Gore won’t be on Michigan ballot. Crap!

Cross posted at Daily Kos and at Things I Wish Democrats Would Say

Just saw this….

Gore supporters fall short in effort to put him on Michigan ballot

now I’m starting to get worried….. here’s more:

LANSING, Mich. (AP) – Efforts to collect enough signatures to put Al Gore on Michigan’s January 15th Democratic presidential primary ballot have fallen short.
Supporters needed to collect more than 12,000 valid signatures by today, but collected only around 3,000.
Michigan Draft Gore co-chairman Bob Alexander says the group collected only about a fifth of the money it needed to mount a full-time petition drive.
Gore won Michigan in his unsuccessful 2000 presidential bid, but so far has not said he’ll run again for the White House.
He still could get on the January 15th ballot as a write-in candidate if he files with the Michigan secretary of state’s office by January 4. But his name will not appear on the regular primary ballot.

I don’t understand what Mr. Gore is doing. In 2003, he made it very clear to the Draft Gore movement that he wanted them to stop their efforts. He hasn’t done that this time; when asked directly, he has refused to tell us to cease and desist.

But we’re getting closer to the moment where it’s do or die for a possible Gore campaign. As has been diaried elsewhere, DFA is asking Gore to either get in or get out. I voted for Gore in their poll, and I still am hoping he gets in, but at some point, whether he says anything to the contrary or not, it’s going to be over. The question for me is, when is that point?

Does anyone here have any knowledge that would give us hope? Any inkling of anything? Please?

Update: The other major candidates besides HRC are not on the ballot either…..

another blog….

a friend of mine convinced me to create a blog, use my real name, and use it to weave a narrative over time for the democrats to follow. I will still post here too, and I hope all of you will post over there as well.

Here it is:

Things I wish Democrats Would Say

Please Mr. Gore… it’s 90 days of sacrifice!

I have been a huge supporter of Al Gore. I firmly believe that he’s our best hope of not only winning the presidency in 2008, but of presenting a bold agenda that truly moves our nation towards energy independence while preventing the catastrophe of the climate crisis.

I have argued repeatedly, here, here, here, here, and here for why Gore needs to be our candidate.

I have to say, if he chooses not to get in, I will be incredibly disappointed, and I have to believe he’s doing it for one reason and one reason only, he’s afraid.

Let me explain:

As most of you probably know, Al Gore has spent nearly his entire adult life trying to become president.

He learned much from his father, a long time Senator from Tennessee, who unfortunately, died prior to his son’s second presidential run. His father died at the age of 90, his son at his side; just before his death, he uttered these words to the Vice-President, ““Always do right,”. It’s been said that his father wanted him to be president from the time he was a little boy. Whether that’s true or not, we’ll never know, but there is no doubt that Senator Gore was a role model for the Vice-President, and their relationship played a huge part in motivating Al Gore to run for President.

After completing his education, Gore enlisted in the military, and served in Vietnam, despite being opposed to the war, and having a cozy National Guard slot reserved for him: (from NY Times):

“But he said, “I appreciate what you’ve done, but I just don’t believe I can do this.’ He talked about how small the draft roll was in Carthage” — and how, if he did not serve, someone he knew would have to take his place.

As we all know Gore returned from Vietnam, ran for Congress and won in 1976, after leaving law school early. Thus began an uninterrupted 24 years of public service, including 8 years in the house, 8 years in the Senate, and culminating in 8 years as Vice-President. We all know what happened in 2000 and what has happened since.

Now, I can completely understand why Al Gore needed a break after the debacle of 2000. I think even the noblest among us would be a bit disillusioned after seeing the Supreme Court hand the presidency to their opponent. I supported his decision not to run in 2004, and to reignite the fire in his life’s passion: protecting the environment.

His work in a relatively short period of time on this issue has been unbelievable. Think of it this way– if I told you 7 years ago that in the year 2007, Al Gore would win an oscar, an emmy, a nobel prize, amass over 100 million dollars in personal wealth , would you have ever believed it? Would you believe that he could have literally changed the frame for discussing global warming? Would you believe that he would be considered the world’s best spokesman on his long-time passion? No one would have.

Now we’re at a cross-roads. As much as Mr. Gore may not want to admit it, a huge part of the reason why he continues to receive so much attention is because there remains a possibility that he will seek the presidency. How much more work can he really do as a non-politician? How can he effectively force legislative change in the congress or in the executive branch unless he becomes a part of the process again?

