Would you support Al Gore if he ran as an independent?

[burythehatchet]

[bullimiami]

1. he wouldnt.

[JuniperLea]

2. Can you ask your crystal ball for this week's lotto numbers while you're at it? eom

[LoZoccolo]

14. Prove to me that Dennis Kucinich will not become a fascist dictator when elected.

Prove to me that those are not his plans.

[rjones2818]

33. Prove to me that

any of the others won't, including Al.

[JuniperLea]

38. Whoa... heavy

Completely off topic and unintelligible too.

[Stewie]

50. I think he was pointing out the silliness of the original question.

Gore ain't running as an independent, and any notion he will be is as silly as a souless, crushing Kucinichocracy.

[book_worm]

53. I don't think he get's that--all he can babble about is all the "mind readers on DU"

without understanding anything about using logic.

[JuniperLea]

57. He is actually a she...

And she is a professional writer who takes great pride in the anti-babble she produces. Try again. You see, the slide into insults "logically" points to my having won this debate hands down.

If all you have is insults, you have nothing.

[book_worm]

71. sorry about getting your gender wrong.

But you keep telling people who don't agree with you that, boy we sure have a lot of people with crystal balls. What logic do you have to back up what you think? Do you think that Gore is going to run as an Independent? If so, where is your crystal ball or how do you come to that conclusion. My logic is based on the the fact that Gore has been a committed Democrat all of his life. Served as VP, Was the party standard bearer in 2000, was partly screwed out of the presidency by a third party challenge, A challenge that gave us George W. Bush, and if he wanted to run he would certainly run as a Democrat given the support he has. Why would he run as an independent? and give the country another four years of GOP leadership?

Now could you explain why you may think he would run as an independent?

[JuniperLea]

72. It has nothing to do with agreeing with anyone

It has to do with drawing conclusions based on nothing. So many people are drawing on "logic" that is based on old thinking. Gore himself has eluded to a new way of thinking about things. We cannot expect things to go this way or that based on what we know from the past. GOP members are fond of saying that 9/11 changed everything. That's not really the case when you look at what it has supposedly changed, because the US government's reaction was not logical. Nothing BushCo does is logical. BushCo has changed the way people think and feel about politics. We can't base our 'logic' on what we know, we have to think in terms of what is possible.

Running as an independent would not hand the office back to the GOP. The GOP has cooked it's goose. Pat Paulson could run and win against a Republican right now. This is old thinking based on the past. Old thinking based on the past cannot be called logic anymore.

I'm not saying Gore WILL run as an Independent... I'm saying anything is possible... because nothing is as it was.

[JuniperLea]

58. Thanks, Stewie!

Love your name! And welcome to DU!

Bravo on the call... I have to agree... despite the other commenter's unfounded attack on me.

[book_worm]

16. you don't need a crystal ball--Gore absolutely wouldn't run as an indie

he's a committed democrat and he wouldn't do anything to enhance the GOP chances in 2008. He knows only too well what a left-leaning independent bid can accomplish from 2000.

[earthlover]

30. Gore emulating Nader....oh my god...the irony of it all!

No way would Gore run as an independent

[JuniperLea]

36. And now a mind-reader!

I didn't know we had so much psychic talent at DU! Ya learn something new every day!

[Virginia Dare]

41. You don't need to read minds..

you only need to be capable of using logic.

[JuniperLea]

55. If this were the same political climate...

That we were used to prior to BushCo's reign of terror, I might agree with that. Today's politics defy logic on oh, so very many levels.

[Virginia Dare]

60. There is still no logic to thinking that..

Al Gore would turn on the Democratic Party, thus enabling the Republicans in 2008.

[JuniperLea]

62. IMHO, there is no logic in saying the GOP would win if he did!

Seriously! There is no love lost for the Dems right now... you can see the climate right here at DU every day of the week. People have and continue to lose faith in the party.

You are still basing your "logic" on what was in the past without regard to the changes we've seen.

[Virginia Dare]

63. I don't base my logic on what I see here at DU..

and polls don't support your theory. You can say you don't believe the polls, but it's probably more scientific than what you read here on DU. Let's see what happens next Tuesday, and then we can talk about people losing faith in the Democratic Party.

[JuniperLea]

67. So, DUers and the news and Congress are all saying the same thing...

Yet I shouldn't trust that at all?

[Virginia Dare]

68. What "news"..

a lot of "news" I don't trust. Not sure what you mean by "Congress". I'm saying there is no support to your theory that people are losing faith in the Democratic Party, in fact as far as the election numbers go, Democrats are polling far better.

[book_worm]

54. try logic sometimes--it beats a crystal ball.

