Kerry says he deserves 2nd chance in '08

[ECH1969]

Sen. John Kerry says he deserves a second chance if he decides to take another crack at becoming president.

The Massachusetts Democrat, who lost to President Bush in 2004, said it is a basic principle that "Americans give people a second chance.

Kerry faces a major challenge trying to convince Democratic activists that a recently defeated candidate can still carry his party's hopes for recapturing the White House.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061015/ap_on_el_pr/kerry2008

[Demeter]

1. ROTFLMAO!

[grytpype]

213. Gore deserves a second chance. Kerry does not.

Gore won in 2000, give him another chance and he might win in 2008.

[susanna]

220. I'm with you on that... n/t

[The Roux Comes First]

224. Please expound on that.

I was pissed at both of them for their too-early concessions. As one still in the increasingly rare category who can accept nuances and grayness (i.e. as opposed to authoritarians on the right and hostiles throughout the political spectrum who know they alone have the answers), what is the distinction you find so profound?

[XemaSab]

230. word.

n/t

[Yupster]

234. No one deserves a second chance

They deserve a spot in the primaries and put their best ideas against the other able candidates. Let the best man or woman win.

[Lerkfish]

2. WOW. that's rich.

maybe he'll concede the day BEFORE the election.

[Tellurian]

219. Kerry's opening statement..

Kerry says he deserves 2nd chance in '08

Sun Oct 15, 2:44 PM ET

WASHINGTON -

Sen.John Kerry says he deserves a second chance if he decides to take anothercrack at becoming president.

The Massachusetts Democrat, who lost to President Bush in 2004, said it is a basic principle that
"Americans give people a second chance. And if you learn something and prove you've learned
something, maybe even more so.

Now, I don't know what I'm going to do yet. We'll make that decision down the road."


Take a "crack" at it? These are not the words of a winner.

[BREMPRO]

249. Kerry was not a great candidate... he was the anti-Bush vote.

We need a candidate with proven leadership that can excite the base and unite the country, not be just an "electable" compromise. No more Skull and Bones brothers PLEASE...

[rzemanfl]

3. Gore deserves a second chance too. I suggest they run together

and each serve two years as V-P and two as President.

[Mz Pip]

4. Whatever

He won't get my vote in the primaries. No way.

That said, if he gets the nomination I'll support him. I just hope we can come up with some new material for 2008. :boring:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[elocs]

24. Exactly. I'd vote for Kerry if he gets the nomination.

But here in Wisconsin I fully expect to have some other choices, quite possibly my own Senator Feingold. I am not sure what qualifies him to deserve a second chance. Perhaps somebody else deserves a first chance.

[Schema Thing]

5. LOL. Bad Frame! Naughty Frame!!

[Pastiche423]

6. He had his chance and blew it

I'm still pissed off that I had to vote for him.

[INdemo]

12. Why is he asking for a second chance..He should be running for reelection

He did not lose the 2004 election..Remember? He will be the front runner the minute he announces he's running..

[Pastiche423]

28. He "lost" the minute he gave up the fight

What happened to No Surrender?

Front runner? HA! What our country needs now is someone that will fight for us and he proved w/o a doubt that he would not.

[City Lights]

55. I'm right here!

:hi:

;-)

[merwin]

57. LOL

[Patchuli]

221. I'd vote for the kitty or George Clooney!

Are you as cute as they are? hehee

[INdemo]

56. Diebold guaranteed the Republicans Ohio long before the election

Remember?

[Pastiche423]

78. Kerry promised he would fight for our votes before the election

Remember?

[blm]

82. He didn't know DNC was lying to him when they told him they were securing

the election process.

He didn't know McAuliffe deliberately kept the party infrastructure in a state of collapse after the DNC failed to secure the election process for GOre.

[Pastiche423]

88. He conceded. He din't fight. He gave up.

Your hero screwed up royally against the worse president ever, BLM.

