Kerry in '08

[Truthiness Inspector]

Clearly things are heating up, and we all have to decide who the frontrunner should be. It should be John F. Kerry, in my opinion.

He is a man of principle, he has spent over twenty years in the Senate, and many of those years on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He knows what is going on and what he is doing.

John F. Kerry is also a war hero, one who achieved what most others have not: 1 Silver Star, 1 Bronze Star, and 3 Purple Hearts. If he could do that in four months, imagine what he could do for our nation.

People call him a flip-flopper but that is not fair. As the saying goes, or something I heard at least, "You can't change the wind, but you can adjust your sails."

Times change, people change, and we need to focus forward in order to win.

John F. Kerry in '08. This man has a clear vision for a Stronger America.

[Mass]

1. I'm a big fan of him, but it is too early for that.

[rodeodance]

23. so am I but I am leaning toward Edwards. He was my first pick last time.

[itzamirakul]

53. Of all the names mentioned so far, Edwards would be my main

choice also.

Kerry - NO. When he didn't speak out about any of the rw charges against him, i lost all respect for him. I think he would behave the same way again.

[LibraLiz1973]

77. Not for me, thanks. I prefer Edwards

Did we learn nothing last time? Kerry is not electable and bringing him out again will only divide the country more.
He may be an honorable man (and I supported him during the election right up until the last) but I don't think he is the future of this country.

[NMDemDist2]

2. welcome to DU Truthiness Inspector!

:hi:

now don your flame suit, it might get a tad warm in here......

[WildEyedLiberal]

3. Yes he does and I agree

Welcome to DU!

[greenbriar]

5. Gore/Kerry 08~ poetic justice

its the only way

[New Earth]

17. i'll second that team

:hi:

[druidity33]

49. i'll third that! n/t

[Truthiness Inspector]

10. Thank you

It's never too early to plan ahead.

[derby378]

4. It's still Feingold for me

Sorry, but Kerry just doesn't reach me as a streetfighter. And we're gonna need one in '08.

[IsIt1984Yet]

31. Me, too. Russ is my guy.

[michreject]

43. I'm with you

He's first on my list.

[blm]

83. Interesting - can you share the major battles Feingold has taken on

over the 13 yrs he's been in the senate that were especially tough? I always thought of him as kind of a quiet voter for most of that time - would love to hear what led you to your conclusion that he's a streetfighter.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

6. No way!

:popcorn: :popcorn: :rofl: :puke:

[FrenchieCat]

7. 2006 is getting very close.....

thereafter, "we" will "decide" who the "frontrunner" will be.....by counting votes during the 2008 primaries!

I'm for Wes Clark in '08...so there!

[karynnj]

54. Frenchie Cat, I agree completely

"by counting votes during the 2008 primaries!"

I am for Kerry - this is too early though. These threads always end up as devisive, with almost more negative comments on each candidate than positives.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. Awesome Post T.I.!

Welcome to DU!

I look forward to hearing more from you. That was a very well written and thoughtful post and I agree with your characterizations completely. I'm in the camp of thinking it's too early to focus on our candidate for 08 and am far more focused right now on taking back congress this year, which is immensely important in my opinion. But I definitely feel all those ways about Kerry as well, and think he's one of the finest Senators we've had.

[MH1]

45. What you said, OMC

If Kerry runs, it will be hard for me to support anyone else over him...unless someone pops up that I don't know much about right now, who turns out to be utterly and completely amazing. That said, we have quite a few potential candidates that I could eagerly support. For me, Kerry is best, for the reasons T.I. mentioned plus others, but I won't take an official stance yet: we need to focus on 2006.

Still, it's really nice to see an occasional "Kerry '08!" post to compete with the "Gore '08", "Clark '08" and so on posts. :-)

Welcome to DU, T.I. You know how to win a few friends right off, that's for sure!

[saltpoint]

9. Kerry's words, especially lately, have come at Bush's jugular

vein like a scythe.

I'm thinking that Junior deserves the verbal whomping, but what I love best about it is the Kerry can bring fire in a couple of sentences where Dubya can't even FORM a sentence. Dragon intellect versus bovine cluelessness.

In his thick, thick skull, even someone as vacuous as George W. Bush knows he cheated to win, and that the man he cheated in 2000 and in 2004 both are smarter than he is. He must sense that historians know it also.