Does anyone really believe that Mr. Gore can do these things better from outside government (provided he eventually delivers a real statement saying he’s not entering politics again), then he can from within?

We all know that in order to truly save our planet and move towards a true clean energy future, a lot of sacrifice will be necessary at home and an awful lot of diplomacy will be necessary abroad. Mr. Gore knows that. He knows that a carbon tax to replace the payroll tax can’t happen without PRESIDENTIAL leadership. It requires Al Gore, President Al Gore, to campaign for it all over the country. It will require a lot of political arm twisting in the congress. It will require someone who knows how to work the levers of American politics doing just that. He can’t do it from the outside.

He knows that in order to create an Apollo-like project for clean energy, the public sector has to be involved. Again, it will require huge infusions of money, a shared sacrifice by the American people, and a huge amount of political capital to make this happen. Again, it requires PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP.

He knows that in order to convince the developing nations like China and India to utilize our new technologies and help safeguard all of our futures instead of building a new coal power plant each week, it will take PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP.

He knows that the nations who now make their living selling oil to the rest of the industrialized world may throw up roadblocks to our efforts to wean ourselves from them. He knows it will take diplomacy we haven’t seen in the white house in nearly a decade. It will take PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP.

Al Gore must know all this. He has to. He has to know that without the presidency, his time on the national stage in this ADHD nation we live in is running short. He will work tirelessly on this issue, I have no doubt, but in the long run, it will be for naught.

So if he knows all this, why doesn’t he run? The only answer that makes sense to me, unfortunately, is that he’s afraid. He’s afraid of having to endure the rigors of campaigning, of being subjected to the political inanity that is an American presidential campaign, of having his patriotism and his integrity repeatedly impugned by people who shouldn’t even be considering throwing stones in glass houses, of losing. Yes, he’s afraid of losing. (No, I refuse to believe it’s because he’s happy, or he’s rich now, or that he’s found his place, or that he doesn’t want to run against Hillary).

I understand the man is human, but I don’t think his fear is founded.

We’re talking here about 90 days.

90 days until Iowa and New Hampshire hit us smack in the face. He can’t endure this nonsense for 90 days?

He could run any campaign he wants, but there is no better way for him to change the topic of the current campaign and make it about anything he desires. Even if he doesn’t win, what better way to force the rest of the candidates to make real, substantial pledges and policy proposals to solve this crisis? How better to rebuild the political will in the public than to enter the debate himself?

90 days is all I’m asking for. 90 days of a full-throated response to Hillary’s hubristic primary campaign that is already taking all us primary voters for granted. 90 days of a bold set of policy ideas to move our country forward. 90 days to show us how we can solve this crisis while taking advantage of this momentous opportunity. 90 days.

Mr. Gore, if you do that for 90 days, and don’t win the early states, I will understand if you get out. You can return to your work; these 90 days will fade into memory quickly, and the rest of your career can be spent on this passion. If you win the early states, you will coast to the nomination, and the presidency will finally be yours!

But please, if you don’t do this now, we’re all going to be wishing you had 2 years from now, regardless of who the winner is in 2008.

Please Mr. Gore. Show us that you have the courage and the strength to put your nation before yourself one more time. We need you. More importantly, our children need you.

Run Al, Run!!!!!!

Another piece falls into place…

Gore wins nobel peace prize.

Nobel Prize + Al Gore = Presidential Run?

From Newsweek:

Could Nobel Win Push Gore Into ’08 Race?
Thousands of activists are hoping to convince Al Gore to run for president. Could a Nobel Peace Prize give the reluctant candidate a push?
WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Jamie Reno
Newsweek
Updated: 10:39 a.m. ET Oct 8, 2007

Oct. 8, 2007 – Al Gore is not running for president. But might the publicity and sheen of a Nobel Peace Prize change his mind? Some Democratic activists sure hope so.

Grass-roots Gore loyalists have been buzzing for weeks about the Nobel Prize announcement scheduled for Oct. 12 in Oslo, Norway. Gore was nominated for his work on global warming, and several longtime Nobel observers believe this could be the year that a champion of climate change gets the prize. “We feel that if [Gore] wins the Nobel Prize … then he can’t not run for president,” says Roy Gayhart, a San Diego-based organizer of a California draft Gore group.

