Why Isn’t Gore Running?

It's my theory that Al Gore IS running for President. It may well be that Gore has figured out a way to get around the money politics practiced by all the other candidates in both parties. He has used his book and the Internet to keep himself in the public eye all the while avoiding the interpersonal attacks that are de rigeur when running a modern conventional campaign.

I believe he is waiting to see how the primary process plays out. For the first time in decades, the game has changed radically. With all of the states that have moved their primaries forward, we have an incredibly compressed campaign season and the very real possibility that none of the major Democrats wil get enough of the votes to lock up the candidacy. Should that happen, we could actually have a meaningful and decisive convention. In that environment, I wouldn't want to be Obama, Clinton or Edwards facing a "draft Gore" campaign.

And, no, he would not lose again. George W. Bush has seen to that.

Because he would lose, again. A canidate who fails to carry his home state deserves to lose. President Bush, 04 , elected again, 60,000,000 popular votes, enough said.

The Clinton campaign has nothing to worry about. Al Gore will never enter race. Why? Because he would actually have to debate the substance of his arguments on global warming and its mitigation. not going to happen.

oops, pardon the repeat, web problems...

Congratulations PinPoint, you have summarized the Clinton-Clinton campaign effort to "T." People who don't leave their home, study issues, think for themselves usually do end up preferring the "abolishment of the climate." Reverting hundreds of years of progress should as well be avoided. It truly does warm me (and not in the global sense) how well informed the Clinton-Clinton camp is compared to the simplistically formulaterd other camp. We live in interesting times.

Congratulations PinPoint, you have summarized the Clinton-Clinton campaign effort to "T." People who don't leave their home, study issues, think for themselves usually do end up preferring the "abolishment of the climate." Reverting hundreds of years of progress should as well be avoided. It truly does warm me (and not in the global sense) how well informed the Clinton-Clinton camp is compared to the simplistically formulaterd other camp. We live in interesting times.

Congratulations PinPoint, you have summarized the Clinton-Clinton campaign effort to "T." People who don't leave their home, study issues, think for themselves usually do end up preferring the "abolishment of the climate." Reverting hundreds of years of progress should as well be avoided. It truly does warm me (and not in the global sense) how well informed the Clinton-Clinton camp is compared to the simplistically formulaterd other camp. We live in interesting times.

Am I seriouslly reading these comments. Do you leave your home, study issues, think for yourself? Its funny how much hate and animosity goes into responces when dealing with politics. Let me address a couple issues. First Gore will not run again, there is not enough time. Two Hillary will take over on super tuesday. Three how ignorant can Americans be? We need a stronger, faster more efficient government. Why do you tihnk the US has fallen. We have no leadership, in our country, in our economy, in ourselvers. The abolishment of the climate, income tax, federal reserve, or social programs will not make this country great. It will only revert hundreds of years of human progress. Picture it, the wild wild west on steriods, nomads and free regin to those who disobey the law. Please wake up, think about it and pull the Clinton-Clinton ticket. We need two presidents in the white house to right these wrongs. Long live the American Dream.

After more than 15 years [1976-1992] in U.S. Congress for Tennessee and 8 more years as Vice President in a relatively good time for U.S. economy, the state of Tennessee could not ''stomach" a vote for him in 2000 presidential election which would have rendered Florida irrelevant at that time; even Georgia in 1980 tried to help Jimmy Carter in his pitiful reelection bid [won only 5 or 6 states]based on a nice principle that "he's stupid, but is our stupid''. Who is going to vote for him now? Oscar ,U.N. and Nobel Prize Committees might ,but won't bring him too many electoral votes! Best bet for him : make an alliance with Sean Penn , Alec Baldwin et .co. go to Venezuela and help Chavez to build socialism there!

Since the presidency won't (and cannot) happen for Mr. Gore, the only way to regain political power is by leading a crusade. One problem though, when dealing with such an enormous issue as climate change, and desiring to be at the helm of policies that will seriously cripple if not kill the world economy, you'd better be damned sure you're correct. Since Mr. Gore chooses to simply dismiss those scientists that disagree with him out of hand without debate or dialogue, as well as personally consuming more fossil fuel than any 500 americans, it's obvious he's in it only for the potential political power. The crusade continues...

Mr. Gore is not running in '08 for the very reason he would most likely get wupped again. Come on, America doesn't need another condescending windbag. Gore himself cannot and will not debate renown scientists concerning their challenges to his assertions about the causes of global climate change. He will continue to insulate himself from direct challenge because he knows no one at will listen to him anymore when he gets his genitals handed to him on a platter again.

AlGore is not running for one simple reason: he would have to defend manmade global warming. This he can???t prove and his hoax would unravel as scientist after scientist comes forward to debunk his hoax. Do they take away Nobel prizes if voodoo science, like steroids in the Olympics, was the basis of the accomplishment? Sadly; probably not.

AlGore is not running for one simple reason: he would have to defend manmade global warming. This he can???t prove and his hoax would unravel as scientist after scientist comes forward to debunk his hoax.

Newsweek's Mr. Hirsh is incredible. Poor guy doesn't have a clue. A couple of months ago, in a commentary on doing a cut and run in Iraq, Mr. Hirsh made a comparative statement on how "Our leaving Vietnam and eliminating support for S. Vietnam had no negative consequences". This clueless writer was inundated with comments reminding (educating?) him about "Boat People", Pol Pot, Khmer Rouge, killing fields, and Vietnamese re-education camps. Now this guy talks about Al Gore running for President. Yes please, Al, run for President. I am sure you could then get a legitimate pass for using all the electricity, oil, and everything else it takes for supporting your luxurious lifestyle. Certainly the MSM press would give you a pass on critical reporting, as they do for most Democrats, so your prognostications would not be something that you would be held accountable for. On the other hand, I do get some personal encouragement from Mr. Hirsh's writing; As a Republican I think we conservatives have lost our way, and need to clean-up, and shape-up our party; It will take a while and the 2008 election is coming soon, so I have all but gotten used to the idea of living with Hillery in the White House. But if Al runs... the Republicans would be a shoo-in... Maybe Mr. Hirsh is a closet conservative?

The author of the article should go back to journalism school for a refresher course in fact checking. Australia is not signatory to Kyoto because their new PM was given a few facts by people in his government as to the total destruction it would mean for Australia's economy to abide by the terms of the Protocol. Typical "Lib"; dont let the facts get in the way of a good story.

I will AWAYS believe that AL GORE WON in 2000- and we wouldn't be in this mess if king george and his court jesters didn't ramrod the country. They've had their shot and have blown it BIG TIME! It's time for CHANGE and PROGRESS!

The author of this article should have checked the facts before putting pen to paper. Australia was going to become signatory to Kyoto Protocol until their PM found out from advisors in his government just exactly what the cost would be in terms of destroying Australias economy . Typical "Lib" don't let facts get in the way of a "good" story.

Mr. Gore would risk exposing his man made Global Warming hoax; could never win the debate, not even with a continued Newsweek marketing campaign to support. That is why he will not run for president, he would lose.

BTW Newsweek, I'm still waiting for the article highlighting scientists AND THEIR EVIDENCE contradicting claims of global warming and the remedies suggested.