I thought I was ABB until Kerry came out ahead

[skjpm]

Why are we choosing the most lackluster candidate? I'm for Dean, but I'm excited about Edwards and could get that way about Clark. We have some very exciting, different candidates running. I can understand people who don't want Dean--I like his anger, but if you don't, why not choose Edwards, who communicates excitement and optimism? Or if you want someone who appears more presidential, why not choose Clark? I just don't get why people support Kerry when there are two other great non-Dean candidates available. Maybe Kucinich deserves a second look, too. Maybe we could all get together and make him more viable. But why Kerry?

If Kerry is the best we can do, then why not just let Bush have it? Accept the fact that it's going to be the four worst years ever in America, deal with it, and wait until the next election. Or work on getting back Congress. I just don't see any reason to work for Kerry. I'll fight against Bush some other way.

[Wickerman]

1. Another 4 years of Bush*

and you wouldn't even recognize this great country as America. Sorry, I couldn't let that happen. I have nephews in the Armed Forces, I have children hoping and working to go to college, and someday I would like to retire. Stakes are too damn high.

I am proudly ABB

[skjpm]

6. There are other ways to fight Bush than vote for Kerry

The Democrats are forcing me to fight Bush with what I see as a weak candidate. Rather than play that game, I'd rather fight Bush with a new Congress or a better governor, or simply a grassroots protest campaign such as Moveon. I don't see why I have to vote for a Democrat to prove that I'm against Bush. If the Democrats don't seem to me to be doing anything worthwhile in the fight against Bush, I'll take the fight elsewhere.

[nolabels]

35. It's not an amorfous thing, them are votes by people

They might or might not have been missguided votes, but they were votes (I think) at any rate

[Walt Starr]

51. Yep, we can fight Bush AND the Democratic Party elitists at the same time

That's my plan.

[creativelcro]

47. This is alarmist BS. 4 years of Bush may be better

than 8 years of Kerry...

[Lurking Dem]

49. Alarmist BS?

Okay.

Everyone hoping against hope for fetal tissue research......dead.

Large portion of Alaska......paved.

Our "kids" in uniform.......dead and dying.

Citizens of any country containing oil reserves........dead, orphaned, and/or homeless.

ATV's and logging trucks running gymkhanas through the woods...what's left of it.

Well water........poisoned beyond redemption.

No services for the poor.

No medical treatment for the indigent.

Seniors dying because they can't afford their drugs.

Reinstatement of the Draft.

Cancer rates soaring with pollution rates.

Federal judges appointed for life with the intent of removing Roe v. Wade.

Supreme Court judges with the intent of dismantling the Constitution as a whole.

A police state.

The continued growth of fundamentalist sponsored terrorism.

The continued dismantling of infrastructure - roads, bridges, rail, food inspection, etc.


Yeah. You're right. 8 years of Kerry would be worse. :eyes:

[bigtree]

2. why not just let Bush have it?

whwhy nwhy not just let Bush have it? ot just let Bush have it? y not just let Bwhy why not just let Bush have it? not just let Bush have it? ush have why not justwhy not just let Bush have it? let Bush have it? it? why not just why not just let Bush have it? let Bush have it?

[TexasPatriot]

3. go watch clarks new ads

http://www.clark04.com/ads/

they're GREAT :)

:bounce:

[progressivebydesign]

4. I understand your frustration... I do..

But.. I have to be ABB. I cannot let Bush and his henchmen further destroy the country. Anything is better than Bush. I worry about the lackluster thing.. but I hope the backlash against Bush is strong enough. I'd rather see someone fiestier... but I will support the eventual nominee. However, I refuse to pack it all in NOW and assume Kerry has it locked up. No way.

[calimary]

37. I feel yer pain... No, joking aside, I don't just feel it, I have my own

version of it. Nothin' much, just this gnawing in my gut every morning when I wake up under this continuing hostage hold. 'Cause I've awakened enough times to know it isn't just a bad dream.

I'm ABB when I'm not a Dean person. Yes, still a Dean person. Nobody else seems to have had the fire in his gut that I felt I had, and for so long. I'll certainly support Kerry if it comes to that, but I'm having a hard time figuring how I'll get my heart into it.

[redqueen]

38. My thoughts exactly n/t

[eileen_d]

5. Geez, it's only two states that have chosen

Kerry doesn't have it sealed up.

As for your question: If Kerry is the best we can do, then why not just let Bush have it? -- if having an "exciting" candidate is more important to you than getting Bush out of office -- then you have some messed up priorities.

Edited for clarity.