The late Hunter S. Thompson wrote that John Kerry "steamrolled" Bush in the debates. Absolutely the correct verb for it. On strength of language alone, never mind command of the issues, Kerry mopped the floor with George Bush, and made a sitting "war time" president look like a hapless fool.

I place Kerry's chances at the 08 nomination very high. Needless to say, the man has my respect and if he's our nominee, he also has my vote.

[saltpoint]

41. Next morning proofreading team suggests...

1. Paragraph One: -- is THAT Kerry can bring fire --

2. Paragraph Two: -- that the MEN he cheated --

____________

Invoice enclosed, Old Crusoe -- and this time you better pay up!

[Blue_In_AK]

66. I loved the way the Kerry camp called Rove "porcine" yesterday...

What a nice way to call somebody a pig. :rofl:

I would gladly support Kerry in '08.

[saltpoint]

69. Hey there, Blue_in_AK. You said it. They really let ol' Karl have it

right between the eyes.

Some of the strongest retort talk I've heard in politics in a while.

Go, Democrats.

[MH1]

89. In his speech at TBA, Kerry used the phrase "corporate piggery"

or something like that... sounded great, anyway!

:rofl:

[Blaukraut]

93. beautiful

the more comparisons to swine, the better. Rove looks like one anyway, so David Wade's expression was very fitting in many ways :-)

[porphyrian]

11. Is he really the best we can do?

I mean, if he wins the primary I'll support him again over these fucking traitors, but I really hope we do better than that.

[Mass]

12. Certainly one of the best.\nt

[WildEyedLiberal]

13. I really don't think there's anyone in America more suited for the job

You're entitled to support whoever you want, but John Kerry is a true statesman.

[porphyrian]

16. That didn't impress voters in 2004.

And his behavior during and after that run didn't much impress me, either. I don't doubt that he's a good man, but I'm afraid he'll fly like a bad rerun in '08 unless he does a lot to change the way most people think of him.

[MH1]

47. Any candidate will face the same media obstacles.

Did Kerry make mistakes? Absolutely - and he admits that. One thing going for him is that he's now a veteran of the presidential campaign process. He's made the mistakes and has learned from them. The game will be a little different in 2008, but many of the challenges will be similar to 2004, and he's been there. The only other one who can say that is Gore, and I feel strongly that he won't run.

Another thing he has going for him is the "buyer's remorse" factor. The more Bush screws up, the more voters will be vulnerable to the realization that they made a bad choice in 2004. Some will resist that feeling, sure, and come up with all sorts of excuses why they didn't pick Kerry. But others will realize their mistake and be happy to make up for it in 2008.

[Joe Chi Minh]

73. If winning handsomely (legally) doesn't impress you, what

could?

[TayTay]

18. Oh yes, he is very, very good

It's so interesting to see the real person instead of the media creation. One is a passionate speaker wo is able to fire up a crowd and really give people something to think about and act upon. The media creation is a smear and has nothing to do with the real guy.

I prefer the real guy. The RW smear merchants and the media that slurp up their crap and print it are just plain wrong.

[Truthiness Inspector]

22. Then let's get the real guy back out there, in front

Dammit. Are we going to let smear merchants tarnish Senator Kerry?

Not moi. His actions speak for themselves, and we should be dilligent in making sure the truth is known.

[LeahD]

36. Here's the real guy in Ohio last month. He was very, very good!

<center>
<img src="" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"><br><br>

[Joe Chi Minh]

75. Do you remember the amazing scenes whe he travelled the

country?

[LeahD]

91. Yes, thousands of people filling the streets!

I still think he's the one.

[sandnsea]

14. We should have an election

How's that for an idea!!

[politicasista]

15. I appreciate the good Senator!

Welcome. :hi:

[genieroze]

19. NO! He had his chance. AL Gore, at least he got beat by the SCOTUS.

He tried to fight it.

[iconoclastNYC]

20. He should run; but he won't get my vote again

[xthetylerx]

21. Well, all of that sounds like

a supporter of Kerry in 2003 or so. We've ran John Kerry against a rather easy opponent. He had a wonderful opportunity. When it appeared that he "lost" in controversy in Ohio, he bowed out.

Gore/Kerry sounds nice to me.

There are so many great potiential candidates, I support a few. Gore, Edwards, and Bayh find support with me for different reasons.

[WildEyedLiberal]

24. Only in DU lala-land was Bush an "easy opponent"

NO candidate has even had the media and the entire establishment as completely in his corner as George W. Bush.

