Kerry Hasn't Earned Right To Run In 2008

[Larkspur]

from The Day, Eastern CT newspaper
http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=02F23DDA-DB64-41B1-AA13-0C2A06C2CA61

Some presidential election history for John Kerry to ponder:

In the 25 presidential elections held in the past century, there were 18 candidates who, like Kerry, lost in their first try for the office. Of perhaps greater significance, only three of those losers were allowed to run again, and only one of them became president.

From Alton B. Parker in 1904 to Kerry in 2004, forgiveness for failure has been rare and redemption when given a second chance is rarer still.
<SNIP>

Kerry can claim neither the slender margin nor the brilliant campaign. It will be argued he was a better candidate against the same opponent than Al Gore but Gore lost by that slender margin and Kerrry was trounced.
<SNIP>

Kerry made himself unclear about the campaign's major issue, the war in Iraq, only to become momentarily coherent when he said if he'd known Saddam Hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction, he still would have favored going to war. I think that did him in-then and forevermore.

And so, sadly, when a place in history is found for John Kerry, it will be among those other obscure aspirants for the highest office like Alton Parker, John W. Davis, James Cox, Walter Mondale and Alf Landon, all of whom were honorable men who ran once, lost and were forgotten.

[Old and In the Way]

1. I thought everyone earned the right to run?

Except under age 35, foreign born, and Presidents who have served 2 terms. Did I miss a Kerry clause in the Constitution?

[yellowcanine]

37. I am with you - voters get to decide who should be running and who should

go home.

[robbedvoter]

54. Kerry disagreed with you when he kicked Gore out of the race

A bit of karma here.

[imenja]

62. no one has earned the right yet

they need to wait until 2006. How about serving the people NOW rather than working on their future political prospects.

[LittleClarkie]

65. Or working against, as the case may be

Eh, so the reporter didn't like Kerry either. So what else is new.

[unblock]

2. more banana republican lies and propaganda

NO republican has earned the right to run in 2008.

the banana republicans put up ZERO resistance to a continuation of the unmitigated disaster that is the current administration.

why should ANY of them deserve a single vote in 2008?

kerry fought and nearly won, and in fact would have if it weren't for the banana republican control over the vote counting process. for that, kerry has earned our respect and our support for a future run.

NO banana republican has earned a single thing.

kerry should run unopposed in 2008.

[cyclezealot]

3. Kerry failed us on

Kerry has every right to run...Considering how he did not reply to "Swiftboat" sleeze attackers; I wonder if he really wanted to win at all...That is when he lost the election...
After that comments about his creditability came to fruition by the general public... Idiots believed these sleezemongers.... Should Democrats buy his excuses they are nuts.

[Imperialism Inc.]

6. He may have felt that the best approach

was to ignore them. He may have felt that if he responded it would give the press an excuse to keep the "issue" in the news. What he failed to realize was that the press was going to do so anyway. And they did. For 1 1/2 - 3 hours every night it was blaring out of the tube. The local "pre-news" , the local news, the national news, the gossip/entertainment news shows that come on after the "real" news. It was constant.

[cyclezealot]

17. Excuses, excuses

It did not take more than a couple days to realize( by the polls, if nothing else, it was working) I was furious with him or his aides...Certainly a weeks time should let you know of the need to counter attack...Too late damage done...
Anyone hear Swiftboat azz holes say, when we are through with him, the US public will think he fought for the COng...It worked...
Should have expected it months earlier, when the same element doctored photos of Kerry with Jane Fonda...

[Jersey_Lib]

73. Painted into a corner

Kerry was painted into a corner by the SBVets. They basically asked "when did you stop beating your wife?" and Mary Beth did not counter attack right away.

The second O'Niell challenged Kerry and asked him to sue if the stories weren't true, Kerry should have taken him to court. Kerry then could have continued his campaign while his attorneys pressed Bush about the libel.

[Dr Ron]

14. A Mistake (Which Kerry realizes)

Kerry wanted to respond to the Swift Boat Liars for the AWOL Liars.

He was advised against this because it was felt that it would increase the publicity for the attacks. It often happens that when someone responds to attacks, the public becomes more aware of the attacks without necessarily picking up the defense. Also recall that the same attacks came out in the spring and did not hurt him then.

Advisers also thought that this would interupt Kerry's current tour when he was putting out his domestic agenda.

