Why didn't Al Gore run in 2004 instead of Kerry?
924299
the public and the democratic party was still a little upset with his performance in the first election and weren't willing to give him the primary.. and he would have hurt the democrats if he'd have ran as an independent
676293
Technically, Gore withdrew. Let me get you a source on that.\n\nOn November 7, 2000 (Election Day), at a time when polls were still open in the Republican heavy panhandle section of the state[3], television networks initially called the state of Florida for his opponent, Vice President Al Gore, then withdrew that projection and later called the state for Bush along with the entire election, and finally declared that it was too close to call. Sometime after the networks reported that Bush had won Florida, Gore conceded the election and then rescinded that concession less than one hour later. Though Bush had 47.9% of the popular vote and Gore had 48.4%, the electoral votes were less clear.
1026120
I'm sorry. I actually believe President Bush fits the office better than Al Gore or John Kerry.
811326
c sense go ahead and make Hillary for prez then the world will unite in LAUGHTER! \n\nObama too new and doesn't stand a chance in 2008. Biden flip flops, Ford (which one?) Dean Screamer perfect for the dems. Kerry his intelluenge on the meitarly made him the new jane fonda. Gore is a whiney little bitch who thinks in his warped little mind he created the internet. \n\nBoy cant wait to see how bad things get screwed up again starting in 2007.
840200
They hate him for his incompetence and shrewd methods. Many think Al Gore would have done a better job since he would focus on the american way of life via the environment and the socail status. I think they voted for George Bush because people like to have someone for a leader that they can critisize, such as John Howard, he is as goofy as hell and yet he is always voted for.
1182298
Without question.  I never imagined in these modern times a popularly elected candidate would fail to win because of the electoral college.  The 2000 presidential election was a sham.  500,000 more voted for Gore than Bush, yet we have been stuck with this merciless demogogue for two terms.  Bill Clinton how you are missed!
859523
I could easily be wrong, but I don't think Hillary Rodham Clinton is up for re-election at this time, whereas John Kerry is up for re-election. I believe Kerry has gotten more press because he is up for re-election and even more so because he bashed the President and the War in Iraq which is such a hot button issue vs. Rodham Clinton disrespecting Ghandi. I don't think gender has anything to do with it and I think that there are other more sensible explanations for the variance in the way the media has responded to their statements.
526125
Start with the voices in your head.\n\nAl Gore and John Kerry didn't conquer the voices in their heads, and look where they ended up.
355035
Both John Kerry and John Edwards are considering running for president again in 2008.  They will likely not do well in the polls and bow out as soon as the primaries begin.\n\nI liked John Kerry and John Edwards and I think either one would make a great president, but now I highly doubt either one ever will be president.  I think the Democratic nominee for 2008 will be Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, or Mark Warner (all good candidates).
544880
Just another example of an idiot in politics that has nothing better to show for any kind of platform. Al Gore is an idiot.
541689
The people didn't choose Bush. The damn election was rigged! (I would have voted for him anyway because I thought he would do better for America than Kerry. So I was wrong.)
1146282
It can't be George W., he's had his two terms, thankfully.\n\nI am hoping we'll see Gore run again.  He arguably already won the election once, and I think it's going to be a likely year for a Democrat to take office again in 2008.
624745
You know, I'm not a republican by nature, but during the 2000 elections I thought that Bush would be the lesser of the two evils. How wrong. I did not vote for him in 2004, but in 2000 I liked him better than Kerry, and now I'm ashamed for even considering the thought. I believe in gay marriage, stem cell research. And he has completely ignored any environmental concerns, not to mention that whole Iraq War thing (written with as much contempt as all the other examples of Bush's negligence and narrow mindedness).
