Has Al invested in funds and startups that would reap windfalls from changes in federal alternative energy legislation and funding?

If so, does Al really want to exchange his current charmed life as one and the same time prophet of green tech and a major investor in same for the (financially) unrewarding snake pit of national politics-- as #2 to a candidate who's far less experienced and savvy?

Dream.  On.  (though it is a good dream...)

Yes, Gore would bring a lot of gravitas to the ticket and generate a great deal of enthusiasm, but I also think that the risk of his upstaging Obama is considerable. You're talking about a man who was a single (Supreme Court justice) vote away from the presidency. How will he not feel entitled to share the helm?  In the same way that no one really believed that Hillary Clinton could be added to the ticket without Bill looking over Barack's shoulder, I'd be concerned that the same dynamic would exist here.

Leave his comfortable, exhalted perch to go play second banana for another eight years? I very much doubt it. Even if Obama asks.

Some of the tea leaves are pointing in the direction (speaking slots, lack of public statements from Gore for quite some time) and I am officially predicting that he is the choice, announced formally on Thursday circa 10 am, with text messages coming in earlier at around 8:30 am.

Al's name recognition is 2nd to none, and many embarrassed Bush voters from 2000 would be happy to give their vote for him this time around. He also gets the Green Vote which would help out west (think Colorado, Nevada and Oregon), along with his Southern roots which would go along way to making states like Virginia and NC more competitive.

Last, but not least, Jewish Voters love Al and his presence on the ticket could put Florida (among other states) into play in a major way and thereby counter any "McCain-Romney" Michigan grabs.  Needless to say, the "You Can Call Me Al" campaign commercial nearly writes itself...

Hmmm...  "Obama al Gore" sounds pretty terroristy to me.

I love Al Gore and would be thrilled, but he's way too prestigious, competent and visionary for Republicans to stand for one second.  He'd excite turn-out from the Hannity/Rush Mental Midget Axis almost as much as Hillary would.

Ratner - you made me laugh so hard, I fell off my chair.

I'd buy an Obama Al Gore sticker in a second flat.

Never happen. Just like it wasn't going to happen with Edwards. You can't sing this "Change" tune and then select someone who's either served as a VP before or been on the Democratic ticket before. Nope. And is it dumb to think that the VP can't be Bayh because, well, he looks like Edwards a great deal? It's gonna be...

...Biden.

I'll buy a full-year subscription to "National Review" if I'm wrong.

"...along with his Southern roots which would go along way to making states like Virginia and NC more competitive.

Last, but not least, Jewish Voters love Al and his presence on the ticket could put Florida (among other states) into play in a major way..."

I like Gore and all, but saying that these traits would have more than a minuscule effect on the race has fairly little basis in reality.  If Gore's Southern roots couldn't help in in VA and NC when he was at the top of the ticket (he lost them by 8 and 13, respectively), it's highly doubtful he'd help Obama there.  And the Florida Jews effect would be negligible, given that they make up 4-5% of all Florida voters, so you need a 20-25% swing among Jewish voters to make up 1% in the statewide vote.

Wouldn't that be nice? But still... being #2 for another 8 years? Although he would certainly balance the ticket, I mean, one is the "Celebrity" the other is that stiff guy... so, why not?

On the other hand it is quite sad that Sebelius' chances were derailed by the Clinton's bitterness, way to help the gender's cause!

Okay, but only if BO agrees to stop talking and Al grows a pony tail.

Then you get the whole Penn & Teller thing going, you get Gore to impale Obama on a bed of upraised rusty spikes or what not, and McCain wins maybe Arizona and one or two more, and that's all she wrote.

Kevin.  Please never buy that magazine, or republican calling-card.  Pledge to do soemthing else. I agree with Wandrey, Gore's too high-profile.  Perhaps the TNR editors are getting nervous about Obama because he hasn't had a few good weeks, so they pull hard for someone to "make" Obama a slam dunk.  Patience people.  Obama needs to hold steady for one week and then let it all out at the convention.  Afterwards, he better prep for debates. My money is on Biden given world happenings right now.  

I will say one other thing.  Michelle Cottle ran a piece today about Obama being too cool.  I saw an Obama ad on the CNN website today encouraging people to hurry up and visit the Obama website so they can be the first to get the info on Obama's Veep choice.  This is the kind of trying to be "too cool" stuff Obama needs to abandon.  Plus, it cheapens the selection of the second office in the land, trivializing it to a mere "scoop" and who' first to get it.  A veep choice is serious biznet and the constituents he needs to secure aren't internet diehards and do not care to be the first to know.  

Wouldn't that be a great ticket? (Sigh...)

I don't think Gore would want another 8 years of pseudo-power. He knows the job far better than anyone would like, including himself. Al's had a very big impact on policy and the public discourse out of public office. I don't know why he'd change that now, and the fact that he's not speaking at the convention only underscores the point.

