Commentary

Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the majority of the editorial board. All other material represents the opinion of the authors. Deadline for submissions is the 10th of every month.

The Metropolitan retains the right to edit all submissions for length, grammar and punctuation. Letters without a signature will not be printed. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of any department or college, the university, the state university system, the student body, or The Metropolitan.

The case for Gore in 2008

-- Andrea Jackley

The call for Al Gore to run for president (again) has been made. But hey—third time is a charm, right? One factor that would change this time around would be the absence of "Bush" in an opposing candidate’s name.

It has been noted that Gore may have been enjoying more prominence as a movie star this past year than a major hitter in the Democratic Party.

Gore’s certified smash hit An Inconvenient Truth informed viewers of the dangers of global warming, and Gore’s ability to effectively speak in front of audiences, on over 600 screens worldwide this summer. It was a move that particularly endeared him to environmentally conscious and politically disgusted college students.

Which brings me to an important conclusion in the push for Gore’s reelection: He is not the robotic figure many people like to remember from his definitive vice presidency. (Honestly, who wouldn’t seem apathetic next to Bill Clinton?)

Whether it stems from heightened relaxation out of the official public eye, a deep-seated passion for his cause, or simply maturation, Gore’s personable and frequent public appearances have propelled him into the hearts and minds of change-hungry Americans.

This isn’t to discount Gore’s intermittent political slip-ups. There was his steadfast defense of Clinton’s sexual escapades and his endorsement of the sinking ship known as Howard Dean.

And while Gore’s distance from former running-mate Joe Lieberman during the 2006 elections may have seemed mysterious to some (particularly old-fashioned democrats), Lieberman’s voracious support for the Iraq war—after Gore’s preceding and adamant opposition—accounts for the turning of Gore’s cold shoulder.

It may also be touted as another example of Gore’s reputation as a loyalist when it comes to his and his party’s beliefs.

If Gore were to accept the challenge of running for president in 2008, he would be in the midst of a feeding frenzy amongst bloodthirsty democrats vying for the chance to supersede a flailing republican administration.

Names such as Harry Reid, Bill Richardson, John Kerry, John Edwards, and perhaps most notably, the wavering and controversial Hillary Clinton, could likely be in the mix.

Rumors of Senator Barack Obama surfacing in 2008 persist, but this is probably just wishful thinking.

And while each of these names pulls clout in the political world, Gore’s track record trumps them all. Having served in the House, the Senate and as vice president in one of the most popular administrations in recent memory, Gore seems almost destined for greater things.

Add into the equation a flawless personal record and you have, in my humble opinion, the most qualified presidential candidate in America.

Yet many have wondered aloud if Gore can resurrect the kind of support he pulled in 2000. Let’s take a look at the facts.

With more-than-dwindling public confidence in the prevailing republican administration, democrats have bright hopes for their future in the White House. Gore’s highly-publicized environmental crusade has, quite conveniently, hit home with Americans paying record-high gas prices.

And previous lobbying against a now extremely unpopular war has helped bolster Gore’s credibility.

All things considered, Gore’s electability seems healthier than ever.

All of this is speculation; however, as it seems that the greatest hurdle for Gore right now is convincing himself that, this time, things could be different.