HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I agree with everyone who...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:04 PM

I agree with everyone who suggests that Al Gore should be the new SOS

He would be a great Secretary of State particularly since Climate Change will have to be taken more seriously post Sandy

26 replies, 1914 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 26 replies Author Time Post
Reply I agree with everyone who suggests that Al Gore should be the new SOS (Original post)
malaise Dec 2012 OP
TDale313 Dec 2012 #1
xchrom Dec 2012 #2
peacebird Dec 2012 #3
texshelters Dec 2012 #4
Gregorian Dec 2012 #5
texshelters Dec 2012 #20
Aldo Leopold Dec 2012 #8
texshelters Dec 2012 #21
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #9
texshelters Dec 2012 #22
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #25
LiberalAndProud Dec 2012 #12
LiberalAndProud Dec 2012 #15
texshelters Dec 2012 #24
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #6
Berlum Dec 2012 #7
cali Dec 2012 #10
TrollBuster9090 Dec 2012 #11
malaise Dec 2012 #17
TrollBuster9090 Dec 2012 #19
tomm2thumbs Dec 2012 #13
TrollBuster9090 Dec 2012 #14
JI7 Dec 2012 #18
ChisolmTrailDem Dec 2012 #16
Coyotl Dec 2012 #23
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #26

Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:08 PM

1. Love that suggestion. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:12 PM

2. Du rec. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:14 PM

3. Wonderful idea!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:32 PM

4. He didn't fight to win the election in 2000

and for me, that disqualifies Gore. There are better choices, and I don't mean Susan Rice. I need to look at all the options before coming up with a recommendation. I need binders full of candidates.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texshelters (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:46 PM

5. Ha, and that was one of the reasons I thought he'd be good as SOS.

Don't get me wrong, I hear what you're saying. But it seems to me that in diplomacy one must take both sides into consideration. And be moderate. I hate moderation, by the way. But I think this could make Gore the perfect choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gregorian (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:37 PM

20. I think we need to move away

from the Clinton-Gore period, but Gore is a million times better than Rice.

PTxS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texshelters (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:42 PM

8. He didn't fight to win the 2000 election?

Seriously? Just how do you define "fight"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aldo Leopold (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:40 PM

21. Conceding a month

before the inaguration and saying, "It needed to be done for unity." I just didn't see any fire in him or desire to be president. He must have been worn out. There were some legal efforts, but you bet LBJ or even Bill Clinton would have made a better case for the office. I think one can be diplomatic and strong. Surprisingly, while I am not a huge H. Clinton fan, she has done well with the situation given.

PTxS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texshelters (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:46 PM

9. That has to be one of the most ridiculous

and factually innacurate statements that I've ever seen on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:42 PM

22. Thanks for the insult, that must make you feel all strong and verile

His speeches and comment make it look like Gore didn't want the office at all. Sure, the lawyers fought for him, but he lacked the fire necessary for the battle.

He lacks fire in general. So perhaps my statement was poorly worded, but his technocratic ways, failed him in this instance.

PTxS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texshelters (Reply #22)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:19 PM

25. Not an insult but a statement of reality.

Word of advice, if you're going to take every disagreement so personally; maybe you shouldn't post factless opinions on a public message board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texshelters (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:54 PM

12. This accusation is made periodically.

I never do get an answer. Exactly where should he have taken the fight after the Supreme Court ruled against him?

Maybe you have the answer, but I doubt it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:09 AM

15. Just as I thought.

Hours go by and nothing but ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:47 PM

24. With such a positive attitude, I'm surprised no one answers you...

His speeches and statements after the election and his efforts to just "get along" after the court ruled against him indicates that he lacks the fire to represent my concerns. He fought with lawyers, but didn't take the case of the disenfranchised voters to the people or say much about it after it was over. If he had taken up the cause of voter roll purges and other election fraud we would be much better off for it. But he played the good politician and kept mum.

Sure, he's a million times better than Rice and perhaps the best of a poor list of choices.

