Political tactics

I would like to participate in any group chat about what it will take to win. It's not a shoe in for anyone. The dream team is Gore/Obama or Edwards/Obama. Obama will create much controversy, but what the people are looking for is bold leadership. Gore/ Clinton or Gore/Edwards? Also possibilities. Would Hillary be willing to make history for the sake of cause? Could she be part of a 16 year democratic legacy? If their was ever a time when a "Kenneyesk" leadership is needed it's now. People are depressed, afraid, and looking for a way out of this quagmire, or a way back to world leadership of ideas. Even Republican's realize tha Reagan was the last guy they had who believed in ideas.(whether you agreed or not). Who is the next guy to stand near a wall, this time between Sunni's and Shiites, and say "we need bridges not walls!"

The winner has to show Vision, Leadership, and Tenacity.

Given the pivotal issue of the troops and the "world position" in the Middle East and with terrorists, when the citizen enters the voting booth, yes they want the vision to lead us out of the environmental crises, but more importantly, they want leadership to address the world crises. If, and a big if, the country can see Obama as someone who can help the challanges of muti-culturalism without giving up American national pride and heritage, he could be part of the team that works on the complex situation in the world. It's too soon for him to be the # 1 guy, and he will be attacked as inexperienced. But...the world needs fresh leadership. It would be bold to select him as the VP. Maybe Hilary would bring the same boldness, if she can believe in AL Gore. It takes a global village to bring together a family of nations.

Tenacity is the other absolutely critical dimension.

Remember Kennedy is the one who went head to head with Khrushchev.
Kennedy said let's go to the moon
Kennedy went to West Berlin and South America.

Another critical point, Boomers and young people. Boomers care about their legacy, their children, and grandchildren. The Youth care about their opportunities and their future. The people of the "60's" are now in their 60's (an 18 uear old in 1946 was 60 in 2006, and 1964 was the end of the boomer years-about 36 years old for the boomer generation.1946 plus 18 = 1964. An 18 year old in 2008 will be 43
25 years from then. So the important outside window for both groups, and those widely around the edges is the next 25 years. They care about now, ten years, and 25 years from now. Don't go to 2040 or 2050...that's not on their radar screen.

With Bush offering meager bio-mix fuel targets for the next 10- 20 years, he's trying to circumvent the issue: who has the tenacity to lead the nation in the next 8 years to changes that will be visible now, soon, and in 25 years. Who has the tenacity to face terrorism and also addresses the roots of terrorism. Who can help our country's economy and deal with the risks and diplomacy in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.
(not to forget Cuba and South America).

The environment is a symbol for vison leadership and tenacity. (as well as being a real issue.) Al Gore gets check marks on all three attributes. But to be a one issue candidate is a political death march. The secret to the white house is to show the nation that that he has the experience, the wisdom, the vision, the leadership, and the tenacity to guide the nation and the world through tumultuous times. He needs a team that will demonstrate the qualities and diversity that handle the issues of our times. Bold, tough, and wise. Bush may claim the first two, but fail's the "wise" test.

People know an election was taken from Al Gore in Florida. But they need to be reminded that he and the world has grown since his vice presidency. During this last seven years, science has moved comprehensively into his corner on the issue of global warming. That's why the issue wasn't as acceptable to Congress and the public during the Clinton years. But when the time came, Al Gore grabbed the baton!

Other than that, I have no opinion!