[skjpm]

7. Not so much "exciting" as strong, forceful, and yes, angry

Perhaps exciting is not the right word. I like Dean's anger, but I also like Edwards' forcefulness (and Clark's and Kucinich's). I want somebody who actually seems to want to fight Bush rather than chip away at him with nuances.

[eileen_d]

11. I guess I'm not so concerned about a candidate's style

Frankly, I don't expect any politician to be a person who I could stand to have in the same room with me for more than 10 minutes. That's why I don't watch them on TV much - I prefer transcripts when they're available.

I dunno... you can't always get what you want... again, it's a matter of priorities. Will you vote for someone who makes you happy, or for someone who is "the lesser evil". I always choose the latter. (However, I am happy with Kerry as the potential nominee)

[capriccio]

28. Nuanced?

Kerry called for "regime change" at home. That too nuanced for you?

[dreissig]

20. Exciting Candidate

The problem with Kerry isn't only that he's boring, it's that he's a weakling. He didn't show any backbone on the IWR vote because he was afraid a No vote would remind voters of his antiwar background.

Eugene McCarthy was personally not very exciting. I used to wonder how got elected in the first place. But he created a stir when he declared himself a candidate for president opposing the Vietnam war. Unfortunately, the nomination went to the energetic Hubert Humphrey, who erroneously considered the anti-war Left a locked-in constituency. He was wrong about that.

John Kerry combines the personal blandness of Eugene McCarthy with the political tin ear of Hubert Humphrey. It's a surefire formula for defeat in November. I question the political judgement of the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire. We are heading towards a repeat of 1968.

[eileen_d]

25. Kerry is a WEAKLING?

Whatever!

And we're not headed towards anything yet. IA and NH aren't going to decide it - that's all I'm willing to bet on.

[dreissig]

31. A Weakling

When we looked for decisiveness, we got mushmouth out of John Kerry. That sounds pretty weak to me.

Kerry can knock himself out projecting vitality or dynamism or whatever, but he's not trustworthy. I don't look to him for leadership.

[Raven]

8. There is no other good way to fight against Bush.

I know how hard it is to see your guy losing but Kerry is not a monster. Whoever the Dem nominee is, he's going to be better for this country than the neo-cons. I would vote for any one of them but I will NOT sit this election out. This election is the ballgame as far as I am concerned. If Bush gets another term, I'm thinking that there will never be another fair election in this country. Please reconsider!

[montanacowboy]

9. Remember Please

that Dean is leading in delegate count - and after Michigan and Washington, California and NY - may well have it!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

10. What looks "lackluster" to you

may look "mature" and "presidential" to someone else.

Put Kerry and Bush on the same podium, and who's going to look like the one who can "put the grown-ups back in charge"?

[eileen_d]

13. Excellent point

It's too bad that the line between politics and entertainment is so fuzzy; however, I think it's always been that way (even before TV)

[skjpm]

15. Kerry/boring--Bush/friendly, funny, one-of-the-guys

I'm sorry, but the debates will be the same as Gore/Bush. Kerry will no doubt be the best prepared and most articulate, and Bush will win with his charm (?!?) and humor (?!?). I don't get it either, but that's exactly what will happen.

[dreissig]

29. Presidential Debates

People said Bush would not survive the debates with Al Gore, but it didn't happen that way. Some people thought that Bush landed a few unexpected punches.

I don't look to the debates as the way to defeat Bush, especially not if Kerry is the nominee. Bush can turn aside much policy criticism by reminding Kerry he voted for it.

[jpgray]

12. I'm kicking my thread on this subject so you can read it

I think getting an Authoritarian fascist-acting gov't out is the top priority. Let's fight like crazy for the best candidate, and then work like hell for the nominee.

[cally]

14. Look at Kerry's voting record

Next to Kucinich and Sharpton, he is by far the most liberal candidate. He is a strong defender of environmental protections and women's rights. I will happily support him. He may not be that exciting, seems aloof, but he will make a terrific President.

[Casablanca]

40. His voting record is good, when he showed up to vote, but ...

If he can't effectively make the Iraq war a campaign issue (and he can't because of his vote for the war), he can't go against Bush. Even his war service can be countered with "Yeah, you fought in Nam 30, 40 years ago and I respect that. But I'm directing a war now."

Yeah, I know he's not directing it and the "war" is tanking, but that's a winning comeback when it's being propagated by a media that only covers quick slams and soundbites.

Only Clark can counter with "Yeah, you can place your war order with the McPentagon, but I _designed_ and _implemented_ a recent successful war, and I've always maintained that you suck at the warmaking business, Bush. And most of my Pentagon buddies agree with me."

