On Tuesday, former vice-president Al Gore officially endorsed 2004 presidential hopeful Howard Dean of Vermont. If recent opinion polls were not enough, the Gore endorsement makes Dean the clear democratic front-runner in the upcoming race.

Dean was the front-runner prior to the endorsement of Gore, but according to most, he lacked credibility. Gore all but erases that problem. A respected, influential and powerful figure amongst democrats, Gore will give Dean the credibility he needs to be viewed as a serious candidate

Tom Daschle, the Senate minority leader, called the endorsement a “big prize” for Dean and his campaign, and stated that it puts Dean further ahead in the race for the democratic race than anyone has been so far.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Gore’s vice presidential running mate in 2000, was “taken off guard” by the endorsement, as Lieberman put it recently.

“What really bothers me is that Al is supporting a candidate who is so fundamentally opposed to the basic transformation that Bill Clinton brought to the Democratic Party,” Lieberman said, possibly in regards to the Dean/Gore stance on the war in Iraq.

While Dean and Gore are both highly and openly critical of the war (being anti-war has been one of the foundations of Dean’s campaign thus far), Lieberman has supported it. Dean’s open opposition to President Bush and his staff certainly contributed to Lieberman’s criticisms.

It is unusual for these types of attacks to occur this early into the presidential race, but Dean’s relative inexperience on the mainstream political scene and his lack of credibility has accelerated the process.

While his lack of credibility and prominence may lead to attacks from both sides, Dean is actually using it to his advantage.

“We’re not like the rest of these Washington campaigns,” Dean said recently in South Carolina. The fact that he has been able to play off his lack of experience and still be considered a front-runner is why the Gore endorsement is such a big step forward for Dean.

But the question arises – was the Gore endorsement planned in advance by Dean? Did Dean, in fact, change his views in order to get the upper hand in the nomination race?

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who at one point was far ahead of his democratic competitors and now trails Dean badly in the polls, accused Dean of “flip flopping sides” on his stance on the war. Dean has openly admitted to backing an alternative to last fall’s resolution that would have given the president the ability to wage war against Iraq without approval of Congress.

Kerry has said that Dean is wearing “two masks” and the endorsement by Gore cannot be taken seriously because that no one knows, which Dean is being endorsed: “Howard Dean exercised the exact same judgment that the rest of us exercised (regarding the Iraqi war resolution). I’m saying there are several Howard Deans.”

Know one can truly know what led Gore to endorse Dean, and not another candidate (most specifically his former running mate). Gore has said Dean’s opposition to the war and his ability to inspire the grassroots have been his biggest draws. Whatever the reason, and putting partisan politics aside, the Gore endorsement is a serious blow to the rest of the 2004 Democratic hopefuls, regardless of whether or not it may be the result of devious political tactics, or the honest opinion of a Washington heavyweight.

Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of The Massachusetts Daily Collegian Editorial Board.