I didn't miss this, but I agree that it seemed to slip under most radars.

I love Gore, but my superstitous side feared his kiss of death after his endorsement of Howard Dean, who was riding on the top at the time. In fact, I fear my own kiss of death for my candidate, since I've never supported a winner before.

This is very unclear reporting. There is a big difference between stepping in and declaring a winner and mediating a dispute. Which is it?

Yeah, speaking of kiss of death, God forbid SI puts Barack on the cover.

This nothing-has-changed "story" is worth reporting?

I don't resent all this talk about a Gore endorsement like I resent the talk of an Edwards endorsement. Edwards just seems like he's craving the attention that dragging out his endorsement gives him, while in Gore's case, most of the attention is seeking him. You don't get the sense he relishes having everyone hang on his every movement like Edwards does.

Just some wild speculation on my part, but what the hell:

What if VP Al Gore is avoiding taking sides because in a deadlocked convention, the party might turn to him as a compromise Nominee to avoid a party split.

It used to happen like that in conventions long past.

Yes, not giving an endorsement actually gives him more influence on the process. If it comes down to a fight at the end, he'll be a voice of reason cutting through the spin from both camps.

Someone mentioned Carter in the remarks; As a Obama supporter I'm hoping he'll NOT support Obama anytime soon.

Already, those in the fringes are equating Obama abilities with Carter.

Carter can only hurt at this point.

Gore will have great credibility if he steps in at the end of the day because of he being on the wrong side of the history before.

(Long newbie post alert – sorry.)

Speaking as an Obama supporter, I find this news especially encouraging, especially if (and I concede it’s still a somewhat sizable if) current outcome trends hold and Obama manages to reach the convention with leads in pledged delegates, popular vote and number of states won. Who better than Al Gore to play the role of the proverbial cautionary whale (no offense, Al) when it comes to addressing the inevitably destructive consequences of overturning the expressed will of the majority of the electorate by non-electoral fiat?

While I would be disappointed to see Obama overtaken by Hillary in the remaining primary contests, I would have no major qualms about supporting her (however tepidly) if she were to somehow manage to right her campaign and win this thing outright.

However, as I see it the bottom line is this: Personally, I will not accept the legitimacy of any candidate, regardless of nominal party affiliation, who professes to want to undo the damage wrought by the most fundamentally and profoundly anti-democratic administration in my lifetime if that candidate’s claim to the nomination ultimately lies in having wrested the nomination from the rightful winner through backroom arm twisting and maneuvering.

Should Hillary manage to come from behind and prevail at the convention by virtue of superdelegates alone, she will have established herself not as an alternative to the Bush cabal, but rather its political, ethical and, yes, spiritual heir. Perhaps her more ardent supporters who may be rooting for such an outcome might pause to consider Albert Einstein’s observation that no problem is ever solved at the level at which it is created.

As many have already noted, standing back effectively gives Gore the "elder statesman" status to let his words carry some weight. That, and the fact that he's more popular now than when he ran for President in 2000.

If it's still unsettled as the last primaries close, it will fall to someone with stature to quiet things before matter get out of control in the long pause between then and the convention. We do not need a bitter, public, drawn-out fight as a prologue to the nomination.

And while trend lines only allow us to see what's ahead because we know what has passed, the trends favor Obama now. We can see this, we know this, and some of us are gladdened, while others are fearful or embittered. That can not become more rancorous than it already has, unless the thought of a President John McCain, with his hot-tempered, torture-endorsing, marginally stable finger on that most dangerous of buttons somehow pleases you. As for me, I prefer my leadership somewhat saner...