I still think it's plausible, but it's more likely he's not scheduled yet because he will be speaking on Thursday, in the stadium, where no one but Obama and Ritter have been scheduled, or he'll be nominating Biden on Wednesday.

I do think he would seriously consider the idea, if offered. But I think one significant reason he might decide against it is: if he is VP for another 8 years, could he really resist the temptation of trying to be president again, in 2016? I don't think so. But the Gore Fatigue factor by that time will have skyrocketed.

One possibility: he accepts the VP nod, but privately decides with Obama that he will step down--or be shifted to State or Climate Czar--in 2012. This would clear the field for the leader of the Party to install his heir apparent by his side: Webb or Warner--and if a Dem retains the VA Governorship, Kaine gets appointed to the new VP's Senate seat.

To quote one of our great 20th-century philosophers:

"Yeah. And maybe monkeys will fly out of my butt."

When is that picture from? Where are the jowls? . . .Ruh roh!

Anecdotal time: My Alaskan ex-husband voted for Bush in 2000, and instantly regretted it because he disapproved so strongly of the way Bush won it, and thought that Bush should have refused the crown. He's firmly what Hillary would call a "hard working white American", and he's for Obama now.  He's a non-evangelical, though, and was only against abortion until his teenage daughter got pregnant. So Mark Penn, how many people are like him?

Yeah, a-long raises the issue of private deals. The VP job is really so very flexible, as Cheney has taught us all. If it came with Cheney-like powers, who wouldn't want it?

Gore or Biden would be great picks. Biden's Russian proposals look SMART and crucially don't involve any Stinger or Javelin missiles.

My only concern with Gore is that he could be a juicy target for scare tactics. Has he not gone too far down the Armageddon road. I mean the guy doesn't even dry his hands! And what would a failed VP bid with Obama do to his 2012 ambitions?

Obama's VP nominee will be Sam Nunn.  He's a foreign policy expert, particularly on Russia and loose-nukes; he's Southern and appeals to conservative Dems; he puts Georgia in play.  His stance on don't ask, don't tell may alienate some gay voters, but his position has changed inasmuch as he agrees the policy needs to be revisited.

Its a pleasant thought, but having tried for the big office and failed, he is now a "was" and even if asked should know better than to accept. I still think it will be Hillary because he is pushing for the roll-call to settle the "nomination issue" by the books, make it clear who is the chosen nominee, then "decide" that in such an evenly divided race he could only ask one person to be his VP...

I'm full of it, I know, but the man has a penchant for grand-standing and this scenario would definitely qualify.

Alan, Gore's Southern roots obviously helped him in Virginia and NC, but not enough to win.  In this year's demographic mix it could do the trick, especially since many voters out there "want to vote for Obama" but something is holding them back.  A reassuring familiar VP such as Gore could help such voters fell more comfortable with Obama.  

As for those feisty Florida Jews, I believe (and perhaps some polling can help flesh this out) that if Obama achieves Jewish Voter numbers like the ones Hillary was polling at he could win the state.  If Florida comes down to 1% or less, a shift of 10% of the Jewish Vote from one side to the other would win it.

Here's an old article about that, I'll try to post some newer numbers.  www.jcpa.org/.../vp446.htm

I'm still holding to my belief that Barack, the Mrs. and a few (at most) had their choice locked in back in the Spring. Following a rigid script has been their rule and it seems logical that they would have accounted for #2 and then milked all the hype they could from this 'process'. When the Head Vetter split in a flash an no one batted an eye...well, he wasn't needed. I also suggested the suspect was lurking inside the team or an uncommitted loyalist.

When Barack didn't chose to fan the flames under one of the final few over the past week or so? It seemed a good time to gets some buzz considering his vacation, The Olympics and Georgia made him invisible.  I became more convinced the short list were part of the deception to hold McCain at bay, to have the RNC looking for a match for that batch while Barack would slide in the someone from his bench.

I am sure I will be proved the fool but even at this late date I'll be truly surprised if the choice is from the 'narrow list'.

I'm not sure how his Southern roots "obviously" helped him in VA and NC.  Kerry had nearly identical margins against Bush 4 years later and he's hardly a guy with "Southern roots."  If you look at his performance in those states relative to his overall performance, he was in the same ballpark as every other Democrat since Mondale.

As for those Florida Jews, a 10% swing translates to 0.4--0.5% of the vote.  If that's the best-case scenario, it doesn't argue that Gore would seriously help put Florida in play.

Al's "Southern roots" couldn't even carry his "home" state of Tennessee. He is a bloated douchebag and a prissy, holier-than-thou elitist with socialist overtones.

His selection is about the only thing I can think of in the realm of semi-remotely likely that would cause me to vote for McCain. He belongs in Hollywood, not Washington.

