Predictions on Al Gore's 2008 Endorsement

Media types are busy speculating who Al Gore will endorse in 2008. He has said he expects to make an endorsement before the primaries.

No one expects Gore to endorse Hillary. I suspect he will endorse Obama, who has been campaigning for his endorsement (as have John Edwards and Chris Dodd. Neither Hillary, Biden nor Richardson have met with Dodd.)

In 2004, Gore endorsed Howard Dean. A month later, Dean was history.

Does Gore's endorsement matter? As much or more than Oprah's?

< Joe Biden Says He Won't Cut off War Funding | Larry Craig to File Motion to Withraw Plea Monday >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Oprah's endorsement - (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by dkmich on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 02:43:23 PM EST
     frankly Scarlett, I don't give a damn.

    Given Gore's endorsement (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:13:37 PM EST
    is apparently the kiss of oblivion, why would Hillary Clinton pay him a call?

    Frankly... (none / 0) (#4)
    by jr on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:27:09 PM EST
    ...I'd be more worried about Joe Trippi's endorsement than Gore's (see also: Simon Rosenberg, John Bonifaz, Jan Schneider).

    His stock is up since '04 (none / 0) (#2)
    by jr on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:21:10 PM EST
    After Katrina and three more years in Iraq (plus the Oscar nod), I think Gore now carries more clout than he did in '04.  Whether it's enough clout to actually have an impact, I don't know, but I tend to think personal endorsements on the whole are usually worth little more than a few news cycles and a quick influx of cash, neither of which is inherently sufficient to win a nomination.  The supporters of the "Draft Gore" movement have, for the most part, already figured out their #2 choices, and I don't know if Gore's endorsement of another candidate would be enough to get them to change their minds.

    Gore's endorsement would be (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:23:37 PM EST
    meaningful if he would tie it to getting out of Iraq, but he hasn't really spoken up on that issue.

    I'd say there's a very good chance (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:30:42 PM EST
    that he'll endorse Hillary. I'd say there's an almost even chance that he'll endorse anyone not named Kucininch or Gravel.

    In 2004 Gore was a loser (none / 0) (#6)
    by Mr Grohl on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:34:41 PM EST
    His endorsement then did nothing for Dean because Gore was largely seen as irrelevant at that time. That is not the case today. As everyone knows, Gore's stature is greater today than it has ever been. I think his endorsement, should it come, will be important. In particular, Gore is so well respected among the netroots and the Left in general that his endorsement would have the potential to unify the non-Hillary (please note I'm being careful here not to say anti-Hillary) crowd behind that candidate. If he endorsed Obama it would be the end of Edwards' candidacy and the end of Obama's if he endorses Edwards. Can anyone here who's not already a Hillary supporter (nothing against Hillary supporters) honestly say that they WOULDN"T give very serious consideration to a Gore endorsement, even if he endorses a candidate that you currently aren't supporting?

    From Hillary Project: (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:48:17 PM EST
    "Uh...no," the former vice president told 02138 magazine when asked if he feels "some obligation" to endorse the senator from New York.

    "I have friendships with her and with other candidates, and they're all on equal footing at this point as far as I'm concerned," he said.

    In other words ... (none / 0) (#8)
    by robrecht on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 01:52:54 PM EST
    For now it's in a lock-box.

    I may be wrong (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dulcinea on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 02:19:46 PM EST
    but I thought former VP Gore said he will be influenced by the candidates' global warming plan.

    When he appeared before the Senate to discuss global warming, and it was Senator Clinton's turn to question him, Mrs. Gore was looking at someone (Hillary?) with looks that could kill.  If true, Tipper will kill any Clinton endorsement.

    At any rate, I don't think he'll influence people as much through his endorsement as he would if he were a candidate himself and so many would absolutely vote for him.

    You are probably right, (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 02:21:50 PM EST
    and people who care who he endorses will be those whose main issue is climate change.

    You may be wrong in some of your particulars (none / 0) (#16)
    by CMike on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 01:36:29 AM EST
    It's hard to know where to begin with this ugly conduct. But since Borger wasn't present at the Gore hearing--and we were--let's start with Sunday's mendacious claims about Clinton's eyes and smile...

    Scroll down to A DOMESTIC CRIMINAL CLASS ON DISPLAY: and read what Bob Somerby had to say about the Gore/Clinton interaction when Gore testified before the senate about global warming.


    importance of endorsements (none / 0) (#12)
    by diogenes on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 05:52:14 PM EST
    I'm sure that if Oprah and Gore were to endorse Hillary, this site would trumpet these endorsements as being highly significant and influential.

    al gore versus oprah (none / 0) (#13)
    by mga on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 06:10:11 PM EST
    oprah obviously caters to the rich and the elite, as was seen by her "fund raiser" recently. no common people for her...unless you bow down before her. ellen is more popular than oprah now.

    al gore is hell bent on the environment and i don't think al gore carries the political clout he once did.

    both should be considered as being insignificant.

    Who cares? (none / 0) (#14)
    by cmpnwtr on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 07:29:38 PM EST
    Who cares who Al Gore endorses? Really, I don't think it amounts to a hill of beans, and neither does anyone else. Not because of any disrespect for Al. But Al is not running and it didn't help Howard Dean and it won't help anyone else he endorses.

    Based on Gore's values, (none / 0) (#15)
    by fafnir on Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 07:42:31 PM EST
    The only candidate whose passion for the environment is close to Gore's is Kucinich. Sadly, I don't think Gore will endorse him.

    As for Dean, the long knives were being drawn and sharpened shortly before Gore's endorsement, when Dean appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews and said the following:

    MATTHEWS: Are you going to break up the giant media enterprises in this country?

    DEAN: Yes, we're going to break up giant media enterprises. That doesn't mean we're going to break up all of GE. What we're going to do is say that media enterprises can't be as big as they are today. I don't think we actually have to break them up, which Teddy Roosevelt had to do with the leftovers from the McKinley administration.


    MATTHEWS: ... regulate them.

    DEAN: You have got to say that there has to be a limit as to how-if the state has an interest, which it does, in preserving democracy, then there has to be a limitation on how deeply the media companies can penetrate every single community. To the extent of even having two or three or four outlets in a single community, that kind of information control is not compatible with democracy.


    This wasn't the first time Dean mentioned his desire to re-regulate media ownership; however, it was the first time mentioned "break-up" and "GE" in it's own house, MSNBC, and so close to the primaries. From that moment on, media coverage of Dean became more overtly hostile and focused on destroying his campaign.

    Ah, my fellow conspiracist... (none / 0) (#18)
    by mike in dc on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 10:28:40 AM EST
    ...at last I find somebody who agrees that was the beginning of the end for Dean.  "WTF?!?  He wants to regulate us?  Put the hit out..."

    It would help. (none / 0) (#17)
    by Geekesque on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 08:53:28 AM EST
    Would it erase Hillary's lead?  Of course not.