say YES.

Otherwise I'll still pull for Obama.

[jillan]

11. Nothing would please me more.

[DODI]

13. I had a crazy thought -- maybe that is what Bill is working for.

[ozone_man]

14. I would like that outcome.

I think it's exciting for the first time in a long time that we have a real contest and go all the way to the convention. If there is no clear winner and particularly if the leading candidates have caused too many bad feelings, then Al Gore would be a great choice. And the environment needs a leader like him.

[Tashca]

15. My first response was no.

When I first heard about drafting Gore....I thought what a joke. No way would I support such a nonsense idea.

Then my guy Biden bite the dust....

Now after watching these three that are left....trying to decide who I would really like to be my next President.......

I'm thinking the Gore thing is starting to make some sense. I could get behind that in a very big way!!!

[redqueen]

17. No... people would reject him as a phony just like they're doing to Edwards...

wouldn't they?

[sellitman]

18. That boat sailed.

You better start swimming.