Clearly this was very bad advice and he should have responded. Kerry reportedly was upset with those who gave this advice.

This was a mistake in the campaign, but making a mistake in a campaign is not sufficient to prevent support for a candidate for subsequent campaigns. I also wonder if a candidate who has gone through the process (including making mistakes) would be less likley to make mistakes in a future campaign as compared to someone who has never done this.

[LittleClarkie]

25. That's what I say

Perhaps we think we could do better the first time out. I'd like to see one of us try. I think that person would come back and say they were naive in thinking it was that damned easy.

No one will ever have a chance to use what they learned if we never give them another try. We'll always be reinventing the wheel.

[cyclezealot]

27. Polls varified Kerry's loss

That should be enough...Turn the other cheek..No way..he is now a loser...That is what the general public will think..
I thought politicians lived by the polls...The polls showed him the way and he ignored them...
I heard from my Repug. neighbors...Not counting the lies...so then,must be true..That is what I heard...And it worked..
One thing..Gore's loss liberated him, so he could say what he thinks...The Liberated 2004 Gore made me wish he could run again..He didn't .

[LittleClarkie]

29. Which polls dear

There were many, and each pointed in a different direction (much like economists).

The exit polls? Those show he won, actually.

The Gallup poll? Zogby? NYT? CBS? CNN? USA Today? Rassmussen? Mason-Dixon?

Some of the general public still has a decent opinion of him I think. We shall see in about 3 years from now.

Gore's a loser too, by the way. Why doesn't your logic apply to him?Well, in part I see it's because he has had four years to show us what he's made of.

What were you saying about Gore in 2000? "No way..he is now a loser"?

So, let's give Kerry that same 4 years, shall we?

[cyclezealot]

38. Up until Swiftbooat Kerry consistantly lead most polls

After Swiftboat,he started a downward spiral..that is what I recall...His negatives began to go up...
My point about Gore...Having lost Gore found his soul..Maybe there is hope for Kerry, then..

[Largemouth Bass]

43. What would have been the best response

to the Swiftboat accusations? How could he prove they were lying?

[Andromeda]

32. Thank you for your measured response.

What you state is exactly true. I don't think Kerry, if he does run again in 2008, is likely to make the same mistakes again.

If we only elected people who never made mistakes we would be permanently leaderless.

[michaelwb]

20. What about Gore?

Here's what gets me Gore was treated as persona non grata after 2000 by a lot of the Dems. While Kerry is still talked about as running again.

What about Gore who, despite the probable fraud in both elections, actually won the popular vote.

[LittleClarkie]

26. "Damaged goods" ;-)

The only reason Kerry is still talked about, I think, is because he still holds national office, and isn't likely to fade into the woodwork as quickly as those who held no office right after their loss.

I think Gore faded out on purpose so as not to divide the country. But I for one wouldn't look unkindly toward another attempt.

As I say below, if you can make it out of the primaries, you've earned the right. I don't care who you are.

[Withywindle]

71. That's not the way I remember it...

Virtually every Democrat I know thought Gore was the presumptive nominee for 2004, and were shocked and dismayed when he announced he wasn't running.

[marcologico]

57. Kerry did respond--remember that Chicago Tribune reporter who spoke up

for the first time to corroborate Kerry's story and denounce the SBVT? And of course the rest of of Kerry's "band of brothers" spoke out too, and Kerry himself said many times that the SBVT vets weren't there, contradicted what they'd written in their own reports (i.e. were lying), etc.

The truth was out there for anybody willing to turn off Fox News and find it.

[The Zanti Regent]

87. I beleive Kerry did not want to win

I really believe Kerry made a Bonesman deal with Bush to knock off the real war opponents (Dean, Clark, Kucinich, Sharpton and Graham) and then he would lay down and die for Bush.

Kerry threw the election.

My son now lies in the Los Angeles VA Cemetary, a victim of Skull and Bones.

THANKS FOR NOTHING, JOHN KERRY, YOU WORTHLESS PHONY!

[marcologico]

88. that's terrible about your son

But I think you're wrong to blame Kerry, who said many times "the President misled us into war."

[Dr Ron]

4. Depends upon what he does next

Kerry is in the same position as everyone else. He must win delegates in the primaries. It is premature to decide who to vote for now. We need to see what the potential candidates do over the next few years. If Kerry is effective as an opposition leader, he could win support for another run.