[ificandream]

25. I like Kerry, too, but ...

...I'm concerned that he'd be much too excellent fodder for the right wing spinsters. You know how they'd spin it, too. If Kerry could be a different John Kerry than the last time, maybe. I certainly don't feel comfortable with Hillary. But at least Kerry would provide the leadership we're certainly not getting now.

[WildEyedLiberal]

28. The fact is the repuke spinmeisters will try to make mince of ANY Dem

So no one has an advantage over the others in that category. In fact you could even put that as a positive in Kerry's column because they already threw their worst at him, and now most of America knows that all they had was lies.

Welcome to DU btw!

[sandrakae]

26. We deserve John Kerry.

As far as I am concerned, John Kerry is the most qualified man to run this Country. GWB is going to leave this country in a mess, we need someone like him to clean it up. I am liking a Kerry/Clark or Kerry/Feingold ticket.

[Clarkie1]

27. I think his idea of a fixed timetable will handicap him in 08'.

Especially if the situation in Iraq is more stable a year from now. Time will tell.

[smoogatz]

40. It won't be.

It'll be worse--though we may have fewer troops there.

[Clarkie1]

92. I honestly don't know. No one knows...time will tell. n/t

[seabeyond]

29. i want john kerry too, for other reasons you didnt state.

thank you for your post

[Truthiness Inspector]

30. What did I miss?

I know I put things in a nutshell. If you have additional reasons, please add them.

[seabeyond]

32. he has already been out there

i believe the people did vote for him and was enthused and the election was stolen i think he is so aware now. with this experience comes

he doesn't do the polite anymore with the media.... he has learned how to handle that

he bought into the public wanted politician to talk about issue, not bash (he knows better)

he doesn't play gentleman with these guys anymore

his trash is out there so he isn't going to be distracted always trying to catch up and try to get message out. that was one of the problems, they were throwing so many things out, they would have to stop and address. a new candidate is fresh meat. i think this is the biggest selling point. if we put a new one out there he is going to be trashed just as hard about lies always trying to clear himself. kerry is done with that.

[itzamirakul]

86. I really think the GOPs will use the same lying situations that they

used in 2004 and that they can and will whip Kerry again with the same lies. They will swiftboat him again and I have yet to hear him give a good, qualified, "THAT'S A DAMNED LIE!" right back at them.

Then, we are somewhat handicapped by our good fellow Dems who just don't want us to fight back on the same terms as the Republicans. The centrist Dems would send us to a knife fight with a soda straw for a weapon. They want us to be "nice" which is one of the things that helped beat us in 2004.

I haven't forgotten the hundreds of posts against Kerry when he quit so quickly after leading us to believe that he would fight to have votes counted accurately. A lot of us sent in money to help defray the cost of dozens of lawyers who were going to go en masse to Ohio and other problem states. None of that happened. We still don't know what happened to that money. It wAs earmarked for lawyers to count votes.

Why was Delay able to send his personal brownshirts out to comandeer polling places in Michigan and the Dems did nothing? These are the things I think Kerry should have been up on. Instead the Republicans made it appear as though they had run rings around JK.

I FORCED myself to REALLY LIKE Kerry during 2004, because he was not my first choice, but then I went out and went to work for him. I spent hours at the keyboard promoting every positive think that I could about him in an effort to get more eligible voters to actually go to the polls to vote for him. I, along with many others have given Kerry more than support. We gave him loyalty and dedication. I don't want to set myself up for another disappointment the size of the one I had after the election of 2004.

[Pastiche423]

33. No f'ing way

It took me a week to draw that line to his name in 2004. And the only way I managed to do that, was to promise myself - NEVER AGAIN will I vote for the lesser of two evils.

[wisteria]

34. I agree! If he runs he will have my vote. n/t

[BlueIris]

35. Welcome. Nice handle.

Kerry's a lock if you ask me, and yes, I would be saying that even if he weren't (and hadn't always been) my first choice for nominee next time.

[jillan]

37. Truthiness Inspector - welcome welcome to DU

After the election I was so pissed when he resigned.

By the end of November '04, I had his back again.
He never stopped. He kept doing everything he said he would during the
campaign. He's getting alot more attention, alot more people are listening.
He will be an even better candidate in '08 then he was in '04. It's going to be fun watching him over the next 2 years.

