What Bill Clinton Told Me About Al Gore (Very Interesting)

[kpete]

Andy Ostroy: What Bill Clinton Told Me About Al Gore. Fascinating, and Andy's Reliable. You Can Take It to the Bank. 6/8 http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/

When I found myself literally standing next to a surprisingly unengaged Clinton as we were about to watch an Air America promotional video on Green's large-screen television, I leaned over and asked him "Do you think Gore's going to run?" With his arms crossed and one hand resting on his chin in a true Clintonesque pose, he leaned into me and replied, "I don't know, he could. Someone's got to fizzle. If someone fizzles, then yeah he could enter the race. He's got plenty of money, his own money, to do it." He then agreed when I asked if having that kind of personal wealth could mean Gore would be able to wait until the last stages of the campaign before he'd enter the race. I wanted to ask him about that "fizzling" thing--was he referring to his wife Hillary's chief rival Sen. Barack Obama or was he also allowing that as a possibility for Hillary herself?--but the crowd absorbed him. I was lucky to have had as much face time with him as I did.

So here's my own scenario: as I've written here countless times before, Gore will indeed run, and most likely no later than October. To borrow from Bill, it'll be Obama who will "fizzle" by September, and Gore will toss his hat into the ring and enlist the junior Senator from Illinois as his running mate. An unbeatable ticket. Stay tuned......

http://ostroyreport.blogspot.com/2007/06/what-bill-clinton-told-me-about-al-gore.html

[bluerum]

1. There are many exciting scenarios that come to mind with the dems

this cycle.

Gore-Obama is certainly at the top of the list.

[Kazak]

2. I can't think of many exciting senarios...

that don't involve Gore though. :shrug:

[UNCLE_Rico]

3. Word 2 that, my brotha...

Gore is the only one who will truly ignite the base.

Allow me the honor of being the first on this thread:

RUN AL RUN!!!

[KharmaTrain]

4. Gore Could Wait Until Next Year

The "long-term memory" of the voter is equal to a fruit fly...thus all the predictions of where the political world will be in six months or a year from now is what my late father would call "metal masturbation". Especially in this fluid political atmosphere where neither party has a prohibitive favorite out there and the the mood of the country ebbs and flows with the on-going messes from the economy to Iraq to healthcare and so on.

Right now the game is for the money. For a majority of the candidates, this is their only real reason for being out there now and for pushing this primary season to such an early start. A year ago, Obama was still a curiosity...now he's a campaign machine...as are the other candidates...going for the bundlers and then worrying about reaching out to the others later...if there is a later. It's raised his public profile and with the money, he's now considered a legitimate candidate.

As Clinton states, Gore doesn't need to raise the money the same way the others do. Besides having it (sounds like Bill's a little envious Al's make a bundle in recent years), Gore's need for it isn't as great as it is for others. He doesn't need to buy TV time to "introduce" himself or outspend other campaigns as some sign of "strength". He also doesn't have to establish his credentials on many issues as he's never kept it a secret where he stood. He was one of the first to speak out against the Iraq mess and take the boooosh regime to task. No bona fides about that required.

Remember, Robert Kennedy didn't jump into the 1968 race until well into the primary season...and Gore could sit out in a similar fashion. If the candidates "fizzle" (and I'm not sure what that really means) the push for Gore to get in would mount. The longer he waits, the more the pressure has and continues to build. Also, the less pummeling he gets in the corporate media and saves his strength and resources to run a strong 6 month campaign rather than this marathon 18 month version.

[a kennedy]

10. "The "long-term memory" of the voter is equal to a fruit fly"

and that is what really bothers me. A Gore/Obama ticket could be just the start of some beautiful things to come. :patriot:

[PATRICK]

11. The RFK

situation was fundamentally different even though some say his efforts were doomed by delegate numbers. The primaries back then did not commit so many delegates to the vote tallies despite the impact of california's winner take all prize. A lot of machine Dems were in HHH's pocket. To win RFK would have had to do his thing to peel them away and keep first ballot victory away from HHH. I certainly don't know enough about the enemies and controversies that might have made that highly unlikely but if the war issue
became more prominent the Dem platform might have taken fire to push HHH out of his cautious loyalty to the disastrous LBJ policy. George McGovern leapt in to carry that torch and was rewarded with a bargain to reform the primary system(like Dean). The dinosaur brain of the Dem party seems to remember all these things selectively. Since FDR it always seems to want to adjust its political compass away from its moral progress and "democratization", so much that it compartmentalizes its own bases lest the furor for justice and reform place too much faith in the best instincts of the vast majority of the nation. The devil whispering such sage advice in their ear to power has always been corporate money and the media.

