NY Observer: Major Dem donors want Gore in 2008

[AlGore-08.com]

http://www.observer.com/20061002/20061002_Jason_Horowitz_politics_newsstory1.asp

Gore Awakens Sleeping Booty Of ’00 Donors

Convenient Truth: Silent Al Warms Up Old Money; Ex-Veep Squeezes Branson, Boogies in Chelsea: Brazile, Chafing-at-Bit Backers Vow Support

By Jason Horowitz

In suit pants too short and black boots too polished, Al Gore stepped haltingly to the podium of the Sheraton New York on Thursday afternoon and took credit for helping to solicit an enormous donation to fight global warming. Mr. Clinton patted him on the back and joked, “Al’s the enforcer.” Mr. Gore ignored the whiff of condescension as his puffy, aquiline face beamed in the direction of the adulation.

To the Democratic-leaning audience, he was their favorite political martyr. But for a series of major donors and operatives across the country, he’s still very much their candidate for 2008.

“I might host a reception here for Mark Warner, I might attend some event for John Edwards, but I think certainly because of my background with Gore, they wouldn’t expect me to be committed to them if Gore were to come in at the last minute,” said Charles W. Bone, one of Mr. Gore’s major fund-raisers in 2000, who is hosting a reception this weekend for Mr. Warner in Nashville. “I think a lot of folks are just going to stand on the sidelines to see who strikes the hearts of the Democrats, and if nobody does that, it just makes the case stronger for Al Gore.”

(snip)

And of course, in addition to his high-rolling donors, Mr. Gore will almost certainly be able to rely upon those same liberal online activists who showed their financial strength in 2004 by raising tens of millions of dollars for Howard Dean.

“What he believes is perfectly appropriate to the historical moment that we are in,” said Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org, the liberal online organization that claims 3.2 million members. “He is, for our members, one of the greatest leaders around.”

(more... )

[nam78_two]

1. go president gore

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
GORE 2008 GORE 2008
:yourock: :yourock:

[Downtown Hound]

2. And this little Dem donor wants him too!

[fooj]

3. An AUTHENTIC leader...

He'll get my vote AND a donation.

[Hawkowl]

4. Re-elect Gore 2008

He would take it in a landslide. America loves a comeback. America also likes to see wrongs righted and the good guys win.

[Stephanie]

7. I think so - I think it's a good narrative.

Last time the narrative worked against him - Gore was the crown prince and Bush was the prodigal. This time he'd be claiming his rightful place, ousting the evil usurper. He's proven, he's NEEDED, he's fucking smart which would be a novelty, and he's learned to give a great speech!

[Stephanie]

5. AL 08

Al's my man. I want to be on his campaign staff.

[lostnfound]

6. Please let this dream come true..the best person for the job

given the state of the environment and his previous experience as VP.

[wakeme2008]

8. RE-ELECT Gore 2008

Yes.....

[wyldwolf]

9. He boogies in Chelsea? Him and Clinton really are buddies again!

[JNelson6563]

10. Run Al, run!

I'd work my butt off for Al.

:toast:

[Bombtrack]

11. Is Eli Pariser psychic?

I guess he could read all of Moveon members minds in 2004 when he pimped for Dean and now he's doing the same for another candidate I don't want, despite being a supporter of Moveon.

[AlGore-08.com]

25. No, BlogPAC polled MoveOn members, the poll was released at the Yearly Kos

Gore got a 92% positive rating, second only to Bill Clinton, who got a 93% positive.

Poll results can be found here:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/6/15/125046/110

[Vidar]

12. Glad to hear it.

[dalaigh lllama]

13. What an absolutely PISSY first paragraph

Here we go with death by a thousand cuts again:

>>In suit pants too short and black boots too polished, Al Gore stepped haltingly to the podium of the Sheraton New York on Thursday afternoon and took credit for helping to solicit an enormous donation to fight global warming. Mr. Clinton patted him on the back and joked, “Al’s the enforcer.” Mr. Gore ignored the whiff of condescension as his puffy, aquiline face beamed in the direction of the adulation.<<

Good grief. How many subtle digs can this Jason feller fit into one paragraph. We've got a picture here, courtesy of Horowitz, of a hesitant, oblivious, unhealthy, bad dresser. Al's not even in the race yet, and he's already getting the toxic treatment. :mad:

If Al does run, and I pray to every god that he does, we've got to recognize this sh*t as soon as it surfaces and fight it every step of the way.

[glitch]

45. pissy is right - the writer should be embarassed by this juvenile writing

but he probably thinks he's being clever.