[cali]

26. LOL!

You are a hoot! :rofl:

[JuniperLea]

35. So unoriginal!

:rofl:

Too bad about that writer's strike... I'm sure we'll be seeing a lot of reruns.

:rofl:

[Hosnon]

29. The OP asks you to assume that he does.

If he ran, would you support him? The OP does not ask whether you think he will run.

[Az]

40. A hypothetical question can be unreasonable

And this is such a case. It is unreasonable based on what we know about Gore that he would run as a third party candidate. In fact if he did it would mean that he had departed from his position in a radical manner. This would further imply that other issues may have radicalized for him. He would not be who we have come to know. So proposing a stark shift in what we know of him only leaves us his name to base our judgment on and that is no basis for a vote.

[Hosnon]

73. I agree that a hypothetical question can be unreasonable.

I do not think that this question is such a question, however. The reason (to be overly semantic) is to determine the level of support that Al Gore the person, not the Democratic person, actually has.

And, to me, if you think the hypothetical question is unreasonable, then the best course of action is to answer it and then state and explain your opposition to it.

This is one of my biggest annoyances here and elsewhere. If you don't want to play the "game" as set out by its creator, the OP, then don't play.

[Az]

76. But that would give the poll a false reading thus defeating the purpose of it in the first place

If people who did not object to the hypothetical did not voice their opposition then you are getting a false sample of the population. Unless the poll is a vanity poll this would seem to render it moot. If there is objection to the rhetoric of the poll then perhaps a different phrasing should be considered or the very issue should be rethought.

[Hosnon]

77. The reading wouldn't be any more inaccurate if you answer it truthfully.

Assuming Hillary eats babies, would you vote for her? Assuming that, I would not. And that is probably true for most people. So the reading would be ~99% no and ~1% yes...a reading that I see as accurate.

A false reading occurs when people vote "no" because they dislike the premise.

[Der Blaue Engel]

3. Absolutely not.

I am still holding out hope that he'll jump into the race, but if it isn't as a Democrat, then no. Forget it.

[peace frog]

4. Gore is my first choice as a Democrat

Anything else - a resounding NO.

[Kahuna]

5. Oops. I voted wrong. As much as I adore Al Gore, I'm sticking

with the Dem. Deduct one "yes" vote please. :D

[AlCzervik]

6. Why would he do that, seriously?

[Deja Q]

7. Nope.

n/t

[last_texas_dem]

8. I think there is no chance that he would

run as an Independent, because it would almost certainly guarantee a Republican victory. It would be similar to TR's Bull Moose candidacy in 1912 in terms of how it would split the vote IMHO.

That said, I probably would vote for Gore as an Independent due to the fact that I live in a state where there is no chance of the Democrat winning. Plus, a Gore candidacy would have very limited effect on the Republican's totals in Texas, and thus wouldn't be likely to swing the election towards the Dem as Perot swung some unlikely Democratic-voting states (Montana, Georgia) to Clinton in '92. I like most of the Democratic candidates running, but Al Gore would be my first choice were he to declare his candidacy as a Democrat.

[opihimoimoi]

9. It would prolly insure a PUB victory...No, he is not insane/dumb..he knows better than to be a Nader

*Nader......a POS

[Scout1071]

19. Not if he ran with a Republican.

A moderate Republican that was respected by conservatives.

[opihimoimoi]

34. Hardly.....

[mike_c]

10. absolutely....

And Kucinich too. I vote for people with the right ideas, not party hacks with the best focus groups.

[Old and In the Way]

11. No, and Al Gore would be the 1st to tell you that.

If anyone understands the folly of 3rd party candidates in our electoral process, it's Al Gore.

[Stump]

12. I'd still vote for him...

No problem!

[Crunchy Frog]

13. Why the hell would he run as an independent?

If he wants to run, I would expect him to run for the Democratic nomination. Why the hell would he split the progressive vote in order to allow yet another Republican presidency?

[Mojambo]

15. The Democratic nomination is his if he wants it. He don't need no stinking indy run. n/t

[bonito]

17. Time is running short for independent voters

In closed primary states.

[Faryn Balyncd]

18. Since Gore would not, & has no reason to do so, what purpose does such a hypothetical serve?

[book_worm]

21. Good question, Charles T

[burythehatchet]

28. who died and made you editor-in-chief?

:)

[ecstatic]

20. Split the Dem vote. Great idea! Not

:eyes:

[Fly by night]

22. Gore/Richardson '08. That's the (Democratic) ticket. A strong and independent one.

[Stop Cornyn]

23. Can't you add a "fuck no!" option. I love Gore as Democrat, but I'd hate him as a Nader.

[ms liberty]

24. I'd support Al Gore on any label ...but he'll never run as anything but a Democrat. n/t

[Divine Discontent]

32. exactly..

he knows it would EASILY throw the election to the vampire party.

