Al Gore stated he would not run in the 2004 election because it would seem like it was just a re-match as oppose to a *real* presidential campaign for a nation's leader even after some liberals demanded he run for president again and with all his support. However, if this Website is true and I interpreted it correctly, he is planning to run in 2008 and will have his new campaign Website up tomorrow. Go to http://algoredemocrats.com (btw, if you're a republican, don't go to their forums ;)).
(11/8/04) Edit: Bad Source (sorry).
It's official: http://www.algore-08.com/
I told my APCS teacher (Democrat++) that I heard a rumor Al Gore was going to run in 08. To quote her - "Not if they [DNC] want to win." :P
Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on November 08, 2004, 03:46 PM
I told my APCS teacher (Democrat++) that I heard a rumor Al Gore was going to run in 08. To quote her - "Not if they [DNC] want to win." :P
I'm confident Al Gore will win the 2008 election. Though it's not really worth anything, as the heat of the campaigning won't begin for another two years most likely.
That's if Al Gore even runs, just because an independent site went up doesn't mean he will. I'm pretty sure the DNC website would have a list of people who will be on the primary ticket if they'd already selected them.
Al Gore will not run. He lacks the backing in the party and the finances to mount a good campaign. There is no chance the Democratic National Committee will take him seriously again. Your "websites" that make things "offical" aren't even close to offical websites.
It would be funny if he ran from a third party or something. It would tear the democrats apart.
Al Gore does not have a prayer's chance in hell of winning in 08. It does not help that after the election he just sort of came off as being bitter and whinny. Like he has some sand in his vagina about loosing.
Sorry, bad source.
Yeah, if he were to run it definitly wouldn't work. Democrats are very unforgiving when it comes to thier failed candidates.
Quote from: Trance on November 09, 2004, 12:22 AM
Yeah, if he were to run it definitly wouldn't work. Democrats are very unforgiving when it comes to thier failed candidates.
Republicans, however, don't seem to be. I'll be the first to offer it up: Keyes/Dole '08! ;)
I wonder who the replublcan canidate will be.
Jeb Bush 08' :D
Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on November 09, 2004, 01:39 PM
Jeb Bush 08' :D
He's said that he won't run. McCain, Guiliani, and Frist have had their names thrown around quite a bit. Guiliani/Frist would be a pretty good ticket, and McCain/any would be pretty much unbeatable.
If Guiliani runs, we might get NY. I'd actually like to see Guiliani run, more than probably anyone else - except maybe Zell Miller. ;)
Nah, Jeb won't run. I'm calling it now, I will bet anybody that Giuliani and McCain are in the primaries in '08, its a good fit.
The Democratic party is quite unstable right now.
Yea, I'd really hate to be a Democrat now, seeing as what's happened within the past few weeks.
-Their candidate wasn't elected president.
-They don't control the house.
-They don't control the senate.
-They don't control the majority of the governerships.
-11 states passed laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman.
-We're advancing in Iraq to secure for the elections.
-The Democrats are leaving the country or killing themselves.
-The Democrats now are turning against each other and John Kerry. (Especially at the Democratic Underground)
-Yasser Arafat is about to die.
owned. :)
It's not all about power you know Trust. Largely the reason people are democrats is because they have those viewpoints. But there's been times when Democrats controlled all of congress and had the presidency, it didn't last long, and it may not last long for the republicans. Also note that the numbers you have over the democrats aren't incredibly big. Btw, where's the articles you presented stating democrats are fleeing the country? And there's only been one democratic suicide, out of the millions out there...People die everyday, that's hardly a downfall on the democratic population.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6704292
How can you say it's not about power? Of course it's about power! We have control, at least until senatorial elections next year (and we'll probably still have it afterwards,) and that means we can get policy passed without much hassle.
Quote from: Mephisto on November 09, 2004, 06:08 PM
Also note that the numbers you have over the democrats aren't incredibly big.
Thats totally wrong. Republicans gained some 4 seats in the SENATE and have the OVERWHELMING majority, and the same is true in the HOUSE. 4 out of 100 is a huge number when applied to the Senate.
Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on November 09, 2004, 06:43 PM
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6704292
How can you say it's not about power? Of course it's about power! We have control, at least until senatorial elections next year (and we'll probably still have it afterwards,) and that means we can get policy passed without much hassle.
I said not
all. And not all republicans vote in a block.
Quote from: Mephisto on November 09, 2004, 07:12 PM
Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on November 09, 2004, 06:43 PM
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6704292
How can you say it's not about power? Of course it's about power! We have control, at least until senatorial elections next year (and we'll probably still have it afterwards,) and that means we can get policy passed without much hassle.
I said not all. And not all republicans vote in a block.
They tend to agree. If you don't think thats true, look at the voting records.
I took an example bill, for prayer in schools, to show how they do tend to agree. (courtesey vote-smart.org)
QuoteMotion agreed to 297-125: R 212-3; D 84-121; I 1-1 on 11/15/2001.
Out of 215 House Republicans, only three didn't vote with their party. I think that's a large enough "block" for us to be safe.