Sorry for the digression but the season would have allowed Gore a much better chance than RFK- who had to MAKE Eugene McCarthy fizzle, earning some bitterness there. The frontloading, extremely unfortunate for all the possible reforms the Dem establishment should have and could have championed favors rich, well known frontrunners. I think that puts Gore at a fatal disadvantage in terms of the sheer speed at which things will occur, barely letting people soak in the fact that he is running. His known negatives, ironically against another candidate like HRC with the same, will arise like a dark phoenix perhaps, especially with the kneecapping spin which will accumulate faster than snow in January.

How interesting is it that so many of these calculations bow to the media contest anyway? Edwards is invisible, not the strong candidate he remains who will profit a lot from Obama's "fizzling" which is only possible if he allies himself to the pseudo political big media contest and does not get daring and aggressive on the ground. It is not mere media perception that is making him appear victim to an unshakable meme of "unreadiness" and "inexperience", caution, looking to the long term of a future candidacy or Veep spot. Still, with his legitimate following and considerable talents he is far from fizzling in these idle fancies. For would Gore come in to take Obama's place in splitting the progressive vote away from Edwards? Edwards would have to be in even more considerable trouble and brushing him back would be no Eugene McCarthy scenario. Also exactly who would defect from the Clintons to the Clinton's ex-veep on the organizational level where people are committed to her beyond all objections? The sheer magic of Gore is not really like RFK's.

Prognostication. Impossible to be impressively accurate. The likely has the weight to prevail, one way or another, and that likely is that HRC's "not so bad" candidacy and alliances will win. The Edwards campaign also depends on some fizzling AND catching fire. This has happened before such as when the trashed and disrespected Bill Clinton carried a damaged second fiddle to Tsongas. And then was forced to play second fiddle to Perot. Yet Tsongas was no mighty campaign machine. The primaries eventually prevailed in common sense I think, left to their own timely devices, hinging on New York, from where "providentially", HRC now originates. I can create scenarios where other candidates than HRC triumph and all must be dependent on HER stagnating, slipping- at least- well before Iowa where her organizational prowess will descend like Kerry's. Even the best candidate, like Bill before her, will have a tough time beating the media warp this time around. The sole puzzle to me is the memory of the voters who are constantly focused on "intelligent" issues, on the attractive person, with the full cooperation of the media and candidates with blatant electoral negatives. The memory of winning and losing and the present sting of the crises we face are background. The party(top) itself has created this repressed memory by not vocalizing the reality of the election fraud(we still face), anger at the crises(CRISES not legislative goodie issues), and talking at all about winning big and with passion. When will blunter reality break through the pleasantries of having the first woman or minority president? When will the latent subconscious of winning desire and progressive fury cut through the smarmy caution and befuddled issue parsing of an absurdly bland banner for a status quo lost in dictatorial, fraudulent ruins?

It is sizzle, not fizzle that is the mystery awaiting release. Or else everyone will fizzle while the GOP ham sandwich gets microwaved to respectability and passion by their MSM peanut gallery. Otherwise, the big campaign will trump the head and heart of the party faithful once more. Any Dem might "win" the election no matter what. The question is how badly we will be robbed, underrepresented and defeated by dirt this time carrying the "kick me" sucker signs on our collective derriere.

[KharmaTrain]

12. So Many Vairables Here...Great Insight

Yes, 1968 was more complicated than RFK jumping into the race and the nomination would have been his. You bring back a lot of specifics and memories that lead to many hours of "what ifs" had Bobby made it to Chicago that August. Would he have formed common cause with McCarthy and throw the convention up for grabs? Sadly it wasn't.

The front-loading of the primaries this year pushes things earlier, but it doesn't always mean that a candidate will emerge in early February...if anything, the dispersement of delegates among the many lower tier could make picking up delegates a lot easier than it appears. Also, remember that a good portion of the delegates are not elected, but are party officials...some who are already committed, but if they smell a paycheck by hoping onto a Gore candidacy, it won't take much.

