Yes! Obviously!

Gore has two advantages over Romney: He's right on global warming and he was funny in that Futurama movie.

"plastic flexibility"-I'm gonna use that perfect phrase. Thanks, Mr. Larison.

For the record, Romney is not my preferred candidate. But this analysis is nonsense. In informal logic we call it the "fallacy of composition": just because there A is like B in 2 or 3 aspects, therefore everything A is, B is.

There is at least one fundamental difference between Romney and Gore: Gore was a career politician, "destined" to be President (not, thank God). Romney was, before becoming a politician, a highly competent businessman.

In the difference category, I'd also add that Romney is hardly the annoying and patronizing speaker Al Gore can be. He's also unlikely to reprise Algore's Alpha Male act from 2000, including that annoying snog with Tipper on national TV.

Anyone who says "thank God" to Al Gore not becoming president must inevitably prefer George Bush and what has happened over the last seven years. Are you really so foolish as to believe that President Gore would have been worse? If you do believe that, then your ideology has trumped intelligence, common sense, experience, and decency.

Gore is a better man, and better Christian, than any Republican.

One big, giant, huge difference!!!

Romney is INTELLIGENT!!!!!!!

>Anyone who says "thank God" to Al Gore not becoming president
>must inevitably prefer George Bush and what has happened over
>the last seven years.

That does not follow.

It is entirely possible to be grateful for Mr. Gore's loss, without approving of Mr. Bush's win, much less approving of all that has followed from Mr. Bush's win. Politics is the skill of making the less undesirable of choices.

> Gore is a better man, and better Christian, than any Republican.

I have no idea if Mr. Gore is a better man than I am. As far as a better Christian, I really think that is for Almighty God to judge.

He's also unlikely to reprise Gore's Nobel Peace Prize and global public acclaim.

An honor he shares with such notables as Yassir Arafat.

Its like, if the person is on the opposite side, you can't give them ANY credit. You can't just stick with things that everyone knows are their flaws, they can have no virtues whatsoever. Have to admit, that would be the first time I've heard Gore described as 'unintelligent'. Even those who disagree with every position he holds at least grants that he's not that.

As for Mitt, that's what happens when a person is driven to try to be what they're not, because people want someone cool, or charming to serve in the highest office in the land.

It is an indicator that, as usual, the level of political discourse is somewhere between a beauty pageant and the 'Dating Game'. People, we're supposed to be electing the head of the Executive Branch of our country. Not who do we want to date our daughter, or have a beer with at our barbecue.

We did that the last 4 elections. Just to be fair, I can say for both sides of the aisle that, when it comes to charm and charisma, both GW Bush and Bill Clinton apparently have that in bucket loads. Even people who hate them, upon meeting them both, agree they are incredibly likeable.

The US like a bad movie on Lifetime. We know we should go for that stable, intelligent, good guy with the decent job. He's not going to win any 'hunk' contest, or charm our socks off, but he's also not going to charm us out of our bank accounts, or use that same charm on our best friend, or turn angry and violent if a person sees past the charm. But we still seek out the 'charming rogue'.

Well, I, for one, am just sick and tired of that. You know, its too late for this cycle, but I'm starting the campaign for next election.

Heck with frat boy charm, or being hip. I want a NERD for president. Someone smart. Someone with ideas. Someone who knows where all the countries are, who leads them, and what their relationship is with us, and where the problems may lay. Who already knows what branch of government he's running for, and that a 'check', when it comes to the branches, isn't only something you write out to pay for the legislation you pass. Someone so geeky that nobody could imagine him cheating around and we don't get caught up in another soap opera. One that nobody loves, maybe, but nobody rabidly hates either. Someone whose ideas have a hard time fitting into a three word slogan, because our PROBLEMS have a hard time fitting into a three word description.

Hey, I know it won't happen, and we're going as close Ryan Seacrest meets (insert someone you think is cool here) as the political field can manage, but I can dream, right?