For Gore supporters like Gayhart, the real inconvenient truth is that the former veep is not a candidate—and may never become one, no matter what happens in Oslo on Friday. Gore, who won an Emmy last month for his Current TV channel and whose film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” won an Oscar last February, has said nothing to indicate that he would run, and his Nashville office didn’t return several phone calls and e-mails seeking comment for this story. But unlike 2004, when his Shermanesque statement stopped supporters dead in their tracks, Gore has not completely closed the door on the idea.

Encouraged, “Draft Gore” organizations from Washington to Michigan to Massachusetts are working to put Gore’s name on 2008 primary ballots. The number of volunteers in the California 4 Gore group has more than doubled to 1,100 since early August, enough to circulate petitions in all 53 congressional districts. The national DraftGore.com group, which has gathered about 127,000 signatures this year—10,000 of them on Sept. 28 alone thanks in part to a segment on Randi Rhodes’s Air America radio show—plans to place a full-page ad in The New York Times in the coming days as an open letter to Gore urging him to run, says the group’s Eva Ritchey. Meanwhile another new coalition called America For Gore initiated a “Two Cents Worth” campaign to encourage supporters nationwide to mail two pennies in an envelope to Gore’s office to encourage a run.

Gore supporters figure a Nobel win would burnish his reputation and remind Democrats that he’s been a leader fighting what voters consider the world’s premier environmental battle. “It makes him look like the knight in shining armor,” says Stephen Cohen, president of the New York Draft Al Gore PAC. No one but the Nobel committee knows how Gore might fare. He’s one of 181 candidates, a list including Bolivian President Evo Morales, Finnish peace broker Martti Ahtisaari and Chinese dissident Rebiya Kadeer. Some Gore backers think he’s already decided to run, but speculate that he doesn’t want politics to interfere with his Nobel chances.

Even most diehard Gore supporters agree the next few weeks are do-or-die for a Gore candidacy. The New York state petition drive must gather 5,000 signatures during a short legal window between Halloween and early December. Gore supporters in Michigan launched a petition drive last week that must secure 12,396 valid signatures by Oct. 23—and a signed candidate affidavit from Gore himself—to place his name on next year’s primary ballot. (Gore backers there draw hope from an Aug. 14 Detroit News/WXYZ-TV statewide poll of 400 likely Democratic voters in which Gore had 36 percent, beating Hillary Clinton, who had 32 percent, and the rest of the field.)

But even the optimists are philosophical about their chances of talking Gore into the race. “I know it’s still a real long shot that he’ll run,” acknowledges Fred Koed of the Massachusetts Draft Gore group. “If I were in his shoes, after the devastating and painful loss in 2000, I’d really have to search inside myself to see if it was all worth doing again. He’ll just have to determine if this is right for him.” In the meantime, Koed and his cohorts hope the Gore faithful—and the Nobel committee—can help him make up his mind.

I just found this…

— Sen. John Kerry tells supporters, “We cannot win this election,” congratulates President Bush. Watch CNN or log on to http://CNN.com for the latest news. More Americans watch CNN. More Americans trust CNN. ******************************************************************** Play the Anderson Cooper 360 Challenge. Find a location near you: http://www.CNN.com/challenge ******************************************************************** To unsubscribe from CNN.com’s Breaking News E-Mail Alert, log on to: http://CNN.com/EMAIL/breakingnews.html To sign up for additional e-mail products, go to http://CNN.com/EMAIL (c)2004. Cable News Network, LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Interactive email id:73951408062638350

If Christopher Hitchens can believe in it…

Sometimes I feel like the rest of the world has forgotten about Albert, but then a nice Christopher Hitchens article suggests that our favorite undeclared will come to the fore after he wins the Nobel Prize.

Of course, Mother Teresa’s biggest critic isn’t all smiles:

I remind you that Gore was once a stern advocate of the removal of Saddam Hussein, and that in office he might well not be the coward or apologist that the MoveOn.org crowd is still hoping to nominate. One has the very slight sense that he contains some unexpended political energy and has acquired some dearly bought political experience. At any rate, nothing could be worse than the present dreary political routine, and if it takes a Scandinavian kick-start to alter the odds, then for once one can hope that the heirs of Alfred Nobel will have a more explosive and catalytic effect than they had intended.

Crazier things could happen.

March to End the War

One of the great things about living in DC is that occasionally a progressively-minded acquaintance from college will give you a call and ask if you want to attend an anti-war march that weekend in your city. I was one of the 10,000 (or tens of thousands, or hundred thousand, depending on who you believe) who marched from the White House to the Capitol chanting anti-war slogans on Saturday, dodging anti-peace protesters’ verbal assaults and steely glances.

