This business of "electablility" is just one more insidious propaganda meme. It is perpetrated by the "professionals" among the DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy (insert Bob Shrum if you like) that continue to be obsessed with garnering the last half a percent of the "elusive middle."  

They've been at it for decades now, expecting a different result. It is the definition of madness. But it serves the interests of the neofascists well, so they promote it. It also serves the Euphemedia's "horserace" requirements.

What frightened the beltway boobs about Gov. Dean was that he dismissed it (and them). He said "we're going to put our flag in the middle of where America ought to be and bring people to us!"

That's how to lead, how to win elections, how to be the one they "want tot have a beer with."

But the "beer" factor is only one of many, many small factors. The simple truth is that the Dems can nominate literally anyone (yes, anyone - Beatty, Conyers, Sharpton, Chelsea - anyone) and they will be just as "electable" as the only alternative to the other candidate.

However, my proposal is to draft/run Conyers NOW. Conyers07, via the Speaker/Impeachment route. It could well be just "out of the box" enough to capture the public's imagination.

And if it did, it would certainly capture the congress in '06 and could bring down the castle walls for generations.

--

My critique of Gore (and others) with respect to Jan. 6, 2001 (and 2005) is founded on Justice Breyer's clear instruction in his dissent to the BushvGore edict as to what the duty of each member of congress is on that day.

A more complete version can be found here.

The only "victim" of a stolen election is the electorate as a whole, as they are the only interested party to begin with. An election is a survey, not a contest. It is not Gore's to win or lose.

1. Is there some relevance to the number of days Gore "fought valiantly" of which I am unaware? Would your opinion differ if it were only 3 or 6 days of valiance before forsaking the electorate? Mine wouldn't.

   Does the number of sidelined Democrats enter into this equation somehow?

2. Quitting with "grace and dignity" is still quitting.
   

3. Not sure what "respected his own words" means, but it certainly would have been more honorable to respect his own belief and knowledge of what the Will of the American People demanded.
   

As for his subsequent activity, it has been better than most -- but still worse than some: like Conyers, Boxer, and Dean. And in none of it does he call for action, as opposed to just more talk.

The neofascists still chuckle to the same joke; "Gosh, for a minute there I thought he might actually demand that they DO SOMETHING."

And doing something need not be as bold an action as impeachment/removal or war crime prosecution (though those ARE the requisite responses to the well-warranted accusations Gore makes). It can be as simple as opening a mouth, just standing on the steps of the (formerly) Supreme Court on Dec. 12, 2000 and saying "this is wrong, I don't concede to this," then letting the chips fall where they may.

It's not like anyone's asking him to turn a swiftboat into enemy fire. But that's another story...

--
www.january6th.org

It would be a campaign to redeem our National Soul.

(Actually, this opportunity is there for any Dem who has to ambition to fill the vacuum of leadership that plagues the party.)

And yes, the odds are against achieving the ultimate goal. But that is rather beside the point. The effort itself would serve to energize the base, nationalize the 06 elections around bush crimes, and rebuild our sagging self-esteem (evidence of which can be found in prevalent air of defeatism - not to single you out personally).

And I don't agree that it is completely unachievable. All it would take is a few dozen Republican to face reality and/or fear the manifest fascism of this regime.

And FWIW, I've been here before. I spent most of Nov. and Dec. of 2004 being told - You'll. Never. Get. a Senator.

Then on Jan 6th, 2005 I walked out of the Hart Senate Office building to a celebratory rally of hundreds, carrying one of these >>

Instead he ran this meandering, disorganized  campaign that had no theme.  His concession speech was one of the best of the entire campaign!  Frightening.

I met Gore in 2002 after he lost and he was charming, funny and actually spoke about policy.  I kept thinking if this Al Gore has shown up in 2000 he would be President.

I see speeches like this and think the same thing.