Reply #69: thanks again... [View All]

[whalerider55]

the daily kos snip is from a conversation a kossack had with another kossack who knew people in the kerry campaign. no names, no quotes, no nothing to verify anything.

in late november 2004, i spoke with folks in the state dem party, at the highest (executive level) who were besides themselves that kerry folded too soon, and begged him to reconsider. i'll hold onto their names, because they are still active in the party and i see them socially; although i am not a democrat. they were frustrated beyond belief. i'm happy to consider your snip of a conversation between two kossacks discussing what a third party told them as an alternative to my own ruminations with the same grace you'll consider my take.

any sensitivity i might have about your reference to me being a transplant might stem from the fact that I currently serve and have been twice elected to a local office, and have worked hard to bridge that perception of difference people think exists betwen lifers and "move-ins"that seems endemic to New England; that in fact, when it comes to organizing and working for a sane, compassionate and coherent community, and not one that is subject to third generations playing out "your grandfather screwed my grandfather and i'll be damned if i'll see you build that affordable housing..." i accept being sensitive about it; respect that I have worked to find reasons to find common progressived ground together as a community and not just try to label things as conservative, liberal... whatever. increasingly, the terms are irrelevent; if i can get elected, then maybe the disconnect is not quite as strong as you think it is. frankly, any argument that promotes differences when it could be drawing attention to common ground leaves me pretty cold.

I never said edwards stayed out all night; i said he came out and promised that every vote would be counted and that was not the ultimate case. i am aware of what was going on with his family; while tragic, that is irrelevent to anything i said. I will agree with your point regarding whether Edwards "egged on" Kerry to fight for uncounted votes that were obvious on the ground in ohio by Novemeber 3rd; my recollection stems from a very disilluioned former mayor who worked for the kerry campaign; again, a name i cannot bring forward because the person is still active in politics, and I do try to respect confidences.

of course there were problems with the lawyers on the ground. the strategy was that every state would have a lead team of lawyers licesnsed to practice in each state, and the 10,000 (or whatever the number was when you subtract the core teams) would be dispatched to work under those attorneys- doing legal research, drafting arguments, helping to file injunctions. i ran a trade association of consumer attorneys for 5 years, and find that strategy perfectly workable and have seen it effectively employed. the decision not to go forward with what would have amounted to a breakneck discovery to bring people forward who would testify (remember, there were plenty who came out for the Conyers hearings),plenty already on the ground crying foul as the election was taking place- Kerry's decision short-circuited that whole, well-thought plan.

that was a great strategy that was never implemented when Kerry conceded. I'd be interested in seeing that white paper. it might explain some things to me that remain fuzzy.

if you have a link to any suit, injunction, anything kerry filed independently of Cobb/Badnarik to contest any single result in any single district in the 2004 election, i'd love to see it. Yeah, he signed on,(I don't believe that Kerry/Edwards have officially added their name to the suit; they remain interested and involved, and didn't sign on until three months after the suit was filed.

finally, if you're goinna tell me i'm flat out wrong, that's fine. my motto is "often wrong, never in doubt." since being wrong is both something of a hobby of mine, and a great opportunity to learn something, i like the give and take of proving or disproving a point, of learning something new, of having my head turned around by facts.

but gimme a little more then a cut and paste of a column where two people discuss the issue using feedback from a third un-named party as having influenced their discussion. you can believe me or not, but at least i'm telling you that i've got it directly fvrom two people who were involved with the campaign at very hiogh levels.

and so, we can disagree.

yer right kerry has cash. a lot leftover from 2004, as i recall. and he may run again; that's fine. i think the primary process is especially critical now that we are seeing a genuine, grassrootsie populism asserting itself in the democratic party. i'll even bet he's learned a thing or to about a national campaign against republicans.

but selfishly, i have to say that 2004 meant so much more to me because i'm a parent. i needed a democrat to fight back, to learn the lessons of '00, to be prepared, to not lay in the weeds while the snakes were swift-boating his ass. and what i got was alito and roberts, who my kids will have to live with for the next 30 years. there was a lot on the line, but there was also enough history to fight this battle before it got to Nov 2 2004.

i'd love a link to a site where kerry says "i never realized they would steal the election, the way they did, intimidating voters, purging voter rolls."

you won't find one. he was either an idiot, or overconfident. neither are good qualities in a president, wouldn't you say?

whalerider