Tammy said

"it cheapens the selection of the second office in the land, trivializing it to a mere "scoop" and who' first to get it.  A veep choice is serious biznet and the constituents he needs to secure aren't internet diehards and do not care to be the first to know"

Respectfully, I really think that you are missing the boat on this texting thing.  Yes, to some it appears too cool for school, but what it also does is amass a pretty large database of supporters new and old that can be later used to keep touch througout the campaign season until election.  It will probably also be used to GOTV and "rally the troops" at the click of a button to every phone listed. It's actually a very smart way to enhance the database of the over 2,000,000 donors that Obama already has and the voters whose cell phone numbers are in his database will be contacted with other news, invitations, fund appeals and requests over the coming months

I also I think people are missing the plan when they discuss the "presumptousness" of Invesco Field speech.  As I understand, for the 80,000 available seats, most will be for Colorado residents (which as ya'll may know Obama wants to try to turn blue), and for those who asked for tickets, they had to agree to register I believe up to 5 people.  Of course, I'm sure the Obama campagin is not naive enough to think that some people won't do that, but even if a small percentage does some registrations, it would be worth it.  

And, since they expect long lines through metal detectors anyway, it has been floated out that the Obama campaign may pass out prepaid cell phones, so that supporters can "phonebank"  or call family, friends and foes and get them to watch the speech. Also, by giving a number of tickets to Coloradoans (sp?) this also increases the campaign's Colorado database.

I understand that people like to begrudge the tech savvyness of the Obama campaign, but let's face it, the internet has been around for awhile, and hindsight being 20/20 I think it was stupid of the other campaigns that they didn't think of ways to harness the power of the "inter-tubes".  The Obama team obviously did, and I would bet the other campaigns wished they had thought of it first.

It would be fun to watch Joe Lieberman squirm.

Anyone interested in a great lampoon of Al Gore's southernness and alleged farming background should Michael Kelly's "Farmer Al." It's not fair or balanced, but it is hysterical.

The suspense, secrecy, rumors and such bear a strong resemblance to a new product release from Apple. And guess what? Gore's on Apple's board. Hmmmm...makes you think, like...OMG.

Forgot the link to back up my claims.  www.fivethirtyeight.com/.../electoral-history-charts.html

Robert Powell,

Not to nitpick (actually yes, to nitpick), but is there some reason that "home" state gets scare quotes?  I know he went to school in St. Albans (while his family was in Washington...with his dad representing Tennessee), but he did live much of his life in Tennessee and spent 16 years representing the state in Congress.  Just sayin'

propositionjoe,

Can you provide a url link for "Farmer Al"? I can't locate it via search engineon Yahoo or Google.

Ratner: "Obama al Gore" sounds pretty terroristy to me.

OK, that won the laugh of the day. Thanks :-)

I STILL think Gore-Obama was the dream ticket (sigh...).  But if Obama's to headline, then yeah, I'd be happy to have Gore sandwiched in...  [NB -- I won't kick and scream about it, but just out of curiosity:  since when did Biden morph from insufferable gasbag to Smoove McSwift?  I'll pull the lever for him, but... just don't make me sit through one of his speeches, please...]

Kevin: This is the best I could do Farmer Al Michael Kelly, The Washington Post, 3/24/99

The article is also in a collection of Michael Kelly's work that was published shortly after his death. I watched Bob Woodward read it on C-Span, and he had to keep stopping because the prose made him laugh. Good luck tracking it down.

ratner, if you get this far, hilarious post.

I've always liked the idea of not taking a sitting Democratic senator for the VP choice.  Either a governor of a state that can get a Democrat elected again, or someone like Gore, who's not directly involved in politics, but has the credentials for the post.

Oh, one more thing, as wrong as I think the notion is, I don't think the country is ready to elect  a Black president and a women vice president.  If that's been said before, then I'll second the motion.

This is what I've been saying.  It isn't all that crazy.  And Gore's absence from the convention lineup IS a clue (or not.)

Here's a crazy idea: how about making Gore the first Secretary of the Environment? Proposing an upgrade for the EPA to a full cabinet-level department with Captain Planet himself at the helm would sound a great first note for the Obama administration.

Alan - I don't get it.  According to the link you posted Gore is way ahead of Dukakis and Mondale in certain ket Southern states: 13% - 17% in Virginia, 8% ahead in Georgia, 3%-11% in North Carolina.  In fact, Gore out-performs either Dukakis or Mondale in all of the Southern states with the exception of Texas in '88, presumably because Texas Senator Lloyd Benson was on the ticket.

I think it's pretty clear from these numbers (as far as I can tell) that Gore's Southern roots helped him in the South.  Not enough to make the difference, but help him they did.  There is no question (in my mind at least) that Gore would help Obama in the South.  The question is how much and in which states.  Virginia and Florida look the most promising.