[BlooInBloo]

38. There are several I prefer before him, but....

... that said, I'll STRONGLY support the eventual Democratic nominee.

I think Kerry would be a fine President, but I also think would can do better.

[ProSense]

39. Excellent post!

Senator Kerry has one of the strongest records fighting for Democratic values and in opposition of Republicans' failed policies, cronyism and corruption. I definitely support his vision for the future!

[dysfunctional press]

42. not for me.

i will NOT be voting for ANY dlc pukes.

[MH1]

46. Kerry is far more liberal than the DLC.

I've always presumed he allows them to call him a member so that he can keep tabs on them and even influence them, if ever so slightly.

Keep in mind that he is consistently listed as around the 11th most liberal Senator. Since lots of less liberal people than you will be voting in the primaries, you probably can't realistically expect a more liberal candidate to be chosen. That said, it's absolutely appropriate for you to work for the candidate who best represents your views. But I hope you will look at Kerry's positions and actions (such as being the one to call for investigation of DSM, the one to call for filibuster of Alito, etc), rather than base your decision solely on an organizational affiliation that may not mean what you think it means.

[dysfunctional press]

56. i just don't care for the guy.

every time he speaks, it makes me cringe- he's one of the worst public speakers out there.
plus- the way he caved so quickly in 2004 was ridiculous
and- his vote for the iwr is completely unforgivable.

there are 3 would-be candidates at this point that i will definitely abstain from voting for no matter what- Kerry, Clinton, Edwards. as november 2008 approaches, that list may grow- but it definitely isn't going to shrink.

i can wait as long as it takes for a good candidate to appear- when the pendulum swings back our way, i don't want it stopping in the middle.

[MH1]

58. point by point.

1) He spoke at the Take Back America conference on Tuesday and the crowd LOVED him. I was there. He really was great. (There are video links all over...if you are interested and need help finding one, I'll track it down.) I've seen him speak in person several other times, and each time he's been excellent. Unfortunately, what gets pulled out and played in the MSM often doesn't do him justice - and that was especially bad during the 2004 campaign. (Gee...wonder if the corporate ownership of media had anything to do with that...)

2) He didn't "cave" - as I've been told, he spent much of the night with lawyers and advisors,poring over ballot numbers and scenarios, and ultimately coming to the conclusion that the numbers just weren't there, and the evidence just wasn't there to prove the kind of fraud that could affect the outcome. He made a rational decision to fight in a certain way, and he has been. I appreciate that many disagree with his decision and even feel hurt by it, but it is just wrong to say that he isn't fighting at all. His lawyers tried to get access to the machines and were blocked. He joined the lawsuits by the Green and Libertarian parties, and the LWV suit against the voter suppression. He has backed many legislative proposals in the Senate - most of which have 5 or fewer cosponsors, but Kerry is one. However, he recognizes that NO bill passed by a republican congress can be assured as a good thing - they will corrupt whatever they can - so he is putting immense energy into trying to win back Congress by helping 2006 candidates. He's received kudos from many in the party as one of the (if not the) best fundraisers the party has this year. His endorsement of Webb for VA Senate was huge, and further shows the character of two men who can overcome 30+ years of intense difference to come together for a common goal to better this country.

3) IWR - many voted for IWR - it is Bush who should be blamed for starting the Iraq War - IWR would have passed without Dem votes, but in any case Bush would have invaded anyway. The goal of Kerry and others in voting for IWR was to try to enwrap Bush in the UN process to prevent him from invading without UN authorization (which he wouldn't have gotten in Spring 2003, if ever). The strategy failed, but the fact remains that Bush would have invaded regardless - his disregard for FISA, and the failure of the Republican-controlled Congress to do a single thing about it - they aren't even investigating! - just proves that IWR was meaningless in relation to the invasion.

4) abstaining - I don't blame you at all for picking a different candidate to support in the primary, but if you abstain in the general - based on who the likely rethug candidates might be - of the three you mention (Kerry, Edwards, Clinton), not one is close to being evil or irresponsible in the way the potential rethug candidates are. If any of those three are the Dem nominee and you abstain in the general, you will just have to bear that on your conscience, I guess. Because it will be an indefensible vote. And yes, to abstain IS to vote.

[dysfunctional press]

60. my conscience will be just fine with abstaining

it would only bother me if i were to vote for a candidate i couldn't support.
i wasted one vote on him- i won't waste another.

i have seen him speak a number of times- and he's never impressed me at all- but it sure seems like he impresses the hell out of himself.