One problem in 2004 was that he let the Republicans define him. (I don't necessarily mean this as criticism--it might have occured with any candidate). Another problem is that only part of his story came out during the election. Voters did not rally know about his fiscal conservativism (which might have negated views of him as a "tax and spend liberal") and of his strong support for fighting terrorism (even when Republicans ignored that issue).

Being active in the Senate might allow Kerry to better define himself as if he becomes prominent in promoting a number of causes (and perhaps in exposing the Bush administration).

It would be best to reevaluate Kerry in 2-3 years as opposed to judging now whether he should be considered for another run.

[TomClash]

5. Huh?

Kerry was trounced? 51-48 and 286-252 against an incumbent wartime President is "trounced?" That's a peculiar use of the language.

One one candidate has run, lost and run again and won? Let's see - Nixon and Reagan - that makes two not one. And that's in the last 44 years.

Maybe "the Day" needs an new editor.

[JDStutts]

34. Good catch

[IntravenousDemilo]

86. Well, no, they're right about one thing...

There was only one candidate who won his party's nomination, lost the election, and then ran again and won, which is exactly what I took them to mean. That was Nixon. Reagan won his first time out as his party's standard-bearer.

[nofurylike]

7. uh. earned?

he won.

whatever the fight about that, he still did.

[cornermouse]

8. Maybe Kerry should do like Alf Landon and let the kids

run for office. Sometimes it works out better that way.

Alf Landon, father of Senator Nancy Landon Kassebaum, an excellent senator from Kansas back when I was still voting republican and republicans were still sane.

Unlike Dole, I never regretted voting for her.
=======================================
Kassebaum-Baker, Nancy Landon

1932-, U.S. senator from Kansas (1979-97), b. Topeka, Kans. A Republican and the daughter of Kansas governor Alfred Mossman (Alf) Landon , she was the first woman who had not entered politics as the widow of a congressman to be elected to the Senate. Kassebaum was an early proponent of term limits, supported abortion rights and gun control, and became chairwoman of the Labor and Human Resources Committee in 1995. She married Howard Baker in 1996.

[lateo]

9. I couldn't agree more...

And...I think it is kind of odd that some of Kerry's more ardent supporters on DU are gone now.

[saracat]

10. BULLSHIT Read this!

You
Sunday, November 28, 2004
Jackson questions Ohio election tally

By Reid Forgrave
Enquirer staff writer

IF YOU GO
The Rev. Jesse Jackson is to lead rallies in Columbus today and in Cincinnati on Monday to encourage Ohio to seek an investigation of the presidential vote. Jackson is to speak at Integrity Hall, 2081 Seymour Ave., Bond Hill, at 8:30 a.m. Monday.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson plans to lead rallies in Columbus this afternoon and in Cincinnati on Monday morning in an effort to seek an investigation into the state's presidential election, which the civil rights leader claims had enough irregularities to warrant a closer look.

Saying the American voting process must regain credibility after the disputed 2000 presidential election, Jackson said the country needs more open, free and fair elections. An investigation of voting and vote-counting procedures in Ohio would be a step toward credibility, he said.

"We were promised this time that every vote would count," said Jackson, president of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.

Jackson cited several voting irregularities in Ohio as indicators that voting problems could be more widespread than reported. Among them:

• An error with an electronic voting system that gave President Bush 4,258 votes in a suburban Columbus precinct where only 638 people voted.

• Elections officials in Warren County who cited homeland security concerns for locking the media out of the Board of Elections office while votes were being counted.

• Large gaps between exit polls and actual results.

"We want to know how deep this pattern goes," Jackson said. "We have been continuing to pursue the outcome of the election with disturbing findings. ... We want a full investigation of these irregularities."

When asked why it was him, not the Democratic presidential candidate, who is demanding an investigation and recount, Jackson implied that Sen. John Kerry could become more vocal soon about an investigation on the Ohio vote or a statewide recount.

"Kerry was inclined to believe what he was told, and he was told the election was over," Jackson told a group of reporters in a conference call Saturday afternoon. "But now we're unearthing information that did not surface at first. I suppose the more information Kerry gets, the more you will hear from him."