As for Jewish Florida, I agree with you that a 0.5% shift (i.e. a 1% swing) in the vote is generally not of much significance.  But in Florida which as a state is neatly divided into two, north red, south blue and the I-4 corridor purple, that 0.5% shift/ 1% swing just might make the difference.  

Did I misunderstand the numbers?

Look at the second set of numbers (the *relative* electoral performance).  Gore did better than Mondale and Dukakis in the South because he did better in general.  There's no evidence for a regional effect.  He did roughly as well in the South as you'd expect any Democrat to do given similar national numbers (e.g. Kerry).

Lamh.  I'm a little tired of all the big media and communication stunts Obama's team pulls with his campaign.  Of course I understand the whole "send us your cell number" as a way to increase his database.  But think who has cell phones and who text messages.  Those people are going to vote for him anyway.  He doesn't need more of them in a database.  He needs to expand beyond young hipsters and white middleclass yuppies.  I'm getting frustrated now.  Just make the announcement already.  Take a page from the McCain playbook here.  Set a date and deliver the decision.  I'm tired of the political theatre.  It plays into Obama's image of a shallow celebrity.  

Tammy- I think you're underestimating the number of people who have cell phones and use text messaging.  I'd say that virtually everyone under 40 has a cell phone, and 90% of under 30s use text messaging at least sometimes, if not constantly.  It's certainly not limited to "yuppies" and "hipsters."  

Also, remember that the issue isn't just getting people to support Obama, but getting them to go to the voting booth and cast a ballot for him.   That's historically been a major problem with the "youth vote."

If I were Obama, I'd be very sparing with my text messages, using them only for major announcements.  Then, in the week leading up the election, I'd be texting people every day to remind them to vote on Tuesday.  On the 4th, I'd send out blasts every few hours.  

ratner: great points, especially about using the texts to goad young people into voting. I hadn't considered that, and it's by far the best use of that technology that I heard to date. Much better than P-Diddy commercials.

Alright Mr. Crowley, I saw you on MSNBC last night hinting that we were all in for a surprise.  You know something now don't you Mikey, or you've heard something. Out with it then son, don't make us Water Board your ass.  :-)

Ratner.  you make my point even more clear- under 30s and under 40s are already onboard.  he should be pitching to older folks.  If texting these young people wins him the election, I'll certainly send you a $50 Ipod coupon.  Let's check back with each other November 5th.  :)  

Prop Joe.  I see you're also into Obama running a Britney-like campaign.  The first major decision of his candidacy and he sends it via text message.  I just can't take it seriously.  It's shallow symbolic meaning, to me, trumps anything he would gain in recruiting young people.  BTW, you're kidding yourselves if you think young voters -- under 30-- are going to give Obama a victory. They will not turn out like people expect.  Past elections are evidence of this.  College students need absentee ballots.  So sending text messages the week before the elction will not work.

Tammy,

Shouldn't he be pitching to BOTH younger and older people? Texting young people seems like a pretty painless way to get in touch with people using cell phones i.e. almost everyone I know, and I am middle-aged. I just don't see how using available technology to communicate with a large group of people in a painless way amounts to "running a Britney-like campaign." Should he take down his website and contact people via direct mail, radio and rotary landlines only? He should use every tool in the box, and he is.

Tammy-

1) Text messaging isn't the only option; you can also sign up to have the choice emailed to you.  

2)  Sub 40-year-olds aren't all onboard for Obama.  You're making it sound like this election just comes down to which age demographic votes more.  Younger and middle aged people are just as divided as seniors.  

3)  Why is this zero sum?  If Obama courts younger voters with text messages, why does this hurt him with older people?  Are they really so upset by new technology that they will turn against anyone who ventures to use it, even if it doesn’t affect them at all?  

4)  College students!  Most people under 40 -- most people under 25! -- are not college students.

AlanSP--

Prince Albert's father went to Congress in 1938, where he served continuously, except for a few months in the Army in 1944, until 1971. There was no time in his life that Gore's focus and actual home wasn't DC, with the exception of a couple of field trips, one of which was admittedly to Vietnam for which he deserves real credit given he could easily have opted out.

What ever else he may be, Gore is not much of a real Southerner.

Tammy - using technology is not a Britney campaign.  Even using John McCain's childish paradigm like that just sounds bitter and appears that you're sticking your head in the sand to what is happening in the era you live in. This didn't do any of the other primary candidates much good as I recall.

I don't know anyone under 60 (and everyone I know under 70) - except John McCain come to think of it -  that doesn't have a cell phone, if not a handheld, that they check regulalry.  That's even in very rural Pennsylvania.  In third world countries, even the poorest have cellphones and landlines are mostly being phased out.  

Folding ones arms and trying not to appear one way or the other (oh, better ignore technology so as not to offend a certain demographic) also strikes me as insincere and five alarm phony.  Better to be honest about who you are than pander like that.

