Obama-[blank]-Gore: The Third Person on the Ticket
Just for a moment, forget about the second person on the Obama ticket and allow me to place my nomination for a third: Al Gore for a high-profile cabinet-level post on climate change.
I am not talking about just announcing that Gore would have a role in an Obama administration, I am proposing a third member of the ticket who campaigns hard, nationally, from the start, in a way that integrates the issue of global climate change the heart of the campaign.
Today the most important issue facing the US today (and for that matter all humanity) is not the Iraq war, or the mortgage crisis, or jobs, or gas prices but rather global climate change. Yet this most important issue has been all but invisible in the primaries. In 22 Democratic debates it was not the focus of a single question. All we heard from any candidate was a position paper on a web site or a throwaway line: "vote for me and I will [end][win] the war in Iraq, bring new jobs, and solve global warming."
This may seem odd, because both Obama and Clinton -- and yes, even McCain too -- seem to grasp the gravity of the situation. But the issue nevertheless fell victim to the dynamics that have continually sideline it in American politics. Americans vote with an eye on the very near-term. The war in Iraq and the mortgage crisis jostle for "most important issue" honors according to what voters believe might affect them first: will their child get stop-lossed in Iraq before or after they loose their house? Global warming's affects are far less immediate or obvious, so the issue lacks an electoral constituency. That is whey when Al Gore decided to focus on climate change he essentially had to leave the electoral politics. And with Obama and Clinton locked in a protracted tight race, as the various primary days approached, climate change was never an issue that would deliver those crucial last votes.
A few primaries ago, Obama, made "a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve ... climate change now... not 10 years from now, not 20 years from now." That was wonderful to hear, though is hardly the straight talk on climate change we desperately need. Climate change is not a problem we are going to "solve" -- not now, and not 10 or 20 years from now. It is a fact of life on planet earth that humans will have to deal with effectively forever. Addressing it in any meaningful way will require huge changes in American government policy, industry, lifestyle and education. This is not the kind of change that can be simply announced and implemented by a government, no matter who is leading it.
By teaming up together, not just after November but before, Obama and Gore could finally resolve the dilemma of how to win in the American electoral arena while speaking out on global warming:
* Announce now that Al Gore will have a special cabinet level post in the Obama administration dealing specifically with global climate change.
* Then actively campaign as a team, effectively be a 3-person ticket: Obama for President, [?] for VP, and Gore for Climate Change Secretary.
The advantages of this would be extraordinary:
* Obama would be free the to focus on issues which win votes while still signaling that climate change is a top.
* Likewise, it would give Gore the room to focus on climate change from within the electoral arena.
* It would serve as a vehicle for massive education of the American public on this urgent matter, and alert them ahead of time to the fact that the Obama administration would be moving in a serious way on this front.
* It would effectively put Gore "on the ticket," which would help bring the Party together after this divisive primary.
As far as disadvantages, I can think of none.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I can tell you now that Gore wouldn't go along with it. He has to remain neutral in case McCain wins.
Let's try again, the disappearing posts. It stopped warming 10 years ago. It is now cooling, the oceans have cooled. Might look at sunspots and read on the Maucer minimum.
It stopped warming 10 years ago. It is now cooling. Better the candidates take a hard look at other scenarios, including sunspots. Read up on the Mauder minimum.
Nonein2008, better study up on La Nina and El Nino effects on global temps before you talk about 'global cooling'.
Making EPA a cabinet Department is the proper way to elevate climate change, and a lot of Congresspeople want to do that with EPA. But now that the Dems have made climate change a multi-trillion dollar cap & trade tax issue I doubt either candidate will embrace it. Strong positions that people are not interested in is a bad election strategy.
David Wojick http://www
I have to admit that the title "Secretary of Climate Change" or "Climate Change Secretary" is less than inspiring. I didn't really have an alternative, just the sure knowledge that the one on the table will not work.
Any ideas for the position?
My ideas: (thrash and trash as you see fit)
Secretary of Planetary Affairs
Secretary of Environmental Policy
Climate Tzar
I know it's an urgent issue (it's our biggest national security issue - far bigger than Iran or terrorism)
I know it's the #1 issue
I know we have to act NOW
But...
For some reason, the American People are slow to come to this realization
To govern...
We have to WIN in November.
So I am in favor of this suggestion - but the reason Obama and McCain are not sounding the trumpets of Climate change is that they don't feel it's going to work for them in November.
Let's keep the grassroots pressure on this issue and work for Barack. We have to be in the Oval Office to apply the leadership that gets Americans mobilized.
It's an intriguing idea. My only problem with it is a fairly big one. I think we need to take quick, decisive action on global warming. And I equate executive departments with giant, bloated, slow-moving bureaucracies.
Not so sure climate change as issue #1 would go over well with those "hard working white" voters in appalachia who are being hit hardest by the economy. When they can't put food on the table or fill their tanks, they'll probably see his focus on "green" issues as far less important, and yes, a bit elitist!