Although a demand for a recount typically is not made until after the vote has been certified, Jackson and others, including the Green and Libertarian parties who have filed a lawsuit demanding a recount, fear that waiting until certification would not allow enough time for a completed recount before Ohio presidential electors meet Dec. 13.

The Ohio Secretary of State's Office has said certification should occur around Dec. 6.

E-mail [email protected]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
have no idea what he is doing!

[struggle4progress]

11. We should be organizing for a multiyear political fight against ...

... Republican extremists, instead of p*ssing on John Kerry and other nominal leaders.

Time is short: when the new Congress is seated, we will see an unprecedented attempt to roll back the nation to the grafty standards of the Gilded Era. Expect an assault on the New Deal, an ongoing effort to end environmental protection, the packing of courts with rightwing extremists, and a new military push.

We cannot count on the media to get our story out, and it certainly will not help us to organize, one person at a time, for the next political phase. Nor can we expect the Congressional Democrats to stand up without being constantly pushed to do so: the history of Congressional Democrats since the early 1980's has largely been one of accomodation with conservative extremists, especially so since the disaster of 1994.

This offers real challenges, which we must begin to address.

[emulatorloo]

12. YEAH RIGHT, Kerry was "trounced"

and Bush has a HUGE MANDATE!

:silly:

[AlexHamilton]

16. Hmm...

Let's not talk about Bush's huge MANdate. Might upset his base. ;)


Alex Hamilton
Read my latest article: The Media is Finally Outraged
Impeachment by the People

[bobweaver]

13. Democrats seem to forget that

that while they play to win, the Republican's don't play to win. They play to kill. This year, they attempted to not only defeat him in 2004, but to destroy him as a candidate for the future as well. The Republicans do not play "ordinary" or "traditional" politics, they play mercenary politics.

[Spiffarino]

18. Absolutely correct

...and very well put.

Rove has said as much on many occasions. These are not "moral" people we are dealing with, no matter how much lip service they pay to moral values. They have no qualms about lying, cheating, and stealing to get what they want.

And all they want is power.

[LittleClarkie]

30. You can tell this is true

by how the Right Wing people are still attacking him. When they brought up the Silver Star "shot a kid in the back" story in conjunction with the unarmed wounded Iraqi story. When they had Braille come out with the "Democrats are steamed about Kerry's funds" story (even though there was 8 million in Gore's coffers.)

If not to destroy him for future election, then to make him ineffectual as Senator. They don't usually have to deal with someone who still has a job at the end of an election. I'm sure they want to marginalize him as much as possible in the meanwhile, esp. if he means what he says about standing up to them.

Anyone in the know is going to see though the bullshit, I should think, esp. his fellow pols.

[Redleg]

49. Good point. How can we beat them unless we become like them?

EOM

[AlexHamilton]

15. The right to run...

Well I don't know that he will be the best candidate in 2008, but he would definitely need to refine his strategy. But, I can't think of any Republicans I would vote for over him if he ran again.

Colin Powell: Way to stick your neck out for Bush instead of for the country when you knew the truth. Not getting my vote.

John McCain: Bush and his cronies pissed on your reputation and family in 2000, but you still support him. He acts tough on terror, but supports using our money for efforts that will not lower the terror threat. Not getting my vote.

Bill Frist: Uhh yeah right, besides being ultra-conservative this guy is just flat out creepy. Not getting my vote.

Ah-nold(given constitutional amendment): Can't pronounce the name of the state he governs. Not getting my vote.

Tack on your own comments on the candidates for 2008.

Alex Hamilton
Read my latest article: The Media is Finally Outraged
Impeachment by the People

[lojasmo]

19. There will be plenty of other people running in the 2008 G.E.

If Kerry is the democrat, somebody else will be getting my vote, and my energy. I voted for him this time, because of the disaster that is bush. He sold his principals for "electability." Didn't quite work out for him though, eh?

If the next democratic nominee voted for bush's war, NCLB, and the patriot act, that candidate will not be my candidate.

[LittleClarkie]

31. Which principles did he sell?

Just wondering what your perspective is.

[Tamyrlin79]

21. I agree: Kerry has not earned place in 2008

I think it is wrong to say he has "no right to run" since, technically, EVERYBODY has the right to run. However, I do think it is too much to say that he has a right to the '08 nomination. Al Gore running in '04 may have had a "right" to the nomination after the '00 election, and had he run, he would have been the presumptive nomineee, rather than Kerry. I think this article references THAT dynamic.

Thus, if Kerry runs in '08, he will NOT be the presumptive nominee again. In fact, the trend will be the reverse, in that he will be the only one that democrats can elminate from the field early on. Sort of like Joe Lieberman. Not to equate the two cause I have much more respect for Kerry, but the dynamic is still the same.

[Jersey_Lib]

70. What about Edwards?

Why wouldn't Edwards make a run in 2008? The field right now for 2008 is slim on both sides. The only candidate the Reptards have is Rudy and that being the case the core will stay home.

We have Edwards, Clinton, possibly Evan Bahr or we can run Obama. IMHO I think an Obama/Richardson or vice versa would be the best bet.

[wellst0nev0ter]

22. Stop. . .Blaming. . .The. . .Victim

You fucking morons.

Was there one claim by the Bush campaign that wasn't a lie or total distortion? Was the media present to focus on the said lies and distortions, or were they there to echo the "flip flopper" or "global test" echo chamber?

And for chrissakes, we all know if Kerry was all of a sudden totally against the Iraq war, the whole political world would suck in a huge breath, turn blue in the face and yell FLIP FLOPPER!!! so he felt he needed to err on the side of "security".

As far as I'm concerned, he ran a decent campaign with all the cards that was stacked against him.

[Cheswick2.0]

23. "You fucking morons."........ LOL

You are right Kerry couldn't change his stance on the war. That is why it would have been better to have an honest one to begin with. There is no defense like the truth. If Kerry had voted against the IWR as he should have, problem solved!
Do you really think that people didn't understand his "nuance" was bullshit?
Actually he had a good answer, he was just too chicken to use it. He should have said. If I knew then what I know now, that the intelligence was a lie, I would not have voted for the IWR.

[LittleClarkie]

28. It was honest

Dishonest would have been to go against what he believed because it would have been popular.

Same as DOMA.

He gave the same authority to Clinton. The difference was that this sort of authority should not be given to a maniac. You don't trust the promises of a maniac. At that point, I don't think Kerry understood just what maniacs our current administration are. It does boggle the mind. I can't even talk about it without looking for the tin to complete the picture.

The world is a complicated place, my dear. So are the solutions. So it is for the son of a diplomat. Perhaps if the campaign was allowed essay instead of short answers, he could get that across. I think he came close in a couple of speeches I read, and in the first debate. But none of that ever seemed to make the nightly news.

Just because his answer differs from yours, doesn't make it less honest. You can call it wrong, but I resent the implication that he wasn't sincere. I think he was.

[Cheswick2.0]

53. sorry, not buying

I don't believe Kerry is that stupid.

[Andromeda]

33. Bravo!

I especially like the "you fucking morons" part. :)

[Skip Intro]

41. I agree

the flip flopper bs or the swift liar bs or the immoral morons/stop the gays bs or the pro-bu$h media bs or terra scare bs (right at the end of the DNC) or the osama greatest hits bs - wtf

I was, and still am, proud of this campaign.

They lied and cheated and stole, Kerry played fair.

I can't fault him for that.

[Redleg]

47. Thank you for saying that.

Although I don't refer to fellow DUers as "fucking morons" (except when I am angry), I agree with what you say.

[ObamaFan2500]

59. The media really hurt Kerry

It hurt me that they turned their backs on us for the Chimp.

[LittleClarkie]

64. The blood will be on their hands too

We shall remember who supported the Shrubbery. They'll try to deny it. But we will remember how CNN used to cut away right in the middle of a Kerry speech, siting technical difficulties, but show Bush in his entirety even when his "major address" turned out to be the same old rehashed crap.

[LittleClarkie]

24. Bit early for such pronouncements if you ask me

And I still wouldn't call it a trouncing.

McGovern was a trouncing. Dukakis was a trouncing. Mondale was a trouncing.

Why does this piece seem less opinion, and more an attempt at prophesy. Perhaps this "one and out" rule is more self-fulfilling than anything else. Why does it have to be? Because we said so?

The problem with the "used goods" theory is that the losing candidate never gets a chance to use what he learned about running a national campaign, and make adjustments. We reinvent the wheel each time.

So what are we looking for, eternal beginner's luck?