Either you're using the tools available to you or you're run over by them.   This doesn't even fall in to the "using technology" realm anyway, its falls in to the "communicating with people" realm.  

Tammy,

Would you be in favor of BHO riding on the back of a train and touring this great land of ours while making speeches to local townspeople?

Texting is cost-effective mass media response that does work to keep in contact with supporters.

Seems very wise to me to employ effective strategies wherever possible.

Much as I love him, I think Gore would be a bad pick for Obama. McCain's attack machine will waste no time sinking their hooks into Gore, ridiculing the "elitist Hollywood choice" for his environmental advocacy, at a time when energy independence demands seeking *any feasible alternative* source, clean, dirty, environmentally insensitive if necessary. If you think the tire pressure gauge lampoon was half way effective, contemplate Gore's favored proposals: costly, long-term, idealistic - oh, yes, Channy will rail on about the both feet on Mars orientation of the ludicrous left.

Am I right??

Please, oh please, not Al. Seriously, the election would be lost for certain if Gore were Obama's VP. I shudder even to think about thinking about it. Almost any of the other possibles would be a better choice, sorry to say.

After endless rumination and media speculation, Barack Obama’s decision on a running mate is nigh. Nigh! Just how nigh, nobody is quite sure.

Tammy, I live in a mixed-race working-class neighborhood composed mainly of young families with fathers who work in the building trades and mothers who work in retail, Hispanic immigrants, black families with older children, and retirees on fixed incomes. A natural disaster a few years ago tilted the neighborhood decisively away from the gentrification that was just beginning, and the housing crisis has turned the neighborhood into majority rental for the first time. Any less elite and this neighborhood would actually be poor.

And yet every (non-vacant) household in the neighborhood has at least one cell phone, as the neighborhood association discovered when we did a disaster-preparedness survey. The big Hispanic family next door? Multiple cell phones. The elderly lady with brain cancer down the street? Cell phone. The guy who just got out of jail and moved back in with his retired mother? They both have cell phones, as does the cop who lives in the adjoining duplex. Fish, the electrician, and Larsen the HVAC expert immigrant from North Africa who spouts off against Mexicans? Cell phones. Henny, the retired Dutch expat? Cell phone. We've even seen the homeless guy who sleeps in the park and steals coins from unlocked cars talking on a mobile.

Nationally, there are more American households that have cell phones and no landline phones than there are households with no cell phones. According to the Census Bureau, 85 percent of adults have cell phones. Since when is it "elitism" to appeal to 85 percent of the voting public? At this point, it's about as "elitist" to communicate via cell phone as it is to advertise on cable television.

"Alright Mr. Crowley, I saw you on MSNBC last night hinting that we were all in for a surprise.  You know something now don't you Mikey, or you've heard something."

Hmmm, let's see - Mikey knows something...knows something...hmmmm...surprise

GOOD LORD, IT'S MARTY!!!

Powell-

He is a bloated douchebag and a prissy, holier-than-thou elitist with socialist overtones. I think that someone is projecting. Or getting their opinions from network television and AM radio. There was a video that Spike Jonze shot about Gore that, unfortunately, was not released prior to the 2000 election. It shows him at home in Tennessee with family. The only thing that stands out is how normal he is, and that he is kind of a goof. Maybe you need your candidates to be cooler, or overtly macho, rather than smart. Link:

video.google.com/videoplay

I heard Gore speak at the Columbine memorial, there was no stiffness. Rather, there was anger and questions about why it happened and what we were going to do to better serve our young people. Contrast that with the Jefferson County Schools commissioner who used such PC and inclusive language as to say absolutely nothing. I heard a broadcast on NPR from Ebenezer Baptist on MLK day several years ago where Gore spoke. He spoke with passion and conviction, and was at ease addressing the congregation (which should not be a surprise from an ex-divinity student and a Baptist).

Perhaps his detractors have to attack his media attributed persona because they are afraid of smart, pragmatic, and informed people of conviction that actually believe that the government can be used to govern for the benefit of citizens rather than corporations?  

All, what about the formality of the decision?  Isn't it one that commands respect and stature? Sending notification of this via text messaging strikes me, to be honest, as non-presidential.  How about a press conference, or some place where he can use his wonderful rhetorical skills to announce his choice and convey to us his logic in picking his running mate.  

You guys are really stretching my complaints to suggest I think he ought to abandon the technology highway.  This is where politics is headed and Obama spear-headed it.  We will forever be grateful to him for that.  I just have a problem with the gravity of the VP decision being announced this way.  It is his first presidential decision.  Text messages are trivial, efficient, playful and not what a VP decision should be.

See Robert's visceral reaction above for the problems associated with a Gore run. I think I hear Butchie loading his constitutionally approved gatlin handgun as well.

Maybe Gore's too Deep Green now.