I agree it's the sizzle here and that's what the corporate media is hoping for. They want the candidate to implode...they've spent all this time and money building up a bunch of candidates, now they want to cash in on the other end. This I fear is where Obama is headed...a "great hope" who just "wasn't ready"...or some other meme.

One good thing about "being robbed"...with more Democrats in control on the state and local level, the Diebold days are coming to an end. Can we be sure? No. But I feel a lot more confident with a Ted Strickland in control in Ohio than a Ken Blackwell.

Cheers...

:toast:

[riderinthestorm]

23. Best. post. on. this. thread.

The one thing that leapt out at me in the OP was the ommission of Edwards. While no Big Dawg, he's got the potential to be the candidate as he stealthily persists....

[Crazy Dave]

5. I agree on the Obama theory

Which is too bad as I really do like him but I see all the hype and hoopla that was Howard Dean and boy did he fizzle quickly. Dean seemed unstoppable and was the poll leader before Iowa. Obama's campaign is almost a mirror image.

Anything can happen though and I wish everyone on our side good luck.

[bigscott]

6. when is the Nobel Peace Prize announced?

would just add to an already impressive set of credentials

[MonkeyFunk]

21. Early october

but don't get too excited - it's extremely unlikely Gore will win it.

[Totally Committed]

7. If Bill Clinton said that, then that's what about 100 focus groups said.

The man is NEVER "off message", and he wants back to the White House. Bad. He would never have said that (even if it seemed "off the cuff" at the time) if it was not proved to be to Hillary's benefit for him to say it. The Clintons are the ULTIMATE political animals. They live and breathe winning at all cost.

That having been said, I ask you to consider the question left begging by this story: How many people would be willing to abandon Obama if they thought it would get Gore into the race? The focus groups probably told Bill the answer to that was, Just enough to put Hillary ahead of the pack, and keep her there.

Just saying.

TC

[Bucky]

9. Excellent, if somewhat cynical analysis.

I don't share your disdain for Mr Clinton, but I think you capture the essense of how he handles questions like that. I love the Big Dog, but he is not to be treated as an impartial elder statesman in this election. He has a conflict of interest similar to what you see in aristocracies--he wants his country to do well, but he wants to ensure it's his family that's running the show when his country does well.

I commend the husband's loyalty, but as a small-d democrat, I'm appalled.
.

[Totally Committed]

14. Bucky, there was a time when I thought Clinton was great....

Then, he signed the Welfare Reform Act. I was disenchanted, but tried to keep supporting him. After Katrina, and during the 2004 election, he did and said some things that made me disappointed in him... some really stupid statements supporting W Bush, and developing a close friendship with HW Bush. His relationship to the DLC. I just started not to trust him.

As the issue of poverty became a paramount concern, I started to study what The Welfare Reform Act actually did to this country's poor. Hillary is a whole different case, but I now dislike and don't trust either of them. I now want neither of them anywhere near the White House ever again.

Sorry, I know that sounds harsh, and may be absolutely NOT the popular view at the moment, but I really feel history will bear me out.

A little light reading, if you are so inclined:

In Direct Rebuttal to President Clinton's NYT Op-Ed:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Totally%20Committed/5


We've got to stop kidding ourselves about Clinton!

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Totally%20Committed/29

TC

[hootinholler]

16. "what The Welfare Reform Act actually did to this country's poor."

A horrible law, as experienced by my Sister. At the time a Pell Grant student with children. On assistance, she was forced to pay her child support back to the state, which was more than the assistance she was receiving. If she had refused, then no medicare, etc. Quarterly justification of remaining in school (nursing program, she graduated with honors) instead of taking a dead end waitress job.

It sucked.

-Hoot

[Totally Committed]

25. I so agree!

I'm sorry it affected your sister so negatively. Clinton should be ashamed of this capitulation to the Republican Party. It was a horrible law.

TC

[karynnj]

13. Excellent point - Nothing Bill Clinton says on the nomination

should be taken at face value. It will be what he considers is the most strategic thing to say. So, what could be the truth?

My best guess: That he wants to keep the people who are currently hoping for Al Gore from looking at and bonding with the anti-Hillarys. This could stop either of them from getting the momentum from passing Hillary in the polls. This assumes that the Gore people if they genuinely gave up on Gore running would look seriously at the remaining candidates. This would likely produce a different result from just eliminating Gore in a poll.

[Totally Committed]

15. Pure genius! -----

My best guess: That he wants to keep the people who are currently hoping for Al Gore from looking at and bonding with the anti-Hillarys. This could stop either of them from getting the momentum from passing Hillary in the polls. This assumes that the Gore people if they genuinely gave up on Gore running would look seriously at the remaining candidates. This would likely produce a different result from just eliminating Gore in a poll.

Awesome post!

TC

[karynnj]

17. Thanks - and I likely wouldn't have got there without starting where you were in your post

I think one of the biggest things Hillary has going for her is the sense of inevitability. When Obama briefly in some polls came close, remember the brittleness and mistakes Hillary's campaign made. If either Edwards or Obama had a string of polls over say a month where they were stronger, Hillary could lose those people. I also suspect that some media people who are treating her more respectfully than they did Kerry, Gore, or the otehr 2008 possibilities, may be doing it because they fear retaliation from the Clintons if they win.

[Totally Committed]

20. I totally agree with you.

I have nothing to add... you've said it all!

TC

[EST]

8. I'm so weary of this crap.

Believe it or not, there are some good hearted, intelligent humanitarians in this country who really don't want to be president.
If Al Gore really is the committed savior of the world and its environment, and I think he is, assuming the presidency of this crooked corporate kleptocracy would be entirely the wrong thing to do and would do more to destroy his credibility than anything else he could do.
And, perhaps, that is the real reason there are so many who want him to run and jump back into the corrupt crowd of the government-it would silence the world's foremost advocate of action to correct the biggest problem facing all of humanity.

Being the president of the United States is not the best job in the world and luxuriating in power and privilege is not the goal of every human being.

I hope and must trust that Mr. Gore has settled the argument is his own mind and can resist the siren call of those who would drag him down to a mere presidential position and limit his effectiveness.

Please, Mr. Gore, don't run, hold your ground, don't give in to the bastards who desperately want to prove that you have feet of clay. Your fight will make you the most revered person in human history, if successful, but if that is your motivation, you will fail.

Al Gore already is a great man, destined to be even greater, but only if he pursues his own course instead of the petty dreams of the people who misunderstand what it's all about. His calling is much greater.

We have plenty of people capable of handling a pissy little job like that of president. This man, if he remains true to his own light, is so much bigger than that.

[riderinthestorm]

22. I agree with this.

Gore has the potential to be one of a handful of "global" players if he chooses wisely at this point. His activism transcends the presidency and I hope he stays out of the race since his mission now and his effectiveness now are so much greater than being tarnished by being the US prez.

Carter with his global efforts towards election integrity. Gandhi in his fight against colonialism. Mother Theresa and her spotlight on poverty. Bono and his work on Third World economies. These folks (amongst others I haven't listed) have their own political playing field and I believe Gore now needs to join this group of global politicians. Gore could be the one whose name is forever hitched with saving the planet and environmentalism if he continues doing what he's doing.

Our planet needs him as our activist - not as president of the world's greatest corporatocracy.

[EST]

24. Thank you.

It is not my intention to denigrate the efforts of people who see Al Gore as the ideal man to get the country headed toward a position of responsible leadership and thus steer the world toward a better destiny. But there are larger goals and, perhaps, more effective ways to accomplish those goals.

It is difficult to keep pointing the real direction when people see winnig some immediate contest as more important because it's more available. However, it is something worthwhile and most assuredly a thankless task but not anywhere near what Gore must be facing, daily, in his quest for the "pearl of great price."

Thanks for your support-it's not going to be easy. We do what we can.

[aikoaiko]

18. I get very suspicious of people talking "unbeatable ticket"

How utterly naive.

[ChiciB1]

19. I Know In My Heart Gore Won In 2000 & Deserves The Presidency...

however, IMO the longer he takes to announce if it were going to happen, I would presume many of us will be leaning toward one of the candidates now running.

I a huge Gore supporter, but I think he's really enjoying all the interest he's getting mainly because it makes THE IDIOT looks so much like well AN IDIOT!!

Gore doesn't "need" it anymore, I think he walked over the coals and has earned his place in history and perhaps it's a good place to stop. Why put in jeopardy the fact that you climbed the mountain and WON??