I can’t say I agreed with all the protesters — their views varied too much for that. Immediate withdrawal is unrealistic; support for the Iraqi resistance is…let’s just say off-message. But it seemed like the group of protesters, contrasted with the counter-demonstrators along the marching route, were a little too representative of the way our democracy is currently (dys)functioning.

For the first few blocks, the streets were lined mostly with supporters, but when we hit Pennsylvania Avenue the scene changed dramatically. Police barricades separated the marchers from the counter-demonstrators, but could block the offensive and inflammatory gestures and words thrown in both directions. Signs on both sides of barricade and issue were occasionally thoughtful, and many were oversimplified, but some were downright mean-spirited (“Traitors,” “Cindy Sheehan is Osama Bin Laden’s Best Friend,” “Hippies Smell” — and those were just from the other side). When the signs on the sidelines got nasty, many marchers started holding up a peace sign – oversimplifying our/themselves. Some people participating in the peace march became, ironically, violently angry. I asked a man in front of me to calm down at one point when he started screaming expletives and epithets at the Vietnam vets we encountered as we approached the Capitol. (He didn’t respond well.)

We all were there trying to make a point about the course our country should take in the future, but there was little unity within opposing factions and little dialogue between them. This is understandable – the crowd consisted of thousands of people with no real plan to rally behind. When our leaders can not communicate and work together to come up with a plan with potential that can be expressed concisely (and thus not by Sen. John Kerry), they give the people nothing to rally behind. That’s not to say that any or all factions of the stop the war movement would be contented with a proposal in Congress; our nation is too diverse and, I would like to think, too skeptical to blindly support whatever plan comes along. But if our leaders don’t take a shot at real dialogue, we will just be stuck, in the middle of the street, shouting at each other in hoarse voices and not hearing a word.

All the Nelson Mandelas were killed in Iraq before we even got there, President Bush lamented in his press conference earlier this week. Now that we’re there, though, all those who could potentially unite our country in its future action are silent in our own, established, self-congratulatory democracy. That’s why I’m also ambivalent toward all the presidential candidates – they are so focused on campaigning with their various messages of change and hope that they fail to foster either in their current roles. If one of them were to stand up with 66 or 67 senators behind him or her, and propose a workable solution that could withstand a Presidential veto – that might get the Democrats a little excited.

Daily Kos: “Gore Brand Among Three Hottest in the World”

great diary, here.

Ambivalent? Am I the only one?

I wonder if there are others here who feel like I do about 2008. I want a Democrat to win the White House more than just about anything right now in my life. I want it even more than I wanted it in 2000 or 2004, more than I wanted us to take back the Congress in 2006. My problem is, I don’t love any of our candidates…..

I wonder if there are others here who feel like I do about 2008. I want a Democrat to win the White House more than just about anything right now in my life. I want it even more than I wanted it in 2000 or 2004, more than I wanted us to take back the Congress in 2006. My problem is, I don’t love any of our candidates…..

Don’t get me wrong. I would be thrilled if Obama beat whoever the Republicans throw at us. I’d be ecstatic if Edwards blew out Giuliani next November. I’d be thrilled if Hillary toppled the Right Wing machine.

But I don’t have the fire for any of three yet. I just don’t feel it. I don’t feel it like I did in 2000 for Gore, or in 2004 at this point for Dean. (I came around to Kerry, but Dean was where my passion was).

I worry too much about Obama, Edwards, and Hillary. Obama’s passion inspires me, but can he stand the onslaught that Rove et al would unleash? Will the media like tearing him down as much as they built him up? I admire the work Edwards has done these last 3 years, but do I completely trust him? Are the positions he holds politically convenient or true in his heart? Hillary would represent something historic, but her turn from liberalism towards centrism and “strength” really rubs me the wrong way. Do we want more triangulation, or do we want someone who will stand up and say, “This is what I believe. Whether you agree with me or not, at least you know where I stand.”

I’m not looking for diatribes from the respective camps for each candidate. That’s not my point. My point is to find out if there are others here who feel as I do.

I wake up every day and check the web to see if there are any Gore inklings. I pray every night that Gore decides to get into the race. He is someone I would have passion for. I would be volunteering for him now. I would be donating now. I would be passionate now.

The others, I’m not so sure about. I will fight like hell once one of them grabs the nomination, should Gore not get in. But I just don’t feel it for them yet….

Please Al, Please Run!!!

Cross Posted at Daily Kos.