PTxS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:39 PM

6. Good idea - he is near the top of my list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:40 PM

7. Love it

Bring it on !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:52 PM

10. I don't get fantasy politics. Al Gore is not under consideration for SoS

He has no particular ties with the President. He will not be nominated. He is no longer in politics. This isn't much more likely than Yogi Bear being nominated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:53 PM

11. Heh, heh. I'm still standing by my own suggestion that

1. Joe Biden should handle the Fiscal Cliff negotiations, because he's a master of politics, and then in January he should
2. Resign, and move over to Secretary of State, because it's a job he's always wanted. Obama should (at least) appoint Rice as Secretary of State during the RECESS, until Biden can be approved by the Senate. And then,
3. Obama should nominate Christine Gregoire to be the first female VP.

(Yes, this is Constitutional. VPs have resigned in the past, and the replacement is nominated by the President and approved by the Senate. Reminder: This is how Gerald Ford got to be VP when Nixon's VP Spiro Agnew resigned.)

VP GREGOIRE


Secretary of State BIDEN


This would give Biden a job he always wanted, and which he'd be good at, and broaden the female field for 2016, giving at least two high profile women (Clinton AND Gregoire) a serious shot at the nomination.


Barring that....(and assuming Rice doesn't want the job, or is completely sabotaged) I'd nominate BILL RICHARDSON. If you've read Richardson's book "Leading By Example" you'll know that he also advocates ENERGY POLICY as a big factor in Foreign Policy. At least as much as Gore does.




In either case, I would definitely let Rice be NOMINATED, and then let the nomination hearings drag on for a month, as Senate Republicans throw all sorts of mud at a highly qualified African American woman, driving down their approval numbers from women and African Americans even further. And then, if they succeed in sabotaging her nomination, nominate Richardson, and watch them do the same thing to a Latino.

Then Obama should nominate the next two Supreme Court Justice replacements (and there will be at least two) who are either women and/or visible minorities, but also happen to be liberal, and watch the Senate Republicans self destruct even more, as they try to block the nominations. By continuing to knee-jerkedly oppose every nomination Obama makes, they'll hand the Democratic party a perfect opportunity to make it impossible for the Republicans to make inroads with women and visible minorities.

I guess the one thing we all agree on is that it SHOULDN'T be Kerry, given that this would just give Scott Brown another (good) chance to capture the Senate seat from Massachusetts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrollBuster9090 (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:09 AM

17. Interesting post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:22 PM

19. Thank you! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:13 PM

13. Pound me if u like


Not speaking to this position, but Arnold Schwarzenegger might be an interesting distraction for the GOP to place somewhere in the Obama administration, especially since he endorsed Obama's health care efforts and supported individuals right to same-sex marriage (despite his own personal convictions, eventually even marrying same-sex couples while in office) and never endorsed Romney while noting he was undecided and that Barack Obama was going to win re-election.

Anything to make the GOP idiots' heads explode and serve the country.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomm2thumbs (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:35 PM

14. Heheh...along the same lines, I might nominate Jon Huntsman. And for the same reason.

It will make Republican ESTABLISHMENT heads explode (not the base, obviously), if Obama is POACHING one of the three or so rational, moderate Republicans left in the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tomm2thumbs (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:24 AM

18. Arnold is a joke and trying to get support with his fake support of Obama

he actually tried to campaign with Obama but the campaign said no. hahahahha

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:19 AM

16. Do we know if he's on the short list? Has he ever

expressed interest in the job?

Man, that would be the best freakin' pick the President could make? I will be tweeting every relevant hashtag as well as President Obama and President Gore!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:43 PM

23. Who suggested that one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:31 PM

26. Great idea. First I've heard of it.

Democratic Presidents should consider nomination ideas from a broad range of good ideas like this from the rank and file democrats. Instead of just considering of nominees from a small group of elitists. End cronyism. The people should have input on decisions, beyond just choosing between two choices once every four years.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread