Anyone who thinks Hillary Clinton could take the presidency in 2008 better pay more attention watching and listening to her on CSPAN.

She's about as inspiring as a damp dishrag and resolute as a wheather vane.

Obama Obama Obama!

But anyway, AL GORE in 2008!

Hillary has passed her "sell-by" date.

Obama Obama Obama!

OK, now what?

He'll be a strong candidate for president someday, but not now.

We need a win. I think a Gore/Obama ticket would be ideal.

I can't for the life of me figure out what democratic focus group thinks Hillary has a chance in hell of winning a national election for President.

As a New Yorker I would like to send her back to Illinois for her support on the war and recent flag support. She is a political 'whore' (a word I use with regret and hesitation) without any real values and beliefs, she is symptomatic of everything that disgusts me about the Democrats and makes McCain (at least until recently) more of an appealing option because he at least (again until his recent pandering) was willing to state his own opinion regardless of the hardliners in the Republican party.

I wouldn't vote for McCain because of his beliefs but he at least earned my respect (until recently) because at least there was the illusion that finally here was/is someone willing to actually say what they mean, want and believe.

Gore at least is beginning to sound like a human being and surprisingly defeat has also made Kerry more animate. I laugh to think of a Gore/Kerry ticket.

But then maybe I should start smoking the crack the Washington insiders are smoking that think Hillary has a chance.

Why? I've never heard him say anything or do anything that would suggest he has the qualities needed to make a good president. As a Senator he's nothing more that an empty grandstander. He should hook up with a cable news station and go into tv. I voted for him last time, next time I'll take a pass.

Gingrich v. Clinton! If that doesn't cause emigration to Canada nothing will.

Cillizza never writes anything useful - it's like the column of out-of-date (and often wrong) convential beltway wisdom. Perfect for the Washington Post.

Gore will fight Clinton to keep the party from moving to the "ideological center?" I think there are many ways to determine where the "center" is - most of which would put it in closer proximity to Gore. Why doesn't Cillizza just say "the right?" Everyone would agree that Clinton is to the right of Gore wherever they are in relation to the mythical center.

As for his praise of Gingrich, this piece appears more a vehicle for pushing Gingrich coverage and legitimacy (maybe Cillizza cocktails with a campaign worker) than real analysis. And his claim that McCain is one to keep an eye on - jeez, I don't think that's a hard one to figure out (or will it take much effort to do, given the media love of McCain). If Cillizza wanted to inform readers about a GOP candidate to keep an eye on who is out of the picture, he might have mentioned someone like Hagel, who is likely to emerge as a major contender given his mix of conservatism, independence and anti-war statements.

Newt Gingrich is seriously delusional if he thinks he's going to get anywhere near the presidency, given some of the baggage he's carrying:

• Married his high school math teacher
• Served his first wife (the math teacher) with divorce papers while she was hospitalized with cancer
• Railroaded Speaker Jim Wright out of office
• Directly blamed Susan Smith's drowning of her children on the Great Society
• Called Democrats "the enemy of normal Americans"
• Said that men are biologically driven to "hunt giraffes"
• Shut down the federal government because (he thought) Bill Clinton was mean to him
• While denouncing Clinton for his extra-marital activities was engaged in similar behavior with a House aide

Talk about smoking something wacky...If she's an extreme liberal then Ann Coulter really is a woman.

And why in the hell does Gore think the party needs to go back to the ideological middle? Does he not get that the Democrats are so in the middle that they perpetually picking splinters out of their a$$es because they've ridden the fence for so long? Only Feingold seems to have the brass ones to take a real stand on issues.

Gore made it pretty clear on the Daily Show this week that he is not planning to run again. It didn't sound like the typical vague answer of a politician who is keeping his options open. It sounded like the words of a man who is enjoying being a private citizen and exploring the good he can do outside of elected office.

I think the idea of Gore running again is just wishful thinking.

Personally, I'd like to see some fresh, new blood run for President. No more Clintons, lord help us no more Bushes - let's get away from this dynastic quality we've been seeing lately in American politics. Obama is awesome, and I think he is ready. It's a good thing to have a short and sweet legislative record, that means there's less for the other side to attack. Even better would be if he were a governor instead of a senator. Really, the best chance for Democrats would probably be to have a governor as the presidential candidate and Obama or Edwards as VP. Look at past administrations - how many senators have been President in recent years? How many governors? That's because governors have a less attack-able record. We need to find a good, solid moderate democrat governor from the south as our candidate. How about Mike Easley from NC - he took a dismal budget crisis at the beginning of his term and has turned it into a surplus (that's the sort of shade of Clinton I like!). That's the sort of record that would appeal to voters, I think.

Atleast with Gore there is a semblance of a platform with his movie--that's more than the Dems have had in years--and perhaps ths US citizenry will finally find the environment relevant as it rears its head on us.