[eallen]

25. Would you like Giuliani as president? Aren't 8 years of being Nadered enough?

[cali]

27. All i can say is thank the gods that Gore has more sense and

honor than all those DUers voting yes. This has to be one of the more far fetched scenarios I've ever seen posed here.

[in_cog_ni_to]

31. In a heartbeat. n/t

[Basileus Basileon]

37. I'd instantly go from admiring him to despising him. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. Sure. Unless Kucinich or Gravel gets nominated by the Dems.

[hedgehog]

42. Depends - would he be running with Nader? nt

[Virginia Dare]

46. No, Nader would run 4th Party..

to keep Al out of the White House...:crazy: :crazy:

[EstimatedProphet]

43. No

If he splits the liberal vote and makes another Republican president, then damned straight I won't support him!

[Virginia Dare]

44. No, but I'd support Abraham Lincoln..

if he ran as a repub...:crazy:

[Richard Steele]

45. I'd probably be too busy to vote, what with all them monkeys flying out of my butt. nm

[La Lioness Priyanka]

48. ..

:rofl:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

47. i dont think al gore would ever be such a dumb ass.

[libnnc]

49. I'm not comfortable assuming that he would

I don't know.

:shrug:

[Orangepeel]

51. No, because it wouldn't be Al Gore

that is completely, totally, 100% out of character for him.

[WinkyDink]

52. No.

[blondeatlast]

56. He wouldn't anyway, but no, I wouldn't vote for him if he did. I abstain. nt

[Milo_Bloom]

59. He wouldn't, but of course I would. (nt)

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

61. This site is called Democratic Underground

And supports the Democratic Party

Just sayin folks

[asthmaticeog]

64. I thought it was called

"The DU." :shrug:

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

66. I have heard it referred to as that

but I don't care for said nomenclature

[MoonRiver]

65. I will support him 150% if he runs in the Democratic primary.

But I would despise him if he ran as an Independent. We, and he, know that would ensure a Repuke remains in the WH.

I'm sure he won't do that, however.

[MonkeyFunk]

69. No

luckily, we won't have to face that possibility.

[Stinky The Clown]

70. It kills me to say it, but no.

[burythehatchet]

74. It's interesting that the yes votes, which a 2/3 majority

are not represented in the comments as much as the no voters.

[slackmaster]

75. I'll be brave and say openly that HELL YES I would vote for him and I will tell you why

To me the single most important issue for the 2008 election SHOULD BE energy, specifically independence from foreign oil. Nobody worth mentioning has made that a priority yet.

Everything else that matters to people, like the senseless war in Iraq, trickles down from our thirst for oil. Fix that, and you fix a bunch of our country's problems as well as addressing global warming.

We need a new national mission, like the one to put a person on the moon back in the '60s. Of everyone who has a chance to be President, Gore is head and shoulders over anyone else as a possible leader.

[Tactical Progressive]

79. Al Gore will be able to do more about energy and oil

- if that's what you're predominantly interested in, in a mostly-single-issue kind of way - from the head of the Dept of Energy, which I'm expecting in a Hillary Administration, than from anyplace else, including the Presidency.

As President, Al will only be able to spend a small amount of his time on any one issue. As head of the DOE or the EPA maybe, he'd be spending all of his time, thought and energy on that, and also empowering like-minded people who will spend all of their time, thought and energy working with him on that. Rather than just a small fraction of his time. And when he's done formulating legislative initiatives, creating policies and overseeing enforcement, etc, he'll put his work product in front of the President and committees etc who will spend 1/100th of their time listening to and rubber-stamping it.

So what would you rather Al do, as a primarily single-issue concerned voter? ...
1) as President, be only partially engaged in energy/enviro policy, mostly just providing the formal go-vote
2) as DOE head, be full-time engaged in it, giving it to the President for the formal go-vote

[slackmaster]

81. I'm looking for an inspirational leader, a new JFK not an administrator

:argh:

[hiphopnation]

78. god i love DU

what a great community

loyal to a fault but also not willing to toe the party line especially when it involves conceding to lying, murderous thieves.

what a great community! you're all a bunch of honest-to-god patriots!

:grouphug::patriot:

[guardian]

80. You have to vote your heart/conscience. N/T

[Tektonik]

82. If our nominee is Hillary or Obama,

I'd vote for Al.

[burythehatchet]

83. You and me both.

[tammywammy]

84. Absolutely Not. nt