Despite winning the exceedingly misnamed gong, Al Gore has seen no boost in the number of people who think he ought to run for President. The Gallup Organization, which skews consistently Left in its polling, claims the following results:
Asked if they would like to see the former vice president run for president in 2008, people said no by a 54 percent to 41 percent margin, according to a Gallup Poll. That was about the same as last March, when people opposed his running 57 percent to 38 percent. Even among Democrats there was no visible surge of interest in Gore. In the new survey, 48 percent said they would like him to run and 43 percent said they would not. Last March, Democrats were in favor of him entering the race 54 percent to 41 percent -- statistically the same as the new poll. Gore, who won the prize last Friday for his work raising awareness of global warming, has not said he is a candidate for the White House but has never definitively ruled it out -- including for a race in the future.The second bolded point is especially telling: even among Democrats there was no visible surge of interest in Gore. That has to be devastating to Gore, who has never given up the ideal of the Presidency, the role for which his parents prepared him from childhood. His energy in all things "Climate Change" comes from the desire to vindicate his lost bid for the presidency, and you can bet your child's college fund that he wanted the Oscar (which he did not win, BTW) and the Nobel to propel him into the White House.
I wonder if this will mean he re-doubles his efforts toward ratification of Kyoto or if he will draw down to lick his wounds?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-101607-gorepoll,1,4688911.story
1 comment:
"That has to be devastating to Gore, who has never given up the ideal of the Presidency, the role for which his parents prepared him from childhood."
But does it? And are we so sure he hasn't given up on the idea of being president (I'm assuming "ideal" was a typo).
In a similar vain, I see similarities with Rev. Jackson (see previous Langtry comment) and even Kevin Costner as Billy Chapel in For Love of the Game ... at some point in time, every person needs to come to terms with the fact that the best is no longer to come, the best has already happened. (Sorry, just saw that movie for the first time and it was fresh in my mind.)
What I want to know is why reporters keep asking if he's going to run? He said he has no interest, and until he declares himself a candidate I have no reason to waste one iota of time thinking about it.
For the record, I voted for Bradley ... pairs well with my history of Kucinich '04, Harkin '92, Simon '88 and, had I been old enough, Cranston, then Mondale (no, NOT Hart) '84. ... yes, liberal nut-job indeed.
Mind you, I'm not doing cartwheels about the current crowd (Dennis, the viability thing ... and you're getting a primary challenge for your Congressional seat to boot? ... get with it man), but Gore entering the race would do nothing for me.
And as a practical matter, I think getting in the race this late (how many days 'til Iowa?) would make fundraising a challenge.
Seeking "to vindicate his lost bid for the presidency," sure, I'll give you that, but it doesn't mean he necessarily wants to run again.
Oh and I'll take "re-doubles his efforts" for $200 Alex.
Post a Comment