20 June 2006
John Hinderaker, this morning:
I've considered the suggestion that the Democrats will re-nominate either John Kerry or Al Gore somewhat ludicrous. It seems clear to me that the Democrats have seen all they want to of Kerry, and, while most Democrats have nothing against Gore, he had his chance in 2000 and has been mostly invisible since then.
"Mostly invisible"? Gore's PowerPoint-on-film An Inconvenient Truth added 282 screens over the weekend and has now grossed about $7 million, right up there with Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties. The Blogger Formerly Known As Hindrocket is evidently not paying attention.
Posted at 9:37 AM to Political Science Fiction
Moot point, anyway, since Gore firmly removed himself from running in '08.
After all, why should he? The job's a bitch, and he's been having a blast, running around Cannes with his little movie and everyone sympathising over being a loser. He's got a lifetime of cushy jobs ahead of him. Why be president?
You have to compare apples to apples. Usually one goes by average box office per screen. Let's look at a few things:
Truth has been open longer than Garf (19 vs 5 days)
Garf is on more screens (2900 vs 404)
Truth's box per screen is stomping Garf (between 1800-5000 vs 800).
I would say that Al is actually doing BETTER than Garfield
Gore didn't do the factually challenged documentary with an eye towards NOT running in '08, "firm" disavowals notwithstanding.