Reply #47: He said that he didn't expect to be a candidate but he didn't rule it out

[Larkspur]

That may be why David Podvin said that progressives should encourage Gore to run and support him; else what we have are longshot anti-war candidates and war criminal Dems to choose from, and yes, Hillary is a war criminal Dem because she supports the Iraq venture. If Hillary is the nominee, she will be tongue-tied over Iraq, just like Kerry was. She's banking on people being tired of the Repuke regime to win the White House, but once inside the WH she'll continue the PNAC agenda, aka the PPI agenda.

Gore knows that he won't get the DLC backing, so the only group who could make a pitch and support him over the DLC is a coalition of progressives who want a viable anti-war candidate who has extensive experience in government. The only one who really fits that bill is Al Gore.

Gore will always be a politician. Just like alchololics can't really be free of their addiction, neither can Gore be free of politics.

The feature film that Gore is working on and will be released at the end of this year could go a long way to determining if progressives should support Gore. That and the 2006 elections may determine if Gore wants to run.