If Kerry makes it out of the next set of primaries, he will have earned the right to run again. That is the only real criteria to me.

And about those men who were forgotten -- did they still have an office at the end of it all? Did they still have a seat in Congress?

As I say, I don't know what the big rush is to assign the man to history. History will decide that without this editorialist's help, for John Kerry AND Al Gore.

[dand]

35. Kerry took a dive, plain and simple,

the POS sat on millions of dollars, then broke speed records getting to a mike to give his concession speech.

I wouldn't vote for Kerry for dog catcher.

[LittleClarkie]

39. That's already been debunked for the most part

He had 15 million.

Gore had 8 million, which was widely seen as not enough when recount time happened.

Kerry gave 30 million to other candidates. He will be giving more to the 2006 candidates. These stories came from the likes of Donna Braille (sp?) who seems to be in "trash Dems" mod, and is a voice I don't trust.

Broke speed records? Most candidates do it the night before. He checked what he knew were concrete votes that morning. He would have had nothing else solid at that point on which to base waiting.

[dand]

40. Your gullibility needs to be debunked,

supporters of this guy got whiplash when he passed us on the way to concede, I don't know whether it was skull&bones or a pay-off or threats but this guy deserves nothing but contempt.

[LittleClarkie]

42. You sure the breeze wasn't a rush of "supporters,"

knives and forks in hand, all wearing bibs with Kerry's picture on it?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1397259

See this thread from yesterday, if you would.

He has my respect. You, sir, have my contempt.

[dand]

44. Thanks littleclarkie,

I will consider it a badge of honor.

[LittleClarkie]

45. I hope that badge doesn't have any pointy bits

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=94805

Cause you may have to eat it now.

[BlueGuyinGA]

36. Kerry should not even be considered in 08

Let's face it, Kerry was a terrible 'candidate'. I think he would have been a good President, but both Gore and Kerry, in my opinion, were terrible candidates who faced a shallow, marginal man in Bush. A stronger Democratic candidate who was more acceptable to a broader spectrum of the public would have easily beat Bush. In hindsight, Gephart would have won Missouri and a few more mid-west states. Then, we'd be talking about President-elect Gephart and the lame duck George Bush right now (doesn't that sound nice!).

So, I believe Kerry is certainly not the candidate for 2008. For a win in 2008, we will have to run a more mainstream candidates that can win the mid-west and take a few states from the South. Hillary can't do that, neither will Dean. Really, I don't think anyone will emerge from the pack until 2006 or even later. But, please - the focus should be on winning in 08 and to do that, we'll have to put up the most acceptable candidate to the widest spectrum of the public in BOTH the Blue and Red states.

[puddycat]

60. what troubles me is how his campaign failed to respond to the Swift Liars

when they finally did, it was too little, too late. I think they should have viciously attacked *'s military record in response. Sometimes I wonder if both Kerry & * being in Skull & Bones doomed Kerry's campaign, because look how quickly he conceded--it was weirdly fast. I know one thing, I'll never vote for a Skull & Bones person again, because they all stick together in the end.

[Jersey_Lib]

72. Consider Obama/Richardson

This might be our best bet in 2008. We need to rethink our strategies based on this election. As we already know, the best candidate doesn't always win.

Do we try to pick off a couple of states or do we go after the entire country? The next DNC chairman needs to set that course for us.

[Withywindle]

75. My new Senator-Elect...

...has made it very clear he considers talk of a run for the Presidency (or VP) at this stage absolutely surreal and ridiculous, and has no intention whatsoever of running in 2008.

That's how Edwards screwed the pooch: TOO SOON and TOO INEXPERIENCED. And Obama is nearly a decade younger.


Let him do what we elected him to do, please.

love,
Illinois. :hi:

[Withywindle]

77. I disagree that Bush is a weak candidate

...Obviously WE think so, but obviously his supporters don't; there are an awful lot of them, and they control both the media and the voting machines! Between that the successful exploitation of xenophobia, homophobia, 9/11 and "terra," it would have been an uphill fight for anybody, and I don't think very many people could have gotten as close as Kerry did. Probably not Gephardt--I admire his stances on labor a lot, but people think KERRY has a charisma problem? Damn, when Gephardt walks into a room, it's like there's one LESS person there. It's not his fault, but it's not an asset. Clark? Maybe, but he's got no government experience at all, and you think they wouldn't use that against him effectively? Dean? His ability to come off as much more of a fiery leftist than he really is is great for the base but it means the smears are already pre-written out of the gate, plus he's one of those dreaded Northeasterners.