1064904
Yes, absolutely.  Did you see the interview with Larry King?  Gore said that he and Clinton were all over Al Queida and told Bush that they should do the same, implying that the Bush administration ignored the warning.  Maybe 9/11 would have never happened.  Certainly, we wouldn't be in a war in Iraq.  I think that a lot of things would be better and different
180160
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!\n\nHere is what happened ... what liberals refuse to see the truth in.\n\nIn November 2000, Al Gore was PROJECTED to win Florida by media outlets using their projection formulas. Only problem was was that they were wrong. George Bush was declared the official winner by a narrow margin - about a 1,000 votes. Due to the closeness of the election, Florida law required a recount. The recount showed Bush won by only 537 votes.\n\nAl Gore disputed the results and asked that four counties be recounted as allowed by law. However, it soon became clear that the recount could not be completed and certified by 5.00 pm on November 14th as required by law. The heavily Democratic counties of Volusia and Palm Beach sued to have the deadline extended. The Bush campaigned countersued claiming it was unfair to change the rules in the middle of the process.\n\nEventually, the Florida Supreme Court ruled in favor of the counties and extended the deadline. The Bush campaign appealed to the US Supreme Court which sent the case back to the Florida Supreme Court for clarification. The Florida Supreme Court again ordered the recount. Bush filed an emergency stay of the recount with the US Supreme Court - which the court upheld.\n\nAt this time (12 December 2000), the Florida House of Representatives voted to certify the original results of the election and voted along party lines. After the certification of the election, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the recount should continue. Later that same day, the US Supreme Court in Bush vs. Gore, voted 5-4 to end the count in accordance with Florida law. They cited different counting standards and no one central authority figure in charge as the reasons for the ruling.\n\nBush vs. Gore effectively ended the recount, and Bush was certified the winner.\n\nNOW, you tell me if George Bush cheated. He followed procedures allowed by law - as did Al Gore. He used the courts to try to get a favorable outcome - as did Al Gore. Al Gore - had the situations been reversed - would have done the exact same thing George Bush did.\n\nWas it a clean win? Absolutely not. Was it legal? Absolutely.\n\nInterestingly enough, the USA Today, the Miami Herald, Knight Ridder and the Tampa Tribune conducted a recount after all was said and done. Under every possible scenario using the conditions that the Gore campaign requested, George W. Bush STILL won the election in Florida.\n\nInteresting facts:\n\n* Some Democrats blamed Ralph Nader for the loss. Had Ralph Nader not run, Gore would have won both New Hampshire AND Florida. Either state would have given him the victory.\n* Had Al Gore won his own home state of Tennessee, he would have won the election.\n* More than 8,000,000 Democrats nationwide voted for George Bush.\n\nThe Democrats have not forgotten the election of 2000, and all of the anti-Bush rhetoric playing today is a direct result of the loss. The election of 2000 is tearing the party apart.\n\nMany liberals claim that "Bush is not my President." As a conservative, this is the most ridiculous comment I have ever heard. It doesn't matter who you voted for or who you think should have won, Bush is still the President for ANY American citizen. Fortunately, only a small percentage of close-minded inviduals think like this, and most of the country thinks they are ridiculous.\n\nEDIT: You libs quote websites like http://www.smirkingchimp.com and http://www.moveon.org and http://michaelmoore.com as credible resources for the news??? Websites that obviously have an agenda? Fortunate that most Americans there, too, see through that garbage.\n\nTo the two of you who said you will never vote again. While I think EVERY American should vote, I am glad to see that two liberals who do not think very clearly have taken themselves out of the election cycle. Nothing like giving up and helping your vowed enemy win again, huh? Hope that make you feel great, 'cause it does me!!  :-)
1125532
the dems are hopeless... for the last decade they've been trying to shift center/right for votes to the point where they have no principles or fundamentals anymore. sigh. clinton was a great president in many ways, but he may very well have destroyed the dem party (by starting the race toward the center). anyway... i hope al gore runs again. i'd rather see him run and lose than have one of these unpricipled wafflers actually win.
64025
In my opinion either Kerry or Gore would have made a much better president.\n\nBush led our country into a war that never should have been. Our economy has been in a downward spiral since he took office. His medicare program is proving itself to be a disaster for our senior citizens,  More and more Americans are losing health care benefits.  The NSA is wiretapping American citizens without warrants.  His Supreme Court appointees have shifted a balanced court to the right.  \n\nAdditionally, his attempt to greatly expand Presidential power in the name of the "War on Terror" is especially frightening since it affects the Executive / Legislative / Judicial balance of goverment as defined in our Constitution.\n\nI'm sure I could go on but I've got to get back to work!