[tomreedtoon]

48. Not simply pissy...it's Effete Intellectual Snob!

Perhaps, to some of you, that old Spiro Agnew phrase might simply be a code word for saying "it's gay." Actually, I think Spiro's phrase applies perfectly.

Effete...paying way too much attention to matters like how long his cuffs are. Maybe the writer would be more impressed if that Gannon dude from the White House showed up.

Intellectual...using words like "haltingly" or "whiff of condescencion." Showing off his college education, which is (here's another intellectual word) sophamoric.

Snob...Looking down his nose at someone who has to beg for money, instead of selling out your country to Halliburton and Exxon Mobil, the way Republicans became rich.

Effete Intellectual Snob. Learn that phrase. Find the right wing fluffers who throw these kind of attacks and call them what they are. (And I mean "fluffers," by the way, in the meaning developed by the porn industry. Ask your daddy about it.)

[bread_and_roses]

54. "puffy" AND "aquiline" are an odd juxtaposition

aq‧ui‧line  /ˈækwəˌlaɪn, -lɪn/
–adjective
1. (of the nose) shaped like an eagle's beak; hooked.
2. of or like the eagle.

I don't recall Gore having a particularly "hooked" or "beakish" nose; and "puffy" is hardly descriptive of "like the eagle."

If I thought the writer was exceptionally clever, I might conclude that this was an attempt to suggest that Gore is a dissipated aristocrat - "aquiline" being one of those discriptors that Romance writers love to use to denote "breeding" and "puffy" of course indicating over-indulgence.

[tblue37]

14. Stephanie said,

Last time the narrative worked against him - Gore was the crown prince and Bush was the prodigal. This time he'd be claiming his rightful place, ousting the evil usurper. He's proven, he's NEEDED, he's fucking smart which would be a novelty, and he's learned to give a great speech!

But the problem is that the narrative would not get presented to the public. Don't forget that the main reason Gore and Bush were close enough in 2000 for the Repubs to steal the election is that the MSM did a hatchet job on Gore. They have continued to do so ever since. If he runs again--and he would be my favorite candidate, too, followed by Dean and Clark--the press would really go after him. Not only do they hate him--they also wouldn't want to acknowledge their lies, and those lies would be evident if his true story ever made it into the general public awareness.

[mdelaguna2000]

15. Gore 08 I'm so onboard with that

No one else inspires me at all.

[ms liberty]

16. I'll say it again: Al Gore is my first and only choice!

Al Gore has the experience and the vision to lead this country back from the brink of disaster. He is the ONLY candidate who has all the necessary ingredients to solve the very serious problems we're facing.
He's intelligent, open-minded, and curious. He faces problems and dives head first into searching for solutions. He listens to other opinions, he looks for the facts, and makes his decisions based on all the available facts. He's a hands-on multi-tasker, and he LIKES the real work that the position demands.
He's got the experience of 8 years in the House, 8 years in the Senate, and 8 years in the Executive branch. By 2008, he will also have 8 years in business. He understands how government works and he understands how government SHOULD work, and he understands how government CAN work.
He has the vision: he saw climate change coming before anyone else except the the most far-thinking of the experts. He truly is one of the fathers of the internet - long before any other pol he was getting government patronage and funding channeled into the areas that allowed it to be created, and he did it because he saw it's potential. He called for public financing for elections long before most other politicians, and warned that money was thwarting the will of the people for the desires of the moneyed interests. He continues to look FORWARD to find the answers for our current problems, and he's also looking for the new and emerging problems that will need to be solved. He's been ridiculed for his vision throughout his career - but he's been proved right, time and again.
He recognizes the dangers to our Constitution. He sees and understands the damage done by the current occupants. He knows that we must follow the rule of law on which our country is based.
He's spoken out about all these things. He warned us about Iraq, and opposed the invasion before any other politician. He's spoken about the danger from within to our democracy. Since 2000, he's regularly given policy speeches that have identified and addressed the issues and dangers we face. And he's correctly seen where we were going, and warned us of the consequences. He's been uncannily prescient.
He's been through the the Rovian grinder. He knows where he went wrong last time, and he's stronger for it. One of the few things he didn't see was one NONE of us saw - and that was election theft. But when Florida happened, he fought legally for as long as he could, and with very tepid support from his own party, against a united and rabid group of usurpers who were determined to take power at all costs. When the SCOTUS decision came down, he accepted it because there was no other legal choice. He knew that to continue the fight in Congress would have been futile; it would have split the country further, and could have destroyed the Democratic Party for a generation.

We have a unique opportunity in 2008, where fate and history offer the chance to elect the one person with the experience and vision we desperately need. It may well be our last chance. I pray to God we take it.

[Uncle Joe]

39. Well said ms liberty and I totally agree.

Furthermore, I also believe he was ignored, trashed and slandered by the mass corporate media precisely because he empowered the people when he championed the internet threatening their monopoly on information, they wanted to remain the sole gate keepers to the truth.

In my lifetime, I have never known anyone to do so much good for the nation, only to be trashed to such an extent for their efforts by our so called "fourth estate watchdogs".

[Doremus]

17. Donna Brazille:

“‘If he decides to run, many people like myself will come out of retirement and help him."


Yikes.

[9119495]

22. Donna Brazille should not threaten us like that. It is not kind.

Seriously, if she comes out of retirement it should be for the other side--where she can do the most help. She sucks.

[boise1]

18. "Boogies in Chelsea",,brief mental image,,,it's gone now....

[AtomicKitten]

19. Re-elect President Gore 2008.

[OnionPatch]

20. Well then

The major Dems and I have something in common. I can't think of a soul I'd rather have for president. RUN AL, RUN!!!!

[struggle4progress]

21. I like Gore -- but we'll need a better campaigner to win.

Gore just barely won 00 -- because he left the Rs lies unanswered.

And after the bizarre Florida flipflop, Gore almost immediately conceded: his FIRST reaction should have been, "Whoa! Let's wait until we know what's going on!" That mistake cost him enormous support when he decided to contest.

I think he's a great guy. But this time, unlike 00 or 04, we MUST punch back ...

[Larkspur]

31. Gore fought the 2000 Recount battle for 36 days.

He did everything legal that he could, but SCOTUS killed his chances.

[struggle4progress]

47. And he was right to do so. But that's not my point. See post #46

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2848572&mesg_id=2850628

[NYCGirl]

34. 6 weeks is "almost immediately conceded"? NT

[struggle4progress]

46. I remember election night 2000 quite clearly.

Blow-by-blow account of Gore's concession -- and retraction

November 8, 2000
Web posted at: 10:54 a.m. EST (1554 GMT)

NASHVILLE, Tennessee (CNN) -- It was the concession speech that never came.

Campaign officials for Vice President Al Gore released an official blow-by-blow account early Wednesday of the Democratic presidential candidate's contacts with his Republican rival, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, and his plans to concede following network news projections of a Bush victory in Florida and nationwide.

... Between 1:30 a.m. and 1:45 a.m. CST, Gore calls Bush to concede the election. Gore's call comes after the media report that Gore is losing Florida by 50,000 votes and after TV networks call the state -- and the election -- for Bush ...

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/08/gore.election/


As a result of that phone call, Gore lost enormous public support when he decided to contest the election. I think he was right to contest the election and did so properly. But he handled the 2000 campaign badly, allowing rightwing lies to go unanswered and not hitting back hard -- and that phone call stands in my mind as a symbol of how poorly Gore had judged the situation. The phone call was reported immediately, and lots of people knew immediately that Gore had made yet another mistake.

Great guy. Funny. Intelligent. Right Priorities.

Lousy campaigner ...

[NYCGirl]

50. And then he publically "unconceeded" about an hour later. NT

[struggle4progress]

51. Yes. And my point, again, is that cost him enormous support when ..

.. he decided to contest.

If Ds run another campaign like 2000 or 2004, the election will be stolen as it was in 2000 and in 2004.

[AtomicKitten]

67. whaattt?

If I may interject ... it COST him support when he decided to contest the election?

I don't think so.

[struggle4progress]

69. That's not what I said. There's no point in saying it a fourth time.

[leesa]

55. Yup, you bought the right wing talking points hook, line and sinker

He took it to court for God's sake!

[struggle4progress]

70. Nope, I'm tellin ya how I felt on election night in November 2000,

after a campaign in which Gore let himself be swift-boated constantly without fighting back, and after I heard the networks announce Gore had conceded.

He ran a louy campaign: he should have won by a landslide, and instead he squeaked out the most narrow of victories, which was then stolen from him. And because the Democrats weren't organized locally, he was forced to fight the rest of the fight in the courts, leaving the public opinion side of the recount fight to wither. Any seasoned community activist can tell you that when we rely solely on the courts, we lose.

In summary: Gore in 00 wasn't ready for the rightwing tactics. Kerry wasn't ready in 04, either. Put up either of these guys again, and I'll knock myself out trying to get them elected. But, frankly, we'll need a bit more snarling and baring of teeth to win 08.

[marchcalls]

23. Gore Can't Win

FlipFlop on the war and too liberal now. too many soundbites that ther repubs will beat him up with.

Need a moderate governor from a red state.