My point is that all of them have strengths and weaknesses. I could have gotten behind any one of them, but I am not at all confident that any of them could have won by an unstealable margin.

[LakeCohoon]

46. Kerry Is A Loser

He had his chance and will not get another.

[Redleg]

48. We are the losers because Bush got "elected."

I don't blame Kerry- he ran a decent campaign that got better in the last few weeks. I give credit to Bush who ran the most cynical and deceitful campaign in my memory. John F. Kennedy counldn't have beaten Bush this year.

[LakeCohoon]

50. I Blame Kerry

and the entire Democratic Party.

My name wasn’t on the ballot. Moreover, my life is not controlled by an intellectually impaired clown that sits in the White House. So, I haven’t lost anything.

However, I am sick and tired of watching the fringe elements of the Democratic Party chase away Middle America. If “Real-Democrats” don’t take this party back, there is no hope.

You will continue to lose.

[Redleg]

52. Good for you. You don't feel we all lose by having Bush in office

four more years? Why even vote?

[EmpireWeAre]

55. Fuck Kerry

The only reason he got my vote was because on the fascism scale (1-10) Bush is a 9, Kerry is a 5. He has the right to run for office all he likes, and if he somehow gets nominated again he'll probably get my vote because once again he'll be the lesser evil.
I don't have a link handy but what was it? Like 95% of the Democratic base was against the Iraq invasion and what do the dumb shit's do? Nominate a man who voted to give Chimpy war powers.

[marcologico]

56. that was the whole point

The Iraq vote wasn't supposed to appeal to the base -- they were going to vote for him anyway, just as you did. The vote was meant to persuade swing voters, who feel a lot differently, that Kerry would protect them. And it probably worked, after taking all the vote rigging into account.

[LittleClarkie]

67. Wouldn't Teresa be upset

I wouldn't want to piss off Ma Teresa. That lady's TOUGH!

[atim]

51. Why Kerry conceded early without questioning? And silent now??

Here I am quoting from an excerpt in another great site www.politicalsoundoff.com

Kerry Camp does nothing to help the recounts!

"If you'd been reading news on the net before the election, you'd have known that some people were claiming Kerry was throwing the election all the way. That in fact, Bush and Kerry are distant cousins, and both members of the 'frat' Skull and Bones at Yale. (1) Think, is it just an amazing coincidence that the two main candidates were related, multi-millionaire boners? Is it possible for you to consider that, perhaps there really is an elite group of families running the country? Some call it the New World Order, it's like the Mafia x 1000, without the accents.


Understandably most Americans are reluctant to think that organized crime has taken over our government, that both candidates were puppets for evil behind the scenes masters. But folks, what if its true? Isn't it worth looking at?"

Full article: http://www.politicalsoundoff.com/home/kerry-camp-does-nothing-to-help-with-recounts.html

Bush and Kerry are 9th cousins and related to British royal family.
I checked this in Ancestry.com. It is not a distortion to say both the government and media are actually front for corporate elite...the story is intimately related to growth of Banking and paper money from early clonnial/captalist expansion from Amsterdam to British East India company and Bank of Rome and Bank of England..a great revision of history and poltical-enonomy is needed.

[marcologico]

58. That is just total nonsense.

But it's a free country and you can believe whatever crypto-Republican crank crap you want.

[LittleClarkie]

66. Ironic to be so against the Republicans

and yet coughing up the same reality-challenged crapola.

[puddycat]

61. Good point about Skull & Bones-- I hope Dems NEVER do that again.

I'll NEVER vote for any Skull & Boner again, ever. They will always put each other before anything else, when push comes to shove.

[LittleClarkie]

63. Lousy point actually -- tin hatted stuff not based in reality

what WAS the point of pulling this editorial out of the archive anyway.

Surely there were fresher threads into which a nice Kerry bash would have fit.

[puddycat]

83. My point is that Kerry conceded too quickly because S & B

I do believe a non-skull & boner may have hung in there--but these people are sworn to uphold and promote one another. Its not "tin foil" stuff at all.

