General Discussion

yurbud

(39,405 posts)

95. that's good to know if true. I'm mainly impressed by her relatively anti-war stance and

Reply to grantcart (Reply #74)

Sat Apr 15, 2017, 08:36 PM

Apr 2017

honesty about foreign policy.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

130 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Al Gore could unite business & progressive Democrats in 2020. [View all] yurbud Apr 2017 OP

NO! NO, NO, NO, NO!!!! randome Apr 2017 #1

Totally agree Freddie Apr 2017 #2

I keep discounting the septuagenarians but yes, there are exceptions to that 'rule'. randome Apr 2017 #17

Al Franken is 65. n/t lapucelle Apr 2017 #28

Close enough! randome Apr 2017 #39

of "retreads" I'd take Gore over Clinton yurbud Apr 2017 #11

Where does your comment here even come from? Nt NCTraveler Apr 2017 #15

reply to #1 yurbud Apr 2017 #125

No, not without a stretch. Nt NCTraveler Apr 2017 #126

WE GET IT, YOU HATE CLINTON Skittles Apr 2017 #122

I do not "hate" her. I vote for policies and I'm looking for common ground yurbud Apr 2017 #129

Sad to discard former candidates as "Retreads." delisen Apr 2017 #23

Well, Clinton's age was no doubt a factor. randome Apr 2017 #41

Sanders was the old one wasn't he? I guess some were afraid he'd have a stroke delisen Apr 2017 #51

I didn't get the sense that her age was factor. lapucelle Apr 2017 #53

Clinton's visual impression makes her bad candidate? Germans more progressive? delisen Apr 2017 #54

Nonsense. She was a year younger than DT and 5 years younger than Bernie. pnwmom Apr 2017 #108

+1 BannonsLiver Apr 2017 #56

The truth doesn't always work in elections, though. randome Apr 2017 #81

It's unfair that Bush won! It's unfair that trump won! MOVE ON! William769 Apr 2017 #77

I seriously thought they could not do worse than Palin. Man, was I wrong. randome Apr 2017 #80

Still, can they go lower than THIS? TrollBuster9090 Apr 2017 #128

Sad to be still looking for Great Male Hope Leader. delisen Apr 2017 #3

I would be very happy to see Elizabeth Warren or Tulsi Gabbard get the nomination yurbud Apr 2017 #12

I wouldn't count on Gabbard keeping her seat in congress. nt oasis Apr 2017 #20

she has pissed off establishment by calling bullshit on regime change--that will be a positive with yurbud Apr 2017 #61

Gabbard's clumsy attempt to provide cover for Assad's chemical attack oasis Apr 2017 #65

I think it time for the Human Rights push-the dictators are closing in on us. delisen Apr 2017 #97

Unity comes when you stop digging the trench with the shovel-weapons. delisen Apr 2017 #31

Gabbard, the next POTUS? lunamagica Apr 2017 #34

Tulsi Gabbard? Hah! No Dinos please. brush Apr 2017 #45

I don't care for her. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #62

Tulsi Gabbard...are you out of your friggin' mind??!!?? malchickiwick Apr 2017 #48

Tulsi Gabbard-amateurism in foreign policy? in human rights, high tolerance delisen Apr 2017 #52

Our government doesn't go to war over human rights, dictatorship, or even terrorism yurbud Apr 2017 #68

Bill Clinton went into Yugoslavia to stop human rights abuses....so Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #76

do you stop human rights abuses using depleted uranium, backing Islamic terrorists, and leaving yurbud Apr 2017 #111

Baloney...Alternet is rewriting history...there is no question about the Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #112

That wasn't Alternet, that was Naomi Klein reposted there. yurbud Apr 2017 #114

Naomi Klein is a Clinton hater and pretty much hates the Democratic Party too. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #116

which part do you dispute? yurbud Apr 2017 #115

The reason for getting involved which Bill Clinton was reluctant to do... Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #117

she ascribes economic motives which historically turn out to be true. It goes without saying... yurbud Apr 2017 #118

Righ,t lets think of a convoluted reason so we can find a reason to trash Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #119

In Hawaii they are not as impressed with Gabbard's Trump friendly attitude grantcart Apr 2017 #74

that's good to know if true. I'm mainly impressed by her relatively anti-war stance and yurbud Apr 2017 #95

Warren is fine but Tulsi Gabbard is a piece of shit. phleshdef Apr 2017 #92

Tulsi Gabbard??? She visited DT in the Trump tower pnwmom Apr 2017 #109

Its sad that you have a gender requirement at all. phleshdef Apr 2017 #91

It's interesting that supporting men is not considered a "gender requirement" athena Apr 2017 #120

I voted for a woman in 2016. phleshdef Apr 2017 #121

I can guarantee you that you will be voting for a man next time, athena Apr 2017 #123

... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2017 #4

BAD IDEA! MoonRiver Apr 2017 #5

Your idea is valid. He was the vice president under Bill Clinton. The caroldansen Apr 2017 #6

Best we ever had? GulfCoast66 Apr 2017 #96

The Al Gore that ran for President almost twenty years ago? bluedigger Apr 2017 #7

No, the Al Gore who won the Nobel Peace Prize lapucelle Apr 2017 #57

No please jehop61 Apr 2017 #8

After Donald those treestar Apr 2017 #10

Please advise us of the outcome of the "hooker scandal." Are you smearing? delisen Apr 2017 #24

