Skip to comments.Dick Morris: Look out, here comes Al (& Nixon’s ’68 Comeback Offers Clues for Gore)
Posted on 02/22/2006 5:46:58 AM PST by Mr. Brightside
Look Out, Here Comes Al
February 22, 2006
Gore may be a man whose time has come in his party. It was he who warned of climate change and predicted its consequences. Hurricane Katrina was just a fulfillment of the prophesies Gore wrote about in his late-1980s book Earth in the Balance.
History indicates that candidates who won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College have all come back to win revenge in subsequent elections. Andrew Jackson, cheated in 1824, won in 1828. Grover Cleveland, cheated in 1888, triumphed in 1892.
Could Al beat Hillary? If Mrs. Clinton persists in her support of the Iraq war, he could. But never count on Hillary losing an election over a principle. Its a bad bet. If she moves to the left on the war, as she already shows signs of doing, she would preempt Gore and Kerry and use her tremendous lead in fundraising and ex-officio delegates to cruise to the nomination.
Gore has three things going for him: A perception that he was robbed of the White House and Hillarys possible stubbornness in continuing to back the war.
The third thing? The weather. As the evidence of global climate change impresses everyone who doesnt work at the White House, Gore looks more and more like a man whose time may have come.
Morris, a former political adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race.
I wouldn't vote for that clod if he were running for city pooper scooper. He's a fringe lunatic!
That raving lunatic wouldn't stand a chance. his mouth would bury him.
Plus, If he challenges the hildabeast, I would advise him to steer clear of Ft. Marcie park.
Global warming debates don't trump defeating Islamic terrorism. Bring it on! I'd love to defeat Al again!
Maybe the author is right, "Graceful Gore" not "Sore-Loserman."
What were we thinking? (rolling eyes)
"Comparing Gore to Nixon is beyond absurd.The entire article is an exercise in mental masturbation despite the claim that the author is what appears to be a conservative."
Exactly. Nixon remained loyal to his country and didn't go over seas and bash it on enemy soil. Nor did he say that LBJ or JFK betrayed their country.
Nixon had his faults, but he was a much better man than Gore, IMO.
I kind of wish Gore's father would have withdrawn.
Gore never withdrew. He lost in the Supreme Court of the US, and didn't oppose efforts to try and convert electors from voting for Bush to voting for him, led by the "graceful" Bob Beckel.
If Al Gore will submit himself to a board-certified team of psychologists and psychiatrists and allow them to examine him, talk with him, probe his mental state, and if they issue a public report stating that he is as sane and stable as any American man in his late 50's, I'll consider whether or not he deserves my vote.
That ought to take me about 1.5 seconds to reach the same decision I reached in 2000.
I hear you, but in this case the buck stops with the president on this one. This is not a knee jerk reaction. I actually don't think the Brits should have been running our ports either.
I have supported the president 100% from day one and breathed easy when he beat Gore and then Kerry. He is giving the Democrats ample opportunity with this port BS to clean house in the mid terms and in 2008.
by the way, did you like the transportation bill?
Dick M has finally put the idea of Algore being Prez to rest. Dickie is wrong on every prediction he makes.
I find it funny that Morris writes an article claiming that Al Gore is coming back to win the presidency.
... and his own bio is promoting his latest book "Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race"
So which is it, Al or Hillary?
Gracefully? That was graceful?
The nation went through hell for months!
"Gore is a traitor and a bum!"
Short, sweet, and to the point...
"Were truer words ever spoken?"
Three problems with your comment;
1. Hilary has no conception of "principle". No democrat (small 'd' intentional) does. They are all preening, self-indulgent, power-hungry children of the Summer of Love
who still labor under the incorrect assumption that they actually achieved anything with all their free-love-drug-taking-pacifist-nuveau-communist-if-it-feels-good-do-it menatlity and anti-war activities. The policies they have advocated have not lifted a single person out of poverty (in fact, they made poverty an attractive option). They did not save a single life, American or Asian, with their anti-war stance, and they opened a wound in the American political dialectic which will never heal.
2. Al Gore is laboring under the weight of the bane of democratic (small'd' intentional) party nomination politics, as concerns a loser: democrats not only bury their dead; they bury their wounded as well. Neither Gore or Kerry has a chance at a nomination, barring some earth-shaking cataclysm (an indictment or conviction, for example). Both lost to a man the democratic rank-and-file considers an idiot. Hardly conducive to inspiring confidence. Just ask Walter Mondale how this game gets played.
3. The remnants of the democratic (small 'd' intentional)party revolves around an agenda far more radical and subversive than even the 'established' front-line democrats are willing to espouse. It is, for all intents and purposes, Howard Dean's party far more than it is Gore's or even Hilary's. The Clintons thought they were cute when they elevated Dean to party chair, believing they could a) keep Dean's money machine while eliminating Dean as a contender, b) keep Dean's brain-dead legions under the assumption that their voice actually counts, and c) avoid a serious challenege from the leftmost fringes of the party. They are wrong on all three counts.
Because there will be no one else to nominate, Hilary will get the nod. She will run a PR campaign which will be intended to remind people of the 'good ol' days' of the 'Co-presidency' and which will be totally devoid of ideas, rational positions, and logic. But that's okay, democratic (small 'd' intentional) voters do not require well-thought-out,pertinent and effective government; they just need high-minded, focus-group-tested, less-than-four-words sloganeering and personal smears.
Fortunately, the rest of the country does require those things. Which is why Hilary will lose, unless her republican opponent is a complete bonehead (like Bill Frist) or simply the consensus candidate of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy", like John McCain or George Allen.
This next presidential election is the republican's to lose.
Even DEMOCRATS on 9/11 were saying they were glad it was Bush and NOT Gore in charge.
The scariest ticket I can think of is:
Gore vs. McCain
Two certifiable whack-jobs running for POTUS -- God help us all!
The one great thing about Morris, if he says it, we know it won't happen.
I could care less what Dick Morris has to say.
He wrote speeches for Bubba.
He doesn't appear to hold any regard for facts or history.
I don't understand why so many conservative radio hosts have him on their show as a guest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.