Al Gore says he can't imagine running for the White House again. But Hollywood disagr

[milmor_1]

Al Gore says he can't imagine running for the White House again. But Hollywood disagrees

By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
Published: 23 February 2007

Here's a scenario that sounds like it could only be invented in Hollywood. Al Gore wins an Oscar this weekend for his documentary An Inconvenient Truth. Later this year, he is the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for his work to raise awareness of global warming. At which point, why shouldn't he also run for president?

It's a scenario that has crossed more than a few minds in Hollywood this week, not only because of the Academy Awards on Sunday but also because the two current Democratic frontrunners, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, have already come to blows on their respective first big tours of the Hollywood fund-raising circuit.

For the moment, the former vice-president, who came maddeningly close to clinching the presidency in 2000, has ruled himself out about as categorically as anyone can. "I have no intention to run for president," he told the BBC last week. "I can't imagine in any circumstance to run for office again."

That, though, hasn't stopped some of his supporters, especially in liberal bastions like Hollywood, from imagining a scenario in which, later this year or early next, Senators Clinton and Obama have beaten each other senseless and Mr Gore is pressed into service in extremis as the voice of experience with the right issues on his side - starting with global warming - and plenty of public goodwill left over from his non-victory in the bitterly contested 2000 presidential election.

It would have to be a highly unconventional candidacy, given the strictures of campaign fundraising and the primary calendar, which will be heavily frontloaded next year because several big states, starting with California and New Jersey, are moving their primary dates forward to early February, right after the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary. He would have to count on a late surge of enthusiasm - and cheque-writing - along the lines of Bobby Kennedy in 1968.

Gore would also have to be convinced that he has the popular support to risk another run at high office. A Gallup poll published last week gave him a 52 per cent favourability rating and a 45 per cent unfavourability rating - suggesting he is a polarising figure rather than a uniting one.

For now, the beauty contest is firmly fixed on Hillary versus Barack - the Queen versus the Dreamboy, as The New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd put it in an Oscar-flavoured piece earlier this week that has triggered the first big blow-up of the campaign.

The bulk of Dowd's piece was an interview with David Geffen, the music and film producer, who was once a huge Clinton supporter but has now disavowed both Hillary and Bill as overambitious schemers who find it troublingly easy to lie at every turn.

"[Their] machine is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive and effective," Geffen said on the day he hosted a star-studded Obama fundraiser in Beverly Hills that netted $1.3m (£665,000). Bill Clinton, he said, was a "reckless guy" who "gave his enemies a lot of ammunition to hurt him and to distract the country".

Right away, the Clinton camp sought to paint Geffen as a key figure in the Obama campaign, accusing the 45-year-old Illinois Senator of doing exactly what he promised he wouldn't, dragging the campaign into the gutter.

"While Senator Obama was denouncing slash and burn politics yesterday, his campaign's finance chair was viciously and personally attacking Senator Clinton and her husband," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said in a statement.

"If Senator Obama is indeed sincere about his repeated claims to change the tone of our politics, he should immediately denounce these remarks, remove Mr Geffen from his campaign and return his money."

Geffen immediately responded that he was not Mr Obama's finance chair or associated with the campaign in any way except as an enthusiastic supporter. Mr Obama himself said: "It's not clear to me why I am apologising for someone else's remark." Mr Obama's spokesman Robert Gibbs added: "We aren't going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters."

But he couldn't resist a little dig anyway: "It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when he was raising them $18m and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom."

Independent Online Edition > Americas

[Woodmonkey]

Originally Posted by milmor_1

Here's a scenario that sounds like it could only be invented in Hollywood. Al Gore wins an Oscar this weekend for his documentary An Inconvenient Truth. Later this year, he is the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for his work to raise awareness of global warming. At which point, why shouldn't he also run for president?

It's a scenario that has crossed more than a few minds in Hollywood this week, not only because of the Academy Awards on Sunday but also because the two current Democratic frontrunners, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, have already come to blows on their respective first big tours of the Hollywood fund-raising circuit.

That's because the Hollywood crowd lives in a fantasy world where winning the Oscar means more than just being part of a good movie. As for the Nobel Peace Prize - winning that is an accomplishment, but doesn't mean much as far as ability in running a country. Look at two of its recipients - Carter and Arafat.

The bulk of Dowd's piece was an interview with David Geffen, the music and film producer, who was once a huge Clinton supporter but has now disavowed both Hillary and Bill as overambitious schemers who find it troublingly easy to lie at every turn.

"[Their] machine is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive and effective," Geffen said on the day he hosted a star-studded Obama fundraiser in Beverly Hills that netted $1.3m (£665,000).

Nothing new there. That machine has been in action for decades now and has perfected its act.

Bill Clinton, he said, was a "reckless guy" who "gave his enemies a lot of ammunition to hurt him and to distract the country".

Yes, and we are still suffering from the consequences of that.

Mr Obama himself said: "It's not clear to me why I am apologising for someone else's remark." Mr Obama's spokesman Robert Gibbs added: "We aren't going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters."

But he couldn't resist a little dig anyway: "It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when he was raising them $18m and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom."

That was handled well on the part of Obama and his spokesman, IMO.