I'm changing my mind

There has been much talk about bringing in Al Gore to resolve the mess that is the nomination process. There is new talk about Gore/Obama as the right way to go. Though I am a big Gore supporter, I have expressed strong views against bringing in Gore now, mostly on the grounds that it seems the Dems can't accept a woman or African-American. I may have been wrong. For which I owe no apologies, but do owe some explanation.

I think that Obama must be on the ticket, or minorities will abandon the party in droves. Clinton/Obama seems to have been ruled out. I don't think women will abandon the party in large numbers if Hillary isn't on the ticket. But Obama/Napolitano or (ugh!) Obama/Feinstein might work.

I think Gore/Obama with some pudding for Hillary (replacing Reid atop Senate, for example) is an option if the stalemate can't ne avoided. True, Obama says he's not running for Veep, bu then he said that when Gore was not an option. The risk is that the ticket is well to the left of center. But most progressives see a winning ticket.

Top Dems are looking for a way out. There are several options. But there is no reason not to discuss them. I invite you to so so below in the comments.

There are risks in each outcome. A ticket headed by Obama is likely to win, the polls and pundits claim. Obama is a candidate of "change", but Al Gore is even changier, with bolder positions on the issues.

Some would say that if Gore/Obama is the ticket, that Gore has circumvented the process and skipped the rigors of campaigning. Bully for him! If it gets us the best ticket, so what? He's paid his dues in the past, a lifetime supply.

Change is good. Changier is better. And that's The Word!