Is it just me, or does it sound like Lieberman's lost it and thinks he's Ariel Sharon? :p

Are you suggesting that any more than a handful of Nadar voters, without Nadar in the race, would have voted for Bush?

It is true that many would probably opt not to vote, but many would have voted Gore simply because they would vote.

Too many variables. What about the, "I better get out and vote for Gore since Nader's running" vote that Gore got? They wouldn't have shown. And the whole flavor of the campaigns change if Nader's not part of the equation. You never know which side of the fence the Gore-Bush fence sitters would have fallen on without Nader there. It just ain't that simple.

Dick Morris, and regardless of what might think of him personally he is a brilliant political mind, believes that Leiberman can win the three way.

Polls in Connecticut show that in a 3 way race, it is currently a 40-40-13 split (the 13 going to the Republican who is plagued by a gambling scandal).

Morris looked at how Lieberman's loss shapes the Dem Presidential outlook.

Because Hillary is playing both sides of the war, it will be easy in the Democrat primaries for fervently antiwar candidates to paint her in a negative light among the most active and furthest left wing of the Dem party, making it difficult for her to win the nomination. Morris sees Gore, of all people, as the candidate that may have the best chance now.

This does not bode well for the Presidential general, because there is no way for Gore to move to the center in the general.

I thought it was interesting analysis, but I don't know if Gore is a candidate with a legitimate shot.

I thought you didn't pay attention to Dem elections.
:D

With six additional years to reflect on it, if given another chance to vote for Gore, I think I would do so. My rationale for not doing so last time hasn't exactly worked out.

In retrospect and looking at polls, I'm sure a lot of people would have then. Gore was able to look like a centrist in 2000. I don't think there is any chance he could come across as a centrist in 2008, and since the general election is about appealing to the center (after having solidified your base in the primary), I don't think he could win.

Particularly if he ends up a Guiliani or a McCain (of course, I think they may each have their problems winning the Republican nomination, but that's another issue).

I'm not talking about his chances for winning. It is way to early to reliably know that; for example if somehow we are out of Iraq in a year the whole calculus being done now changes.

On most things, Gore is a centrist and I can live with the elements he's not. I could also vote for Giuliani as well but not for McCain.

In politics, perception is reality. I don't think nationally the perception of Gore could be that he is a centrist. Of course, he who frames the question wins the debate, so a lot would depend on what topics are hot at the time (such as your if we are out of Iraq scenario).