Tim Dickinson has a very good article in the recent issue of Rolling Stone called "Why Gore Should Run and How He Can Win." Dickinson is a former editor at Mother Jones and current contributing editor at Rolling Stone and author of their National Daily Affairs political blog. He posits that Gore may be poised to win the Democratic nomination for a number of reasons---his late entry into the race would allow him to sit back and observe Hillary Clinton's early trials (such as her awkward response to a question today in Iowa about her qualifications dealing with "evil and bad men"); he won the popular vote in 2000; he has the fundraising clout to compete with, if not topple, the numbers Clinton or Obama can produce; he was vocal against the war from its outset, as opposed to some of the waffling Clinton, Obama, and other candidates have done; he has garnered massive support from the growing environment/global warming audience; he will remain in the spotlight for months to come, with his new book, The Assault on Reason, coming out in May, as well as his Academy Award nominated documentary An Inconvenient Truth in late February---so he almost has a bit of an outsider's perspective (so to speak), which may serve him well. It would balance another strength---eight years as Vice President, which undoubtedly gives him the most experience on foreign policy of any candidate possible. So, will he run?
I like Barack Obama. I also like Hillary Clinton. I would vote for either of them. But in 1999, I had a Gore 2000 sticker. I never peeled off the back. All I would have to do is make the last zero into an 8, and I'm set. It's too early to tell which candidate would be best, but I like the sound of Al Gore running. If his political strategists can remember how much affinity people had for his newfound personality and authenticity upon giving his heartfelt concession speech, he could have a chance.
Read Dickinson's article here.