[MH1]

64. So, if the matchup is

Kerry vs. Brownback?

You choose Brownback.


Kerry vs. George Allen?

You choose George Allen.


Kerry vs. John McCain (and his doubletalk express)?

You choose John McCain.


You would inflict Brownback, Allen or McCain on this country rather than vote for John Kerry?

Wow.

[dysfunctional press]

65. no- i would choose to abstain.

or possibly vote for a third party candidate, if there was one to my liking.

that's how our system works- you vote for the candidate you choose to support the most, not for the candidate that has the best chance of beating the candidate you support the least.

if i'm lucky, then in my lifetime, enough people will eventually share my views, and we'll elect the kind of candidates i support- but i will stay steadfast in my non-support of dlc hacks.

i'm patient...i can wait.

[MH1]

71. So, you would support Brownback, Allen, or McCain over Kerry. Got it.

Because THAT's the way our current system works. Whether you like it or not, whether you choose to admit it or not. Whether you can remember as far back as the year 2000 or not.

Regardless - I hope this means you are working hard to get a more representative voting system implemented where you can (which means the local level) - like Instant Run Off Voting (IRV). Once you succeed at THAT, then the system will work the way you apparently want it to.

Finally, if you think John Kerry is a "dlc hack" then you are truly uninformed about him and/or the DLC currently. I would hope that you would work hard to learn about the candidates and support whichever Democrat in the primary truly best represents your views. If you diligently research, you may be surprised at what you find out.

Unless of course, you are what your posts make you appear to be, which means you wouldn't care. I hope I am wrong, though.

[dysfunctional press]

76. no, i would choose to abstain...

or possibly vote for a third party candidate, if there was one to my liking.

i will not vote for john kerry again for any reason whatsoever.
i didn't like that i was given no choice in the primary, and i didn't like that i felt like i was obligated to vote for kerry in the general, and i won't do it again...i don't like the guy as a candidate.

[LibraLiz1973]

78. I wont vote for him again

I'd rather not vote at all

[MH1]

82. Wow - you would also prefer a repuke for president?

After reading your full length post, that makes NO sense at all.

It's one thing to say you'd prefer another candidate. It's a totally different thing to say you'd rather see the Republican win if you get a less than perfect nominee from the primary process.

:banghead:

[blm]

84. Because you dislike the ONE LAWMAKER who has investigated and exposed

more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history? ANY other Dem deserves your vote but not the one who has effected this nation's REAL history as positively as Kerry has over a 35 yr period.

Gotcha.

[MH1]

81. Once again - YOU WOULD VOTE REPUKE. Abstain = repuke vote AND YOU KNOW IT.

You have made that clear enough. Just because you don't "like" someone you clearly know nothing about. And it damn sure wasn't the candidates' fault that you were "given no choice in the primary" - the candidates have NOTHING to do with how that is set up.

[dysfunctional press]

90. absolutely not.

an abstention is just that- an abstention. and a vote for a third party candidate is just that- a third party vote. if the Democrats were an actual opposition party, or would field a decent candidate, people like yourself wouldn't have to resort to foolish semantic games to try and guilt people into voting for a candidate they don't support.

and you know it.

it may even take another 4 or 5 repuke regimes- but eventually the people will catch on...hopefully.

thankfully, i can be very patient.

:hi:

[MH1]

97. It helps the repuke win.

You can argue all you want but you cannot change that fact.

[dysfunctional press]

98. Democrats not fielding a decent candidate is what helps the repuke win...

You can argue all you want but you cannot change that fact.

centrism is a stupid policy...we're supposed to be an opposition party that represents the common working person- not "republican-lite".

and i will not be wasting my vote on any more republican-lite tickets.

but you can vote however you please...i can live with it.

[saltpoint]

52. How 'bout for a 100% ACLU ratings senator then?

John Kerry is a sturdily liberal senator from a steadily blue state.

The ACLU is not known for its spinelessness.

[dysfunctional press]

79. as long as it's not kerry...

i won't be casting any more votes for him.

[saltpoint]

95. Y'know, a 100% ACLU rating might not be too shabby after 6 or 8 years

of vacuous mean-spirited heartless governance by George W. Bush.

I respect the ACLU very, very much and that rating means a lot to me.