I looked up that "hooker" scandal. It was a masseuse who claimed he assaulted her yurbud Apr 2017 #35

A "hooker scandal"? Just where do you think you are? n/t kcr Apr 2017 #110

It might work if he's given up on being "nice" . lpbk2713 Apr 2017 #9

Or if he hadn't sold his television station DK504 Apr 2017 #18

Did you want Gore to oppose the decision of the US Supreme Court? delisen Apr 2017 #26

This is a fresh approach to bash Hillary nini Apr 2017 #13

Is that what it is? DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2017 #22

I think Churchill was the right person for Britain after War was declared. delisen Apr 2017 #49

Very nicely put. N/T lapucelle Apr 2017 #55

Well said. JHan Apr 2017 #105

Yes. fifth columns are always with us. delisen Apr 2017 #27

Thanks for pointing that out. It is a bit backhanded, R B Garr Apr 2017 #30

I thought the same. JHan Apr 2017 #63

so we can only have one even possible nominee ever? I could see that with FDR. Otherwise... yurbud Apr 2017 #87

Did I say that? nini Apr 2017 #90

it's implied when even entertaining the idea of another possible candidate is "bashing" yurbud Apr 2017 #94

in your world perhaps nini Apr 2017 #100

THAT is actually a fresh approach to bashing her. Pretending her fans are blind sycophants not... yurbud Apr 2017 #88

YES Skittles Apr 2017 #124

The "only one" argument needs to die. NCTraveler Apr 2017 #14

Tell me...what campaign message of his particularly appealed to you? brooklynite Apr 2017 #16

He said he was for the people, not the powerful. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2017 #21

Lock box. Climate change. There were quite R B Garr Apr 2017 #25

I saw that trailer in the theater, and it took my R B Garr Apr 2017 #19

Do we have to keep going back to those old Clinton-era retreads? The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2017 #29

Experience as retreads. We don't need no stinking experience. Celebrity is what we need. delisen Apr 2017 #37

There are plenty of people working in the party now The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2017 #40

Both Hillary and Gore have had successful lapucelle Apr 2017 #58

They should stick to those successful careers. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2017 #75

Would you rather have Hillary going back to being a senator lapucelle Apr 2017 #89

If she wants to run for the Senate again, that's fine with me. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2017 #93

I am one of the people of her state. lapucelle Apr 2017 #98

The Republican noise machine would make mince meat out of him with his own words. Binkie The Clown Apr 2017 #32

I don't know. The rising temperatures may make him look like a savior- delisen Apr 2017 #44

good points yurbud Apr 2017 #79

Have the republicans ever cared what liberals would think of their candidates? JHan Apr 2017 #107

Wait...in 2000 Gore was falsely painted as lapucelle Apr 2017 #33

In 2000 Republicans bankrolled Nader's run against Gore. Are they smarter than we are? delisen Apr 2017 #42

They know how to cultivate and exploit useful idiots from all sides. lapucelle Apr 2017 #46

2000 should have been a turning point in a lot of ways yurbud Apr 2017 #50

lol threadwinner lol. JHan Apr 2017 #64

An excellent public servant, but a poor candidate, so Not a good idea nt IphengeniaBlumgarten Apr 2017 #36

We can't go back in time. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2017 #38

Call Joe Lieberman! ZX86 Apr 2017 #43

OK, that's the best argument against Gore--worst VP pick this side of Palin yurbud Apr 2017 #86

O'Malley will try again. There's Warren, Franken and hopefully some young bloods will emerge brush Apr 2017 #47

Fair or Not, Al Gore is seen as a loser. Glitterati Apr 2017 #59

We need someone new. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #60

Unless Presidential campaigns are dramatically shortened and issues-focused, forget it. Buckeye_Democrat Apr 2017 #66

The one the far lefted labeled as no different than Bush Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2017 #67

He did quite well among self-identified liberals. Buckeye_Democrat Apr 2017 #69

Here is the trailer for Gore's new movie. THIS is what we could have had! R B Garr Apr 2017 #70

I think Howard Schultz is going to run Thrill Apr 2017 #71

I think Dems need to move on to new faces. davsand Apr 2017 #72

That is a terrible idea. Voltaire2 Apr 2017 #73

Gore is my hero but Americans don't vote for... jg10003 Apr 2017 #78

This message was self-deleted by its author ismnotwasm Apr 2017 #82

I could support Al Gore Gothmog Apr 2017 #83

FUCK THOSE WHO DIDN'T SUPPORT GORE IN 2000 JI7 Apr 2017 #84

Word. cheapdate Apr 2017 #106

What an uninspiring choice then and now. alarimer Apr 2017 #85

Too risky mvd Apr 2017 #99

WTF are you smoking? nycbos Apr 2017 #101

I truly LOVE Al, but I want to see someone who will be under 70 running. Lisa0825 Apr 2017 #102

What next we going to dig up a corpse to run. I like Al Gore, I like Hillary Clinton doc03 Apr 2017 #103

I used to want him to run again very very much. Warren DeMontague Apr 2017 #104

I hope he runs and others as well TNLib Apr 2017 #113

Gore and Biden both do, but... TrollBuster9090 Apr 2017 #127

He conceded too quickly for my taste. WinkyDink Apr 2017 #130