Regardless of your opinion of Gore's action what do you think...

[usregimechange]

about what he said here: "we don't have the luxury of fighting among ourselves to the point where we seriously damage our ability to win on behalf of the American people."

[John_H]

1. I think that statement explains his timing.

He wants to push the low level of support folks out of the race. I agree with him.

[grannylib]

2. I think there is truth in the statement, but I think he may have hurt

himself by trying to sound as though he is now the leader of the Democratic Party and by coming out with his endorsement now and urging others to in essence drop their support of other candidates.
Unity is a great thing at the right time, and I am sure we will be united around the Democratic nominee when that time comes; I just think it's a little early and we need to let voters decide now too, not just at the election. Yes, I think the field is crowded, but I think all of them are still entitled to be heard, and things can change really quickly still...

[mmonk]

3. I say go through the process

democracy is essential, not a luxury.

[jmcgowanjm]

4. the luxury of fighting(does fighting =debating?) among ourselves

It must, because Gore's not referring to
actual bloodletting here.

And when do we debate the issues?

This aside, I agree w/ Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
that Gore's action has
narrowed the field to Dean & Clark.

[Skwmom]

5. Gore wants the voters to stick their head in the sand

during the primary election and wait until the general election to find out what his chosen candidate is all about. Can you spell DISASTER.

[usregimechange]

6. I think he wants us unite and spend our time and $ on W

Is that wrong?