Tammy asks, 1.) Shouldn't he be pitching to BOTH younger and older people? & 2.) "Should he take down his website and contact people via direct mail, radio and rotary landlines only?"

In the current TIME, Lev Grossman cites a few stats: "...35% of Americans over the age of 65 are online, if you look at the subset for McCains's race, gender and education the number is more like 75%." From '00 to '08 the percentage of Internet users went from 41.5% to 82%."

No, you won't find a business, organization or government agency that is not maximizing potential of the Internet. From banks to the bureau of motor vehicles most consumers are shifting to web transaction more rapidly than expected. Many online businesses are showing growth in spite of the recent energy price spike because...Well I think you might concede 82% of the population who is online are buying with their fingers rather than burning fuel.

Finally, you should know why McCain has announced a date when he will reveal his VP pick. [Hint, it's his 72nd birthday & the day after the Democratic Convention.]

It should be noted that McCain's website has copied nearly every feature from the Obama site. However, they added features piecemeal and it suffers from clutter and confusion.

Full disclosure: I began designing websites in the early 90's. I've heard all your protests, but they ceased around the turn of the century.

Gore's not the pick, guys.  CNN just ran a story that he'll be speaking on the final night of the convention, the same night as Barack.  

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../cnn-gore-to-speak-on-last_n_119830.html

Gore will speak on the last night of the Convention.  Relax y'all; he ain't gonna be VEEP.

Ratner and Sully you guys tie in the laugh of the day catagory.

On Gore, oh God noooooo.  

Gore is unimaginable for two reasons above all else.  He already held the job for 8 years and why would he want to do that to himself again?  Makes no sense, you just don't go backwards in a career, and this would be a huge step backwards for him at this time in his life.  

The second is he has serious issues that would be immediately exploited by McCain on his almighty image as the Climate God and his feet of clay issues surrounding his personal energy usage and the "paid for as a benefit" carbon offsets which no one really knows how they work and what to do with them problem.  This would explode in his and Obama's face the minute his name was presented and even if he has fixed the situation, which I haven't heard he has, the meme is out there and waiting to bite them on their collecitive asses if he would ever run for either the top of the ticket or VP.  The rooftop pool on the excessively large mansion is his Achilles Heel.

From CBS News report dated February 27, 2007:

The Gores used about 191,000 kilowatt hours in 2006, according to bills reviewed by The Associated Press spanning the period from Feb. 3, 2006, to Jan. 5. That is far more than the typical Nashville household, which uses about 15,600 kilowatt-hours per year.

His Nashville home is more than four times larger than the average new American home built last year — about 2,400 square feet, according to the National Association of Home Builders.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month, according to the Tennessee Center For Policy Research's release.

That is more than an average American family uses in an entire year."

This was the top Google hit when I plugged in Al Gore's mansion.  Regardless of anything else he does or says, this stuff is out there waiting to be plucked by any and everyone who is looking to smear him.  Obama doesn't need this kind of controversy in a VP and while no politician is as pure as the driven snow, there are some matters that are unforgivable to the conservatives and the talk show pundits (I use this term lightly) and will overshadow every message an Obama/Gore ticket would try to put out.

Michael.  You mis-quoted me.  I wrote about pointt 1 but not point 2.  I don't need a lecture from you or anyone else in technology, nor do I need one on demographics.  My occupation equips me very well in those respects.

Tammy,

Your position was indeed distorted: I did it and so did several other people. That said, your statements did seem pretty maximalist. A Britney-like campaign? C'mon. But the point you make in this last post is reasonable, something about which reasonable people can disagree.

I simply add that Obama is not replacing a presidential speech about his veep selection with the texts and emails (for the record, I signed up for the email only option); rather, he is setting up the speech with the prior notification. Again, I think this is a savvy plan. He's building a sense of community with his supporters, which might boost his GOTV effort on election day. This guy takes the ground game seriously, probably more seriously than anyone in recent memory. Note that Nate Silver has reported that Obama has something like 3 times as many field offices in operation than McCain, and these offices make important connections (one would hope) with potential voters. That is a dead-ass good idea. So I think, in this case, we can agree to disagree respectfully.

Tammy - you called Obama's campaign a Britney campaign - which you know is an inflammitory put down - for using email.  It's a bit much for you to get righteous about your knowledge of technology when called on it.  

Wandrey.  Why the defensiveness when I criticize Obama?  Certainly I am not the only one here to do so.  Perhaps people are still reeling from the McCain ad.  I think text messaging his VP choice is Britney-like, but I don't think he is.  Can you give me a break?  Please?  My point is about the weight of the VP decision.  If you can't see that, then there's not much else I can write.  People around here are so defensive about Obama. I won't miss it when I let my subscription expire.  In the mean time, I'll speak my mind.  

You're welcome to speak your mind, I've never suggested you don't.  But you also get to deal with the consequences of doing so, we all do.

