IN 1960, Richard Nixon lost a close presidential election to John F. Kennedy. Defeat in an election of this magnitude normally gives the candidate a hint that they probably should not run again, but Nixon persevered and came back in 1968, in a nation plagued by an unpopular war in Vietnam, for an ultimate triumph.
Nothing of the sort has happened since then, but the circumstances are now ideal for Al Gore to enter the horserace for 2008 and pull off another Nixon. Unlike Nixon, however, Gore can at least say he won the popular vote the last tme he ran. There are inherent problems with any analogy, and the best that looking at the past can do is to provide context and inspiration. But Gore should be ecourged by the knowledge that he would make the best candidate from either party should he choose to enter. Al Gore should do two main things to win: come up with a plan for Iraq and just relax.
The first is something like Mission:Impossible right now. Nixon succeeded by promising "peace with honor." Whether we like it or not, that's what we will have to do in Iraq as well, and someone should come up with a catchy phrase for it by now.
Gore should enter this race with that same sort of energy and vibe, promising "victory with restraint" or something along those lines. It seems strange, but Al Gore has a real opportunity to come off as a new and fresh face, despite his lengthy political career. He can help himself towards that end by asserting something thoughtful about Iraq -- something he should think about before entering the race.
If you don't understand why Al Gore should relax, then just direct your attention to the 2000 election. It appeared to many that, by trying excessively hard to be an appealing candidate, Gore talked over everyone with an air of arrogance and aloofness. Those are rather undesirable qualities in a potential president. If he runs, he should not be afraid to be a little more personable than last time around, especially considering that character is important to a significant percentage of those who vote in presidential elections.
Some may say I'm being overly presumptuous, plotting Gore's campaign strategy before he's even in the race. In fact, according to a February 2007 New York Sun article, he told the BBC, "I have no intention to run for president. I can't imagine any circumstance to run for office again." Those are obvious words, but they don't tell the whole story. If Gore senses that there is enough momentum and desire for another run from the general public, you can bet anything that he will throw himself in, as would any other presidential wannabe.
Without even doing anything significant politically, besides making a few appearances here and there, Al Gore still has lots of support. In a recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll regarding potential candidates registered Democrats would vote for in 2008, Gore came in third with 14 percent, behind Hillary (37 percent) and Obama (22 percent), but ahead of Edwards (12 percent). He's famous, apparently there's demand for him again, and his contributions towards publicizing the threats of global warming give him a sense of direction and moral purpose somewhat lacking in the current field from both parties.
But does America need Al Gore? Perhaps not. Bush had a fairly disappointing presidency, but the nation's political climate is not as tumultuous as it was in 1968. What America needs most now is a candidate with genuine gravitas: someone who is respectable, intelligent, and likely to be passionate about the job of president. Other current candidatesembody some or all of these qualities, but not like Al Gore, who has proven himself over the past few years to be a dedicated, tireless and authentic individual -- characteristics that he was accused of lacking back in 2000. Al Gore can come back and much of America appears more than willing to participate in his return. So stop waiting Mr. Gore. Just do it.
Erald Kolasi's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at ekolasi@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
