If you needed a clear indicator that Hillary Clinton is in big trouble, the recent spate of articles about a potential presidential run by Al Gore should satisfy you. For those of you who don't recall, Gore was vice president under Bill Clinton and he ran and lost the race for president in 2000 in the cliffhanger. Parties generally don't bring back losers sixteen years later, particularly if that loser has not been in politics in the interim.
Gore was a terrible candidate in 2000. If he had not been so wooden, he would have won that election. Now, Gore is an older, grayer and fatter version of that losing candidate. Gore is also a spokesman for the global warming movement, but he has used that position to make himself a large fortune. He also made a foray into cable TV. The effort was a total failure, but he managed to extricate himself from the attempt by selling his network to Al Jazeera. My guess is that Al Jazeera would like to undo that transaction in which it paid half a billion dollars for a network which now gets an average prime time audience of less than ten thousand viewers.
The reality is that there is no way that Al Gore could ever be the Democrat nominee in 2016. Martin O'Malley has a better chance. Maybe even Lincoln Chaffee has a better chance. No one in their right mind would speculate about Gore unless they were seriously frightened that Hillary is going down for the count. Having the FBI seize computer systems to look for classified materials has a way of tarnishing a candidacy.
In any event, I have to wonder. If Al Gore is back on the Democrats' radar, can George McGovern be far behind. He ran and lost 44 years ago (to Richard Nixon). It is true that McGovern passed away in recent years, but he still would seem more lifelike than Gore.
Gore was a terrible candidate in 2000. If he had not been so wooden, he would have won that election. Now, Gore is an older, grayer and fatter version of that losing candidate. Gore is also a spokesman for the global warming movement, but he has used that position to make himself a large fortune. He also made a foray into cable TV. The effort was a total failure, but he managed to extricate himself from the attempt by selling his network to Al Jazeera. My guess is that Al Jazeera would like to undo that transaction in which it paid half a billion dollars for a network which now gets an average prime time audience of less than ten thousand viewers.
The reality is that there is no way that Al Gore could ever be the Democrat nominee in 2016. Martin O'Malley has a better chance. Maybe even Lincoln Chaffee has a better chance. No one in their right mind would speculate about Gore unless they were seriously frightened that Hillary is going down for the count. Having the FBI seize computer systems to look for classified materials has a way of tarnishing a candidacy.
In any event, I have to wonder. If Al Gore is back on the Democrats' radar, can George McGovern be far behind. He ran and lost 44 years ago (to Richard Nixon). It is true that McGovern passed away in recent years, but he still would seem more lifelike than Gore.
No comments:
Post a Comment