[emulatorloo]

16. First I will answer you seriously

Kerry in person is extremely dynamic and is far from lackluster. Crowds in Iowa were fired up, they were moved to tears, they were cheering and he was a fiery dynamo.

He looks better in person than he does on TV, he projects better,

Since TV is the major way that people are going to see him, it is a big issue. However, I think that he can overcome this, and I see some of the same Kerry I saw face to face in Iowa in the more informal interviews he does (NH night on CNN for example) and those town hall thingys they show on C-SPAN. So I think with work, he will begin to show better on tv as time moves on.

You also must compare him w GWB, who is as lackluster as they come. And as you watch Kerry, you will see that he has some very good things to say to counter the kinda crap that the repubs are going to say. GWB has nothing to say for himself but slogans and platitudes.

"Why Not Let Bush Have It" You have not seen the Bush presidency until you have seen the Bush presidency with nothing to fear after election in 2004. It is unfathomable to me the damage they will do to the economy and the courts and social security and reproductive rights and gay rights and civil rights and so on.

We have to fight that.

But you do have a good idea about working on getting congress back.

[molly]

17. Great post - great answer!

:yourock:

[GreenPartyVoter]

18. I say we let Bu$h have it

right int he kiester! *lol*

[emulatorloo]

22. Yes, Kick His Butt to Mars and Beyond

:toast:

edit heading

[FreeperSlayer]

19. Just as we suspected...

NBD is alive and well. I freakin' knew it.

[skjpm]

24. I'm not NBD--I'm willing to accept Dean losing--but not to Kerry

There's a point in supporting Edwards for his optimism, Clark for his military background, and Kucinich for his values. I can move past Dean--but why to Kerry? If there was something wrong with these other three candidates then, OK, Kerry. But before we choose him, I think we can find someone better.

[Raven]

26. Your post is misleading.

You said that you were Abb until Kerry and you implied that you would sit the election out if it were Kerry. Now you are saying that there must be another alternative to Kerry. What are you saying anyway? Another candidate or sit the election out? Which is it?

[MsUnderstood]

21. Are we really in control

I read somewhere the conspiracy that republicans are registering as democrats in an attempt to push the candidate they want into the nomination.

I don't know if its true, but it is certainly an explanation for the reason we are getting a candidate you feel is weaker.

Of course, I also believe the government killed Kennedy, Lincoln, and MLK.

[capriccio]

32. Correction

It wasn't the government that killed Lincoln, Kennedy, MLK (and John Lennon, Bob Crane & Lynard Skynard). It was Skull & Bones. Oh, but that is the government, isn't it.

[sangh0]

23. Huh?

You liked Kerry earlier, but now that he's won a couple of primaries he seems too lackluster?

Would Kerry seems more exciting to you if he lost a race or two?

[elsiesummers]

27. Kerry- not a great candidate but would be a great president.

First - he's not the nominee yet (though he is the likely nominee).

I have similar concerns - especially that he won't wear well from the time the nomination appears locked up until November 2004.

But - if he is the nominee - I tend to think the very things that make him a poor canididate would make him a good president. Example - too serious. Another example - overly detailed answers. Another example - a long history of legislative experience.

So - while I don't see him as particularly electable, if he is the nominee, I'll work hard to promote him - pointing out to people that the very things that they don't like about him are good qualities in a president. I think we can turn his deficits into positives.

Meanwhile - because winning the election is a must - I still hope that Edwards or Clark pull off the nomination (and I think either of these fellows, especially Edwards, would make a great president, also).
A footnote, ABC note suggests that Bush's missing years will become a problem for Bush if Kerry is the candidate - THAT's interesting.

[dreissig]

33. A Follower, not a Leader

I don't associate Kerry's name with leadership on any great issues - do you? He seems to hang back until issues are well defined. Then he comes forward and nudges the real leaders aside. That's what he did with the VVAW.

Look how he voted on the Iraq War Resolution - with the majority. He could have been an opinion leader. Instead he took a straddle position, saying one thing and doing another.

Kerry would make an awful president. We'd never get him to commit to anything, and even if he did, he'd weasel out of it.

[elsiesummers]

36. Kerry is not my first choice.

Make no mistake - I want to see Edwards win this thing because I believe he is both the best candidate and the best possible president. He is inspirational and he really gets it, the populist message, he's lived it. I'm very much against inherited wealth so this is the thing that concerns me most about Kerry.

But, lets look at Kerry in a positive light.

First, being a good candidate is not the same thing as being a good president. (I think this is also true of Howard Dean - it is his candidacy in the GE, not his ability to be president, that concerns me).