[AlGore-08.com]

24. What flipflop are you talking about? Gore's always opposed the war

His first major speech against the war was given in September 2002 - - three weeks before the Congress voted to authorize the invasion. The whole point of the speech was to urge Congress to vote against the IWR.

He's given a whole string of speeches about Iraq since then, and all of them have been in opposition to the war. Every time the press has asked him about the war, he calls it the biggest tactical mistake in U.S. history.

[marchcalls]

26. the WMD quotes

he was sure about he WMD. and his support for the attack in 98. I'm not ragging on him .. im just saying the repubs are very good at that stuff ... like the kerry quote .. voted for it before i voted against it - etc.

I just think the dem nominee needs to be strong on national security and offer solutions. using history as a guide - we need a red state guy who runs toward the middle. i dont think thats gore.

[NYCGirl]

28. You mean the quotes that Snopes says are "truncated" and "out of context"

here?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

[AlGore-08.com]

32. What does his support for the First Gulf War have to do with this war?

He opposed the Vietnam war, does that make him a flip flopper for supporting the First Gulf War?

The idea that Gore isn't "strong" on national security is a joke. For examples, as co-chair of the BiLateral Commission, Gore oversaw the destruction of over 5,000 nuclear missiles in former Soviet territories. He personally negotiated with the heads of the Ukraine and Kazakhstan and got them to agree to get rid of all their nukes. Part of the reason that al Qaeda and other terrorist groups haven't set off a "suitcase nuke" yet is that Gore made it that much harder for them to get their hands on nuclear materials.

Gore was one of only four members of the Clinton Admin's National Security Council. He was on the Senate Armed Services Committee and even as a Representative he was a recognized world leader in arms control. That's the kind of hands on international and defense experience a red state governor will not have. Anybody who is old enough to remember the cold war remembers that the GOP always uses the "But you have no foreign policy/national defense experience, how could you keep us safe" card against Democratic governors. That argument was still being used effectively as recently as 1992. That's one of the reasons why Clinton picked Gore for his running mate - - because Gore's national security and defense credentials were so strong they countered that argument.

Going back eight years to find a position that can be painted as a flip flop if people don't know the context is pathetic. We shouldn't ever use fear of that type of attack for deciding who to support because there is no one - - no one - - on this planet who can't have the same tactic used against them.

[marchcalls]

38. what?

"What does his support for the First Gulf War have to do with this war?"

-- i didnt write anything about the 91 gulf war.

maybe he can counter the right's attacks ... He's not gonna be running against Bush though ... we should remember that.

[leesa]

56. Wrong. Enough of the "need to be a Republican to win as a Democrat"

crap. This DLC junk philosophy has got to go. No wonder people think there's no difference between the two parties.

What a stupid idea this has been!

[Bridget Burke]

27. Gore won in 2000. The votes, not the legal case.

WHICH moderate governor from a red state do you propose? The last Governor "elected" President was Bush--no, thanks.

Anyone who's listened to Gore knows you're wrong about his "flip flopping." And the Republicans will try to beat up any Democrat who dares run.

Edited to add: Now you think "national security" is a big issue. Not a strong point for governors. Definitely not for Bush...

[marchcalls]

30. ????

Governors seem the most likely to win. the last senator to win the white house was kennedy.

Clinton won as a moderate governor. the last democrat to win.
Carter before that ... georgia governor.
Reagan - governor.

National Security is THE issue ... and every poll shows republican better at it. dems need to combat this --- by presenting a plan, rather than looking backward.

i guess there arent very many dems in red states

vislak (swing state), richardson, kaine ... maybe

[Bridget Burke]

33. 9/11 shows exactly how good the Republicans are with "national security"

The more it's discussed, the worse the Republicans look. Check recent polls on which president was harder on Bin Ladin.

Please show us what your favorite governors have done on National Security.

[marchcalls]

36. ok

the recent polls would be great if Clinton was running again.

Im just afraid that dems are repeating the history of 02 & 04.

we shall see .... i just believe that the 08 democrat nominee needs to be widely viewed as stong on national security. if you disagree ... thats ok

[Bridget Burke]

41. "democrat" nominee?

I'll ask again: You suggest a Governor as the Democratic Nominee. Who on your list has the best National Security credentials?

Republicans don't know shit about National Security. They dropped the ball after Clinton & let 9/11 happen. They started a completely unrelated war in Iraq--that is only encouraging Terrorism.

[NYCGirl]

42. Yep, that rang the same bell with me. "Democrat" nominee, indeed. NT

[AlGore-08.com]

35. What does the "Last Senator" remark have to do with Gore?

The last elective office he held was that of Vice President, which he held for eight years.

