Gore limbers up to 'let it rip' in 2004

Barely 18 months after his controversial and traumatic defeat by George Bush in the presidential election, Al Gore is giving increasingly strong signs that he intends to seek revenge in 2004 – whatever the misgivings of Democrat elders.

The latest indication came at a weekend meeting of donors in Memphis, in the former vice-president's home state of Tennessee (which he crucially failed to carry in 2000), when Mr Gore vowed that if he does run again, he would "let it rip" and "let the chips fall where they may". Those comments, made in private sessions with his supporters, are said to have drawn a standing ovation.

No less important, both his wife, Tipper, and eldest daughter, Karenna, have publicly declared they would be delighted if he ran. Karenna said: "It makes you sick about what he could do if he were in that job, and makes me think he should go for it again."

That delight is not shared by the Democratic high command, which believes the party must find a fresh face to recapture the White House. Mr Gore is yesterday's man, they say. He had a gilt-edged chance in 2000 and blew it.

But the mood of the party base is much more favourable to a man it continues to believe had the election stolen from him by an unholy alliance of Florida Republicans and the US Supreme Court. And whatever his failings, Mr Gore is far better known than any of his putative rivals for the nomination.

Crucially, too, the Memphis gathering showed the bulk of the powerful fund-raising network he assembled for 2000 is intact. In other words, as one Democratic analyst put it, "if Gore goes for the nomination, it's going to be pretty hard to stop him", whatever the secret wishes of the establishment.

The dilemma was summed up by the New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, who wrote of how Democrats "could be stuck acting as though the guy who lost the election, even though he won, could win again, even though they're sure he'd lose".

Mr Gore says he will not take a final decision on whether to run until the end of the year, but the Memphis meeting, along with the growing edge to his criticism of the Bush administration and the support of his family, are clear signs that he is leaning in that direction. In the meantime, the wheels of other potential candidates are spinning in the sand.

Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Mr Gore's running mate in 2000, has signalled he intends to seek the nomination – but only if his old partner decides not to. Other possible runners include Richard Gephardt, the House minority leader, Tom Daschle, the Senate majority leader, as well as senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina, a photogenic young lawyer dubbed "the new Clinton" by some.

All have been quietly sounding out donors and have been setting up organisations in key states. All four have paid visits to primary battlegrounds such as Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, where a good performance will be more important than ever in the front-loaded primary season two years hence. But none has made much of an impact.

Indeed after Mr Gore, the Democrat running highest in polls of party supporters is Hillary Clinton. But the New York Senator has given scant sign of contemplating a White House bid.

For the moment Mr Bush, with approval ratings of about 70 per cent, looks unbeatable. But the fate of his father is a reminder of how fast things can change. After victory in the 1991 Gulf War, the popularity of the 41st President hit almost 90 per cent. Eighteen months later he tumbled to abject defeat by Bill Clinton.

Though little noticed, things may be changing for the son. The "war against terror" is no longer the public priority it was a few months ago. If the economic recovery stalls, and the current rash of corporate scandals continues, a Democrat could have a chance in 2004.