So, I'm not "Kerry bashing"--just telling it as I see it. I worked hard for Kerry and contributed lots of money (so much I'm broke), but I would NEVER vote for him again. When the top two candidates are in one of the most secretive and powerful societies in the world, it makes me wonder.

[Withywindle]

74. Virtually every American...

...whose family has been in this country long enough are all distantly related (I'm probably distantly related to both those guys somewhere--probably through a tumble with a servant, though. ;)). And all the European royal families are related to each other too: never stopped 'em from sincerely trying to wipe each other out for a thousand years. Hell, Barack Obama is distantly related to Jefferson Davis, but that's failed to make him a Confederate sympathizer. I'm not buying that as evidence for anything.

Most Presidential candidates have always been scions of the ruling class in one way or another and, correct, it's not a very large group of people relatively speaking, and yes, old imperialist money plays a large role. How this translates to somehow not really trying to beat each other and cutting secret deals--that's the leap of logic I'm not making, sorry.

[Emillereid]

68. Hard truth that needs to be said -- mourn for Kerry if you must, but

get over it and start organizing a grass roots fight to take our country and our democracy back. We have got to look to each other and not depend on some future nominee. If someone emerges who can speak for us; who truly articulates what we believe -- Great! But let us never again be co-opted by electoral/candidate politics and compromise the greater vision of this country to any one man or party. This is a long time struggle for the survival of this country -- whether that can be accomplished through party politics is doubtful. Personally I think Kerry shot his wad -- his moral compass was so far out of order and his position on Iraq especially was pathetic; the fact that he couldn't even find himself on the right side of that ethical divide was suicide. Don't make excuses -- ORGANIZE!

WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE POWER! DON'T FORGET IT!

[Bridget Burke]

69. He has as much right to run as any other qualified American.

That is--run for the nomination. May the best man or woman win.

[Doctor Panacea]

76. Forget Kerry

Forget Kerry and move on. He was a terrible candidate. He tried the DNC strategy of straddling issues and hoping to pick up a vote here and a vote there, and it did not work. And he was an insufferable bore.

I saw a classfied ad for bumper stickers that summed it all up: "Vote Kerry - He Sucks Less."

[marcologico]

78. I guess you didn't watch the debates, read the papers, check the platforms

or otherwise tune into the election, but don't let that stop you from buying a lame bumper sticker to proudly display to your GOP neighbors.

[maduroftime]

84. I think this is not constructive at all...

There are many points of view as to why Kerry won or lost and even more on whether he should be supported in 2008 if he chooses to enter the primaries.

However, in order to come to ANY conclusion, insight must be gained from ALL points of view and then distilled. I think there is truth to everything that has been said in this thread. I can think of many reasons why I would support Kerry and many others where I would not support Kerry.

Right now, I must say I am leaning against Kerry and wanting to go Green because the sting from Nov 2 is still pretty strong and I want to get behind someone who truly supports my belief system.

But pointig fingers and accusing people of narcisism because they happen to believ a certain way is not going to solve anything.

[marcologico]

85. My opinion is based on substance, not on show. Does that help?

Based on the policies Kerry set out in the debates and elsewhere I think he should run in 2008. When and how he conceded is irrelevant to me since he lost in any case. If he'd flailed and floundered the media would have called him a sore loser and those inclined to believe the media would have taken up the call, just like they repeat the flip-flop mantra and complain that Kerry "quit" too soon.

Regarding your belief system, did you watch the debates, and if so which beliefs did Kerry not adequately address?

[agincourt]

79. Kerry would have been a good president,

But Hillary is the only one who can win in 2008. People who vote for Bush will vote for her. Go figure. Let's run her.

[LittleClarkie]

80. Is your tongue in your cheek?

I don't know any Bush voters who don't dislike Hillary with a passion. They haven't even noticed her conservative voting record.

She is a frontrunner based on name recognition only. She will have to fight with the rest of them to get the nomination.

[agincourt]

81. It don't make sense to me either,

She polls as the most admired woman in the country, president Hee Haw polls as the most admired male. There has to be a big chunk of people out there whom admire both at the same time. I'm confused as well.

[Withywindle]

82. Damn, speaking of royal families!

You'd think it would creep people out to have the wife of a former Pres in office right after the son of another one, wouldn'tya? It does me!

But geez, what are we really doing here? Getting our licks in early on the nasty primary fights of the '08 season?