NY Times: Who Has The Best Shot At WH in 2008?

[MannyGoldstein]

The New York Times is asking readers to submit comments on the Presidential ticket that they think has the best shot in 2008:

http://news.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=63#respond

For the record, here's my response - why not post yours?

"Gore/Feingold.

At this point, most Americans long for the "good old says" of the Clinton administration, when the economy was relatively good and the President was not - well, nuts. Gore carres much of the shine of the Clinton presidency, but was able to avoid most of the sleaziness (other than the check-wielding monks...). He has acquited himself well since the Vice Presidency, and seems to be more comfortable in his skin than back when he was pretending to be a DLCer. He'll present to the electorate as experienced and ready to do the job - the job that most Americans want him to do.

Feingold should be looking pretty smart by the 2008 elections. He recognized the "Patriot" Act and the Iraq War for what they were, and voted against them. He was one of the few in Congress to try to censure a President who, as is becoming increasingly clear to more and more Americans, needs to be censured or impeached. While Feingold is "on the fringe" compared to his Congressional peers, he does not play the part of the far-left crazy; rather, he calmly falls into the role of a man who sees the truth of the matter, and does the correct thing."

[SharonRB]

1. Great response

And I think that's a fabulous ticket. Gore is definitely at the top of my list.

[AtomicKitten]

2. Gore/Obama

[phiddle]

3. Gore/Clark

1. Doesn't put a Senate seat in Danger
2. Neither one has recent congressional record to mine for dirt.
3. Strong on national security
4. 2 of the best people available

[politicasista]

4. Too early. Anyone is qualified. Focus on 06 n/t

[silko]

5. The monks? That was a typical pseudo-scandal

as far as Gore was concerned.

He did not raise money there and he didn't know that it was a fundraiser. He had no idea about what
those two Dem fundraisers were preparing to do AFTER he would leave the building.
And no amount of investigation could uncover evidence to the contrary.
But this is just another 'I invented the Internet'. It doesn't matter whether it happened or not.
It was repeated over and over again so it must have happened. Yeah right.

And Gore didn't pretend to be a DLCer. He WAS a DLCer. He is not a liberal and never was.
All this talk about how he shifted to the left since 2000 is bullshit and Gore himself rejected it:

Later I ask Gore if he's moved to the left these past six years. After all, he denounced plans for the coming war in Iraq in September 2002, long before his Democrat colleagues, and he now unashamedly attacks corporate special interests. A flash of anger: "No! If you have a renegade band of rightwing extremists who get hold of power, the whole thing goes to the right. But I haven't moved. I'm where I've always been."

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0531-29.htm

As for "not feeling comfortable in his skin" nonsense, what do you think?
Just because someone doesn't like crowds and doesn't like the camera he does not feel comfortable in his skin? By that standard the vast majority of people do not feel comfortable in their own skin.
Of course they do and so does Gore. He just can't stand the spotlight and the whole hoopla during these stupid campaigns. That's it. Nothing wrong with that.