[JNelson6563]

44. I hope not!

I can't sell out two presidential races in a row. Sorry.

[dailykoff]

48. No objections.

He's got a hell of mess to clean up, and the corportocracy will fight him tooth and nail, but I think he can handle it. He's got his own money for one thing and that will help him.

[natrat]

50. dont trust him - gore my man

[blm]

51. Unless he works to expose machine fraud and secure voting machines he

CANNOT WIN - no Democrat CAN win. And, trust me, no one wants Kerry in office more than I do - I want the books opened on BushInc and, so far, he's the only person I KNOW for sure will do it.

[WI_DEM]

55. Excellent Senator and if nominated in '08 he will get my total support

but I personally want a different face in '08--who? I'm not sure yet.

[sea urchin]

57. Who has the best shot at winning?

I still think Sen. Clinton would unite the party. She has to run to the center for the moderates and disaffected R's.

[MH1]

59. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

I hope you brought your flame-retardant suit though.

I personally like Hillary, although she isn't my choice because of her policy positions and the way she will motivate republicans to swarm to the polls to defeat her (imo). But many on this board have much less moderate opinions of her than I do. Just letting you know!

[bdamomma]

63. I like Clinton but not for President

[sea urchin]

68. How about VP? (nt)

[oasis]

74. Hill is suffering the slings and arrows of a front runner. It'll come down

to which candidate has the best organization.

[bigwillq]

88. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[SmokingJacket]

61. I have nothing against the guy, but he had his chance.

There are plenty of other excellent possibilities.

Edwards, for one.

[bdamomma]

62. There are so many great candidates out there

Wes Clark, Russ Feingold, John Edwards, John Kerry these guys are professionals and have class and know how to speak, we have a choice, I would put Al Gore in that category also, but let us focus on November 2006 we have to clean house first.

[lillilbigone]

67. Please just wait till after November to have this discussion.

You're premature.

[saltpoint]

72. Nah. Too many political junkies on the web to withhold comment

or speculation.

We're multi-taskers. 08 is on everybody's minds.

Party strategists are already knocking heads over 2012! Long as it stays pro-Democratic, this is healthy chatter.

Welcome to DU.

[Joe Chi Minh]

70. Yes. And I think the fact that he knows the law and has been

beavering away all the time on progressive legislation, adds still more kudos to his CV.

[Robbins]

80. 2008

Inless Al Gore runs mu first choice Is Feingold but after that my prefernce Is for Kerry or Clark.
In fact Kerry looks better now than he did during the 2004 primarys. Let's be honest out of the senators who will run Kerry,and Feingold are the only ones who deserve the nomination. Kerry Is the
most Liberal candiate since Mondale to have won the nomination. Kerry listened to the wrong people(just like Gore did) and was hurt by the Clinton people on the DNC,and DLC. He needs to run as he Is not try to be what people tell him the country wants. Polls show If people could vote again he would win. Kerry clearly won the debates against Bush(which closed the gap,and If the votes In Ohio would have been legit would probally be In the White House) after Feingold out of the Senators who are going to run he has been speaking out most against Bush and backing up with votes. I will take
him over Hilary, Biden,Bayh,Daschle,Vilshack,Warner,Richardson. I like Edwards but I prefer Kerry over him. Inless Gore runs I think will Democrats should conisder him,Clark,Feingold for the Nomination with Edwards as a dark house.

[Orsino]

85. He wouldn't be my first choice, but...

...if anyone has to inherit *'s wars, he'd be a good one.

I'd rather promote a non-militaristic image for America.

[bigwillq]

87. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

94. Still, "No."

I've got an opening in '24, though. :)

[globalvillage]

96. I agree, TI.

I was at the TBA conference when Sen Kerry gave his speech Tuesday, and it was stunning. I've seen/heard a lot of speeches, but that was truly magnificent. He OWNED that room. I thought Hillary was OK, except for her Iraq stance, which was pretty harshly received (she looked lovely, BTW, I met her later in the day). Pelosi was next up, and she was good, but not outstanding. But JK had the crowd on it's feet over and over again.
The man I heard on Tuesday was John Kerry, without any evoquocation, without anyone trying to 'manage' him, and he was rockin'. If he keeps it up, there's no stopping him. The media will not be able to ignore or distort his message like they did in '04.
He's learned a lot, he admits his mistakes, and he is not likely to repeat them.

I agree. Kerry '08, and welcome to DU!

recommended.