|
|
Post by pjohns1873 on Apr 26, 2014 6:10:04 GMT
Al Gore was recently asked if he plans to run again for president--some 16 years after the 2000 race against George W. Bush--in 2016. His response:
That would seem to be a tap dance in place of a direct answer. Or mere politician-speak for a maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Apr 28, 2014 12:40:33 GMT
Al Gore was recently asked if he plans to run again for president--some 16 years after the 2000 race against George W. Bush--in 2016.
I'd stick with the odds that it's a 200/1 shot against it based upon a 2012 odds making study.
www.2016election.com/2016-democratic-presidential-nomination-odds/
I'm not all that good at following the vast majority of possible Republican or Democratic contenders instead focusing on those that seem to come to the forefront and for the Democrats I'd say that Elizabeth Warren seems to be the best of those I've looked at. She's one hell of a lot better than Hillary Clinton and is the most electable from the standpoint of Independent voters. I don't see any of the potential Republican candidates I'm aware of having any chance agianst Warren who, from what I've read, is a relative moderate Democrat.
Al Gore just carries too much political baggage IMO. Gore could certainly defeat any "Tea Party" Republican but might have a tougher time if the Republicans could find a moderate Republican to run.
|
|
|
|
Post by pjohns1873 on Apr 28, 2014 19:11:44 GMT
Al Gore was recently asked if he plans to run again for president--some 16 years after the 2000 race against George W. Bush--in 2016.
I'd stick with the odds that it's a 200/1 shot against it based upon a 2012 odds making study.
www.2016election.com/2016-democratic-presidential-nomination-odds/
I'm not all that good at following the vast majority of possible Republican or Democratic contenders instead focusing on those that seem to come to the forefront and for the Democrats I'd say that Elizabeth Warren seems to be the best of those I've looked at. She's one hell of a lot better than Hillary Clinton and is the most electable from the standpoint of Independent voters. I don't see any of the potential Republican candidates I'm aware of having any chance agianst Warren who, from what I've read, is a relative moderate Democrat.
Al Gore just carries too much political baggage IMO. Gore could certainly defeat any "Tea Party" Republican but might have a tougher time if the Republicans could find a moderate Republican to run.
I tend to agree with your assessment that it remains a longshot that Al Gore will actually run again for president. And I also agree that Eizabeth Warren is probably the strongest potential challenger to Hillary Clinton, if both should decide to run. However, I would certainly not characterize Ms. Warren as "moderate." She is a left-wing populist. In fact, the UK periodical, The New Statesman, listed her, in 2012, as being among the "Top-20 U.S Progressives," along with Paul Krugman, Michael Moore, Noam Comsky, and Rachel Maddow. |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Apr 29, 2014 10:45:52 GMT
You could be right on Warren as I really haven't followed her actual positions on much of anything. My knowledge about her is limited to about two issues that I actually looked into and she had a reasonable position on both and two issues is hardly adequate in evaluating a person's political position.
Pretty much any Democrat would be better than Hillary Clinton including Al Gore IMO. |
|
