Should Al Gore be president again?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter scott1
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the potential for former Vice President Al Gore to run for president again, exploring his political career, environmentalism, and public perception. Participants debate his past failures, current relevance, and the sincerity of his environmental advocacy.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express support for Gore as a presidential candidate, while others question his qualifications and past performance.
  • A participant suggests that Gore should focus on building a successful "unpolitical" career to enhance his credibility.
  • Critiques are raised regarding Gore's environmentalism, particularly his lifestyle choices, which some see as contradictory to his advocacy.
  • There are claims that environmentalism in the US lacks a coherent movement, with some participants arguing that existing organizations are ideologically driven and ineffective.
  • Some participants speculate that Gore's recent activities, including his film, may indicate a preparation for a presidential run.
  • Concerns are voiced about the practicality of proposed environmental solutions by activists, with some viewing them as unrealistic.
  • There is a discussion about the potential dynamics of a presidential race involving Gore, particularly in relation to the Republican Party's stance on environmental issues.
  • Some participants express a desire for Gore to demonstrate genuine commitment to environmentalism without seeking political office.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a range of views, with no consensus on whether Gore should run for president again. Disagreements persist regarding the effectiveness and sincerity of environmental movements and Gore's role within them.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various aspects of Gore's lifestyle and political history, which may influence their opinions on his environmental advocacy and potential candidacy. The discussion reflects a mix of personal opinions and broader political critiques without resolving the underlying issues.

  • #31
Bystander said:
No --- that's what the party hacks peddle to kill the idea of open primaries, plural --- they don't wanta lose their seniority.


No that's what actually happens.

So while you're insinuating I'm a party hack, I'll just let it slip that I'm a registered independent.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
There aren't open primaries --- you can't possibly know that that's what happens --- you've asserted that politics is a silly board game being played to see whose party wins and whose party loses. Party hacks are terrified of independents --- to pick up primary votes from independents means that the candidates seeking party nominations actually have to appeal to a broader spectrum of voters.
 
  • #33
Bystander said:
There aren't open primaries --- you can't possibly know that that's what happens --- you've asserted that politics is a silly board game being played to see whose party wins and whose party loses. Party hacks are terrified of independents --- to pick up primary votes from independents means that the candidates seeking party nominations actually have to appeal to a broader spectrum of voters.

Um... yes there are open primaries. A number of states have had varies forms, extending from blanket primaries to open party primaries--though in all cases you can't vote in both 'double primaries'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_election

In case you've been living in a hole for the last ten years, yeah politics is a silly board game played on party lines. In the US anyway.
 
  • #34
From the Wiki link, "Open: Voters may vote in primaries of a party of their choice, the choice to be made at the voting booth. When voters do not pre-register for a party, this is called the pick-a-party primary because the voter can select which party he wishes to vote in on election day. In other open primary states, voters pre-register their party preference but the information is only used by parties for mailing lists and is non-binding.

Now, just how open is this? Let's say it's a presidential election year, and I'm interested in D for this office, R for that, D for another, R for another --- 'tain't that open.

"Blanket:" (Wiki) no longer used --- the only open primary in the list.

Lawton-Lieberman? Connecticut dems shot themselves in the foot with a guaranteed loser, in a "closed primary" --- "open," or, "blanket," the republicans and independents might have saved them the embarassment --- Lieberman is popular enough in Conn. that the republicans have let him have it essentially uncontested --- might run someone for form's sake, but not as a serious challenge.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
17K
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 154 ·
6
Replies
154
Views
25K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
14K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 384 ·
13
Replies
384
Views
43K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K