But so many  of your criticisms lack substance Tammy - they are too often personlized mind reading about who Obama REALLY is and what he REALLY thinks, mostly about his ego problems or something. This is not substance.

Calling his campaign a Britney campaign falls in to substance-less criticism that says nothing about him.

Iggy Pop often has excellent critiques of Obama's campaign, they rarely if ever say anything about Obama's personality or ego or true motives.  Iggy P is almost always hard hitting too - and right.  

Thanks Alan, you may well be right.  It seems quite counter-intuitive but then I guess that's what polls are for.  

I wrote a quick e-mail to Nate regarding this.  When he gets back to me I'll be happy to share whatever insight he offers.

I'll tell you what Tammy - I'll criticize Obama:

I think he's been totally ineffectual fighting McCain and I want to throttle him for it.  He has let McCain define him, rather than the reverse. McCain has been so hypocritical and dishonest, I have no idea how Obama can just let it slide.  I don't know if its passivity - I certainly hope not - or by design, but it's not just weak - its wrong.  

Maybe Obama just doesn't get mad. I have friends who grew up in Hawaii, brilliant researchers both of them, who simply don't get angry. Its as if their cortisol never became activated.  But that is neither her nor there.  On substance, his not fighting back more is wrong.

Its his job to point out the stark differences in stark terms between the two candidates and he's not doing that.  Hoping for polite discouse on policy differences is a fools game.

I'm quite open to Hillary as VP because of this fundamental flaw in his campaign, I'm even bordering on hoping for it.  I know she'd suit up right away and get in there - unless she's still trying to sabotoge, who even cares, as long as she's jousting at McCain's level.

Gore is opening for Obama Thurs at Invesco.

Better yet, Gore-Obama!

Would Obama really pick a veep who so clearly outclasses him on depth, mastery of detail, gravitas? I'm not sure he can even afford to pick Biden at this point. The contrast doesn't flatter him. It makes a lot of voters wonder why #2 isn't at the top of the ticket.

Wandrey.  My criticisms are an amalgamation of the many editorials I read daily.  I'm not writing anything new here that others haven't already said.   Back when I got "Comment of the Day" people brutalized me, including you, for making what you called "unsubstantiated" claims.  Before and after I wrote that entry, the press ran several stories from more "reputable" peeps than me essentially saying the same thing.  Basically, if I took the time, I could have easily supplied links to support the claism I made that day and the ones I made above.  But like you, I have a day job.  

Please be careful about the standard you set for posters here.  If everyone had to provide scientific or any other type of "evidence' (that passes some invisible threshold) to back up their claims, the blogs would be empty.  Don't require of me what you don't of others.  There is plenty of "opinion" around here.  

I never question your claims, judgment or opinions, even if I disagree with them. I respect your second entry here and agree with it (not that, that matters).  Thanks for writing.  You too Prop Joe and Michael.

Now, let's find some way to get Obama on offense and in the business of framing McCain without tarnishing his brand.  

Well?  Your comment of the day was almost entirely personal - what he really thinks and what his real ego problems were - and you were called out pretty intensely for it, which seemed fair to me.  Because editorialists do the same thing doesn't make it credible.  I don't need links or any other form of reference to decide something doesn't have alot of substance.  I need no links, no science.

Obama is not Paris Hilton, and the construct was invented by Rovian ghouls who have trained this country to think like idiots against their own self interest.  It's a toxin I don't have much patience for.  I don't care if Albert Einstein says Obama is Britney, its still wrong and worse: meaningless.  I still have a hard time believing how little the last eight years have been attacked while we have these discussions that Rove has defined.  It brings me to despair.

I watch everyone getting sucked in to the same dynamic that has driven this country into a ditch and I'm not going quietly - Republican plutocrats hiring Rove to turn Democrats into arugula eaters  while the press, and too often fellow Democrats, sit on the sidelines and help.  The whole dynamic is sickening.

Now saying Obama hasn't been fighting back at their level IS substance and a fair critique.  Saying I know the REAL reason (he's a coward, he's disengaged, he's an egghead, fil in the blank) is when we ver off into solipsism.

I have taken to calling McCain an airhead, which seems pretty apparent to me.  I still can't say exactly what his real self is or his real motive.  I wouldn't try.

I think Obama would turbo charge his brand if he attacked with vigor immediately.  The field is wide open and McCain is a hypocritical sitting duck.  If Obama doesn't go in for the kill on such a fat target, then he doesn't understand this game in the first place.

Wandre, nice retort.

tep, I'm glad to see that now that even if Obama does what you'd like -- in fact pick the running mate you wanted him to pick just days ago -- you're still going to be mad and not support him. I'm not going to say it is surprising that there are people cannot be pleased commenting on a liberal weblog. Clueless liberals just wouldn't be the same if they could ever figure out how politics worked. But I am surprised that to read what you think on a screen you're willing to pony $30/year.