Regardless, the list you mentioned did not win the White House just because they were Governor. In 1992, Clinton ran during the worst economy since the Depression against a President who didn't even look like he was addressing the problem. Clinton also benefited from Perot's independent run - - Clinton won four states with less than 40% of the vote. Clinton's hold on the electorate was so slim that he didn't win a majority of votes in 1996 against a very weak Republican candidate - - and Ross Perot, who wasn't even running, still took 8% of the popular vote.

In 1976, there was a huge, anti-Washington feeling in the electorate in reaction to Watergate. (And Carter was running against the guy who pardoned Nixon.) It's one of the few times that being from outside the beltway has trump national security concerns. Carter's hold on the White House was so slim that he lost in a landslide to Reagan. (Carter won only one Southern state in 1980: Georgia.)

And Reagan's resume was less important to his win than his slick campaign - - "It's morning in America". He was very good at selling himself, and he hire a lot of people who were very good at selling him. They steamrolled into the White House on a feel good, dumbed down message.

[marchcalls]

37. it doesnt

What does the "Last Senator" remark have to do with Gore?

it doesnt. i had suggested earlier that dems choose a governor from a red state. seems governors win more. sorry to offend you.

[Larkspur]

29. Gore opposed the Iraq war before the IWR was passed

And he still opposed the reasons for doing so. How to resolve the issue now is like trying to solve the Gordian knot, but I don't think Prez Gore would support permanent bases in Iraq.

[Crunchy Frog]

44. So the Repubbies are afraid of an Al Gore run?

Maybe I should take a second look at him.:)

[tomreedtoon]

49. Well, this right wing "Can't Win" troll thinks Gore has a chance.

The fact that he had a short phrase and a shorter attention span is kind of indicative of his true nature. Can one of our moderators track down his address and see if he's posting this from, like, Rove's office?

[marchcalls]

52. disagreement

not much tolerence for disagreement here.

Like others in this thread, im just not sure Gore can win. maybe he can. no need for the attacks.

Dems need someone who has appeal in the red states. especially if Giuliani is the repub nominee.

[rasputin1952]

57. But Guilianni has so much baggage, he could never pull it off...

NY'ers really don't like him, and his policies are absurd.

Guilianni is nothing w/o a supposed "crisis", and then he has everyone else do the work...all he does is take "credit" if things work out, and passes out blame when things collapse. Rudy is a classic "me" person and is a blight on society.

he is a joke, and if he ever got elected as president, he would actually be worse that bush.

[Crunchy Frog]

63. Giuliani's REALLY going to have appeal in the red states.

:rofl:

The fundie, bible belt "values voters" are going to nominate a guy who tried to move his mistress into the Mayor's mansion that he was still sharing with his wife and children, after they went into hysterics over a minor sexual indiscretion by President Clinton. When they have a good, solid Christian conservative like George Allen as an alternative. Sorry, not buying it.:hi:

[marchcalls]

66. Rudy will have a tough time

Getting nominated would be tough for him. I don't know how either side will shape up.

[marchcalls]

62. right wing ... lol

more of a split ticket man

florida:
Nelson for Senate this year
Crist for governor

im one of the swing voters that you guys insult all the time.

[Crunchy Frog]

64. And who did you vote for in the last two elections, pray tell?

(Presidential elections, that is.)

[marchcalls]

65. my vote

I missed the 00 election.
Bush in 04.
I liked Wes Clark though

[Crunchy Frog]

68. I kind of took you for a Bush voter. I appreciate your honesty though.

If you knew how progressive Wes Clark was, I doubt you'd like him as much. He was endorsed by Michael Moore you know. :)

[elehhhhna]

40. K&R!

[npincus]

43. I'd swap an ovary for his Dem nomination

[leesa]

53. Good. Gore/Feingold would be sweet.

[truebrit71]

58. NO THANKS! Been there, done that.

Time for new blood.

[WCGreen]

59. "Mr. Gore ignored the whiff of condescension ..."

What is that all about...

Clinton calling him the enforcer is good...

[newsguyatl]

60. Gore will ALWAYS have my vote FIRST

always.

[maxsolomon]

61. Gore/Clark cannot be beat

except by obvious fraud.

they've got bona fides on the 2 biggest issues facing this god-forsaken country:

1. Energy
2. War

[IndianaGreen]

71. James Carville said this morning that Gore was going to run

I hope the Raging Cajun is right.

[politmuse1]

73. Run Al Run - Please sign petition

The article made my day!

If you haven't done so, please sign Draft Gore's petition asking Gore to run in 2008. Almost 12,000 people signed already.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/algore2008/

[Imagevision]

72. 2008 is sooooo very far away...