Bottom line, if George W can turn being a dumb guy with a thin resumé into an asset, well then, I sure as heck think that John Kerry can turn being an over serious guy with overly lengthy and detailed answers and an exceptionally long time working on legislation into an asset! When did knowledge and experience become a bad thing? When GWB was selected!

Oh - and Kerry's been a leader on CAFE standards - that's a positive in my book.


I still think John Edwards is the best - This doesn't make John Kerry bad.

[calimary]

39. You've actually made one of the more reasonable defenses of Kerry

that I've seen. Your points are well-taken. I'm still hesitant for other reasons. But this is a good argument. One worth remembering.

[elsiesummers]

41. Hi

Thanks. :) There are no perfect candidates, but they all have their merits - and I'll be proud to support the nominee whoever that might be.
They are all such a vast improvement over GWB.


Meanwhile - Go John Edwards!

[TheDonkey]

30. that's sad (nm)

[loupe-garou]

34. John Kerry is not evil and he could beat Bush!

I've been watching the posts about Kerry and I'm surprised about how much people seem to dislike him. I also think his record is being misrepresented. He has a great record on the environment, has gone after a host of corporate and gov't special interests, was against the war as it played out(I admit I was very disappointed in his vote, because I knew Bush would never go through proper channels).
He has support across a range of demographic, which is surely a good sign, the support of many veterans, and a record of standing for veterans issues..........I could really go on, but the point is, whoa people, we are all Democrats, we are going to register huge numbers of voters, and we are going to win our country back.
I share the anguish you all have felt these past 3 years, and it is easy to get into a frame of mind that only this candidate can do it, but the truth is people are angry out there across party lines, and we have a good shot with a few of the candidates.
Maybe I'm a wimp, but I hate seeing character assasination, especially since I believe they are all decent men who have given their lives to public service to different degrees and in different ways.
Anyway, thanks for caring so much!! As for Skull and Bones, didn't you do anything silly when you were twenty? There is no evidence that it has defined his life, as opposed to his going to Viet Nam.

[Monte Carlo]

42. Kerry = Bush, dontchaknow...

... if you listened to certain people here. Too many won't see past a handful of votes when they dismiss Kerry as a toady of Bush. You have to let it roll of off your back.

[edzontar]

43. I share your worries about Kerry--and don't get how he came out

On top...I mean, he is a very boring TV speaker and has yet to explain his IWR position in a way that I can find clear or compellling.

It seems like the "electable" mantra is getting in the way of what we can all see and hear--that this is a lackluster candidate and mediocre politcal leader.

[redqueen]

44. I don't get it either

I don't personally know of ANY democrats who were excited about Kerry. Everyone I know is behind Dean or Kucinich.

The only stickers I see down here in TX are for Dean or Bush.

[Greyskye]

46. Here is a possible answer...

I didn't get Kerry at first either. Then I took this: www.presidentmatch.com

The results I got really surprised me. Kerry and Kucinich were within 2% of each other for matching my personal views on all of the issues listed. Give it a try and see how well all of the candidates match your personal political framework.

For what it's worth, my results came in a 100% match for Kucinich, with Kerry at 98%. Since Kucinich doesn't appear to have a snowballs chance in you-know-where, I have become very comfortable with the idea of a Kerry presidency.

Edited to clarify:
This tool is not perfect. I know of at least one issue that I disagree with Kucinich on, even though the tool gave me a 100% match.

[atre]

50. Interesting link

It must be an offshoot of the Kucinich campaign website. This thing had me at 100% on Kucinich, with no one else even close, and there are many issues on which I do not agree with him.

I would've expected Dean to top the list (since I consider myself left of center on social issues and conservative on fiscal policies), but he was around 87%. Kerry, not surprisingly, was fourth or so in the low 80s.

[library_max]

45. "I'll fight against Bush some other way."

There is no other way. Put him back in the White House for a second term, actually elected this time, not having to worry about re-election ever again - holy shit, you think you've seen "chimp gone wild" since 2000? You ain't seen nothin' yet! Or perhaps you think that sulking about the nominee (assuming that Kerry will be the nominee, very far from a sure thing at this point) will help the down-ballot races and put a majority of Democrats in both houses of Congress? Keep dreaming.

Republican control of the White House, both houses of Congress, and the judiciary, sealed shut as tight as Rove and co. can make it. But you're going to "fight against Bush some other way." Gee, good luck with that.

[Walt Starr]

48. I'm still ABB

Anybody But Bonesmen.

[mitchum]

52. Maybe you're now BCOSG

Bad Case Of Sour Grapes?