Al Gore: Unelectable? Cillizza: Unreadable?

Chris Cillizza outlines his case against Al Gore as a viable 2008 presidential candidate. His points:

1. Polls say people don't think Gore would make a good president.
2. Gore is too liberal.
3. Gore is too outspoken.
4. Gore is a flip-flopper, changing to suit the political winds.

Well, Cillizza's list surely does contain items that might cause various people to think twice, depending on their motivation for supporting a candidate. But the problem is that as a set they're either empty of content or mutually exclusive. To say that Gore shouldn't run because people don't think he should run is just to notice that many people think he shouldn't run. It doesn't explain why. And to say simultaneously that Gore is too liberal, too outspoken, AND an inconsistent flip-flopper just doesn't make sense. #2 and #3 are assertions of consistency, and #4 is an assertion of inconsistency.

What I take away from Cillizza's post is first a sense that he's too far into the horse race of the election to pull himself out and evaluate Gore substantively. Second, I am reminded that if one studies the political playbook hard enough, it's possible to criticize just about anybody as a presidential candidate. How do you manage to not be consistent, to not be inconsistent, to not be stubbornly principled in an unpopular way, and to not appear pander to voters' desires?

This is not to say that Al Gore is the right candidate for the Democrats. It's just to say that the criteria Cillizza uses to evaluate Al Gore's viability aren't appropriate, at least if one is less interested in Beltway visions and more interested in the capability for substantive leadership.

Joe Biden for President?

I keep hearing that Joseph Biden is a major contender for the presidency on the Democratic Party side. I'd really like to hear someone explain why that is. He's from a small state, he tried running for president before and it didn't pan out, and he's been made fun of for pompous bloviating. So what's the attraction?

Democrats set up a Wiki for 2008 Presidential Contenders

It seems some Democrats have set up a Wiki for 2008 Democratic Party presidential contenders, at which people may post arguments and evidence supporting a case for or against Democratic Party contenders for the nomination in 2008. Being a wiki, this will be whatever people choose to make of it, or choose not to make of it. Interesting.