I hope Al Gore does not become a part of politics again. He is so much better, so much more effective as a free-spirit, unattached to all the political webs that entangle and stall the good intentions and cries for change around the world. Politics is the archaic thing holding this planet back from healing itself. Politicians are more concerned with donors and relection from the day they take office, to make anything happen quickly. What could be the greatest tool for change is actually the worst. You stay free Mr. Gore, free and productive.
Right on! I can't understand all the clamor for Gore. As a politician he was a great VP, which is damning with faint praise. He ran a very mediocre presidential campaign. I agree with mergina he does much better as a free agent where he can really speak his mind. As a politician he was too much like a Clinton, trying to triangulate and please everyone and ending up inspiring no one. I also agree with some other posters who said that Climate Change won't resonate with the middle class as the number one issue. Finally, it doesn't seem to me that this is an issue where Obama needs to emphasize how different he is from McCain. Anyone that is paying attention at all can see things such as McCain gets a 0 from the League of Conservation Voters and Obama a 67. http://new
Bob, please get a clue. Gore has unequivocally stated that he will not accept any position in anyone's administration.
What I really want to know is why this Superdelegate has failed to step up and endorse Obama? He "endorses" Franken in his Senate bid in Minnesota, even though he has absolutely no stake in that state's race. WTF is wrong with him?
Gore may not take a traditional role, but this could be compelling for him. I think it's a fantastic idea.
This is an exciting concept.
Al Gore could campaign brilliantly on Climate Change and the need for the US to retake the lead in working to solve this international crisis. It is an important issue that he expresses with more passion than anyone I have ever heard.
He's a Nobel award winner in this field.
What a great campaign he could put on. Especially now with gas getting up to $5.00 a gallon.
"Today the most important issue facing the US today ..........
Yeah, but our media punditocracy is mostly clueless, and consequently so are most Americans.
Well said HS.
Hey, check this blogger out, He is a damn good critical thinker.
Also, in his latest post he speaks to a good book by a Professor Ehrman, "God's Problem"
http://www
Greetings Dapper! Yeah, thanx for that link; I saw it late last night and made a mental note to get back to it this morning(but of course forgot). I heard Ehrmann on NPR a couple of months ago when he was doing his book tour for this one. Looks like a book long riddle of Epicurus. Agape.
Dear Bob, Al Gore was a senator, but I was told he was also our 45th Vice President at some point :)
See Bob Ostertag's Profile
Ahem. Thank you. ;-)
Yes, and?
Gore as VP (again) has been suggested here and is insane, but I actually like the idea of Obama's candidacy turning into a a pseudo team candidacy -- one that has tons o' heavy hitters.
This could be a win-win for both: check out Gore's recent TED speech, where he says re behavior and changing light bulbs etc., "It's more important to change the laws. ... In order to solve the climate crisis, we have to solve the democracy crisis. And we have one." http://www
Although McCain is spouting some environmentally friendly noise to try and woo the gullible, Gore cannot imagine that four years of McCain would be anything but disastrous for the climate crisis. And because Gore has spent the last several years raising his credibility and profile, I think he'd be a major asset to Obama.
Let the talks begin!
Again and again and again: Gore was the guy who wanted LIEBERMAN to be veep!!!
Gore the politician SUCKED!!! Clinton without the snappy come backs, sex appeal, or saxaphone.
Gore the STATESMAN is doing good things for America. Let's keep him where he's useful before the Peter Principle kicks in AGAIN!!!
But, have you seen him in An Inconvenient Truth? After watching the documentary, my immediate thought was that if he had spoken that way in 2000 he would have been elected President in a landslide. He was passionate and inspiring.
Agreed. That's Gore as statesman that I referred to. However Gore as politician was a watered down Clinton.
Lieberman didn't change his stripes until after that failed White House bid. Like a piece of old fruit, he did NOT improve with time.
I disagree. Lieberman NEVER changed his stripes. He was simply called on it. He was, is, and presumably will be a republican milking the Democratic (now "independent") money machine.
While I agree that Al Gore should have a cabinet level position in Obama's White House, I do not agree that he should be cast as a third member of the ticket. Mr. Gore, in his public persona, is not a likable guy. He comes across as a snob. And he screwed up his own campaign for the Presidency up in 2000.
The noise machine will have a field day with Al Gore, setting Sen. Obama up to explain away anything Mr. Gore says, preventing Sen. Obama from staying on the message of change.
The addition of Al Gore to the Dem ticket also sends the message that we agree with Republicans that Sen. Obama is too young and inexperienced to handle the job himself, he needs an older, wiser mentor.
And then there is the sour grapes angle...Th
We have a Populist candidate. His message of change has already resonated with over 18 million voters. He'll need about 45 million more to win in November. Let's not screw it up, again.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