The again, it's cheaper than therapy. And, clearly, less effective.

Tep: "It makes a lot of voters wonder why #2 isn't at the top of the ticket." Not at all.  The primaries - and democracy in general - are not set up to elect the most qualified or the most experienced, but best politician.  The best we can hope for is that the one who manages to climb the greasy pole to the top is marginally competent and not corrupt; the rest is gravy.  The system backfired badly in 2000 for the country ... and it still might do so this time.  But, short of creating an undemocratic "meritocratic" hell, this is about the best we can hope for.

Obama or McCain: that'd be choice.

Haha, touche, Barney. Yeah, maybe that $30's better spent elsewhere. Dollar's rising; maybe I can get a nice bottle of Pauillac this year for $30.

I think Obama's recent attacks, highlighted in TNR are encouraging and very effective. More of the same. People shouldn't panic with McCain's recent surge, it's all FP related and in time I think the electorate will see him for the unstable, risky, regressive gamble that he is.

Wandrey - Go raibh maith agat cara.

Michael Crowley stumped for Al Gore yesterday. Not only stumped for Gore but predicted he was the man

Bottom line here is that you guys can't stand criticism of Obama.  It's just like the primary days around here.  You applaud the posters who are pro-Obama and take down anyone else, using ever-shifting criteria.  Wandrey, you ingnored me again.  And get over my Comment of the Day.  I'm sure it makes you and others feel better that you took me down for it, but what I wrote I still stand by.  You just don't like the words I used, including today's "Britney."  Sensitive, sensitive.  Go ahead and keep the daggers coming.  I'll be your Hillary, the "Rove-like democrat who's taking down the precious young candidate of hope."  

One last point, that your side has more support here gives you false consciousness of being correct, grounded, substantial, etc.  Enjoy it.  The TNR blogs are about Obama cheerleading.  I hope his 1-2 point poll spread lately gives you something to cheer about.  It makes me very nervous about and very angry at Obama.

"Obama is not Paris Hilton"

Is that a text message?

TammyA: I have enjoyed your spirited and logical defence of Hillary, as well as your spirited and passionate takedown of McCain.  I think we all have - even though of course I can't speak for anyone but myself.

And speaking for myself, I have to confess that while I totally understand your "gravity" concern, the Britney comment was, IMHO, uncalled for, even if it is in reference to the campaign rather than Obama.  Frankly, I was disappointed, because it played in the sandbox that McCain is trying to set for Obama.  After all, Britney is not an ad person and for all we know, she knows nothing about cell-phones.  And there is nothing inherently "celebrity" in cells or text messaging.

The question is whether texting makes the announcement less serious, almost trivial.  I have been living in Europe for most of the past ten years, and there, texting is a fact of life; it is somewhat newer here and I suspect that that novelty of medium (plus its acknowledged informality) is what is driving your concern.  I suspect - no, I lie, in fact, I know (at least, I have read it in numerous modern histories) that for every medium emergent there was a similar concern.  And the concerns were at the same time realised and unfounded: TV, for example, has trivialised the news, but more people get a better sense of the candidate than before, etc.

And so it is with texting.  It is possible that they went a bit overboard, but I think that the Obama campaign is playing it strategically here as well: a loss of gravity in return for two million cell phones that could have enormous benefits on voting day.  Looking at the strategic value, I am willing to accept the marginal cheapening that texting comes with.

As for your anger at Obama - it is also understandable - for God's sake, even Wandrey is pissed off and Crowley is about to go insane out of concern.  Two points.  First, let us agree that Obama cannot show any sign of anger or of appearing to attack McCain's honour.  He has to keep his cool and keep to his Marc Antony-like "Brutus is an honourable man" routine.  Second, we also know that he IS capable of hitting back, of ruthlessly dropping friends and allies and moving in for the kill.  I think he is waiting for the VP candidate to do the slash and burn.  If, after the Convention, the campaign (and not just Obama) failed to realise on its strategic strengths in going after McCain, at that point, I'd join your anger - but not before.  For now, there is no cause for nervousness, and much cause for guarded optimism.

Look even Tep was nauseated by McCain's patriotism attack.  Now, that's something. :-)

Peace, please - we're all on the same side.

Sarà Gore? Sarà un caso, ma tra i big democratici annunciati nella quattro giorni di Denver l'unico nome che che manca è quello Al Gore. Forse perché sarà lui il vicepresidente? PS In quel caso sarebbe figo se McCain

If Gore were to run for VP, all the goodwill and respect he's acquired in the past few years would dissapear instantaneously and, in the eyes of the press, he'd become a mentally disturbed, lying smarty-pants again.  In a heartbeat.  

TammyA, you're wasting time debating with WandreyCer. She wrote that Hilary wanted to murder Obama back in May or June. This is who you're dealing with.