If he had led in the fight against the hackable, unauditable voting machines, it would have been different. But he din't. I have no respect for any candidate that simply gives up.

[blm]

89. He won. Bush lost. DNC got its ass kicked by RNC who stole it for Bush and

Kerry was left with no legal evidence to continue in court.

Even RFK has affirmed that - so keep misdirecting the blame unto Kerry - that will secure future elections, won't it?

[Pastiche423]

94. The blame goes to the one that conceded w/i 24 hours

Damn, BLM, you sound like a jilted lover........... or something.

[blm]

95. So you think Dem legal team who said Gore had a case to continue in 2000

advised Kerry wrongly that there was no legal case to continue?

And I answer the way I do because too many absurd statements are made. Either Kerry was in charge of the election process for four years and failed to do the job of securing the vote process or he was the Dem nominee in summer of 2004 and failed to beat Bush.

The way I see the it, Kerry did his job and beat Bush, but the DNC and its election "experts" failed to secure the election process and did not counter the RNc's four years of vote stealing tactics.

[Pastiche423]

98. I think that Kerry gave up

PERIOD!

[blm]

99. You think Kerry gave up when Dem election legal team said he HAD a CASE?

Or you think Kerry conceded because the Dem election legal team told him there was no legal evidence to continue in court?

[Pastiche423]

103. Asked and answered

[blm]

105. Yeah - but I was looking for pure logic.

Not an emphatic declaration that had no basis in the reality of what occurred. Kerry didn't give up. There was nowhere to go without a case to take to court.

[sendero]

144. Winners make things happen..

.... losers make excuses.

I'm so tired of your "the DNC did it", you sound like a Republican blaming Clinton.

Fact is: if your company drops the ball because a subordinate doesn't do something s/he was supposed to do, it it STILL YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A LEADER.

You're a Navy captain and your ship runs aground: YOU ARE FIRED REGARDLESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

I've heard your story and you are sticking to it, but it doesn't impress me at all, I was there I heard and saw what Kerry did and I will NOT support him for the nomination.

Not only did he not do what he said he would do, he ran a sorry campaign. He let the swiftboaters walk all over him. He posed for several ridiculous photo-ops. He is not charismatic, not posessing of the ability to make a stirring speech, he is warm milk and that's not his fault but we can do better.

[roguevalley]

122. sitting in alaska with a laptop and a modem, I knew that. if he is the

candidate and didn't, he doesn't deserve a second chance. this country has been through too much hell to experiment with whether John Kerry learned his lesson.

[windy252]

179. I agree.

If I'm still around in '08, I would definitely not be voting for Kerry in the primaries.

[Hoping4Change]

246. Doesn't that show a lack of political street smarts?

He also didn't seem to have the street smarts to respond adequately to the swiftboating.

[Drifter]

102. And he gave up the fight the instant ...

he let the (not so) Swift Boat liars walk all over him.
Quite frankly that gives a look at the type of President he would have been.

Cheers
Drifter

[Ex Lion Tamer]

164. 100% absolute and total agreement with you.

[dchill]

216. Exactly.

Kerry and Gore have both been elected president more times than GWB. Neither one of them should be in a position to need or get "a second chance."

[susanna]

222. Did you forget your sarcasm smilie,

or am I in some sort of alternate universe? Just asking...

[Divine Discontent]

228. I'm not pissed I had to vote for him

over a corrupt war mongering lunatic. are you telling me at 5pm on election day you weren't believing there was a chance he'd won? we KNOW Ohio had tens of thousands of votes scared off by too few polling booths where people GAVE UP standing for hours trying to vote, and there were people thrown off the rolls, just like in FL. He literally won all the progressive states, and PA, and it's a shame to hear people say they were pissed they HAD to vote for him. It's your right, but when compared to Bush, I think the choice was clear. I'm surprised you're still alive, if you were so upset you had to vote for Kerry, what'd you do when Bush "won"?

[Botany]

7. I worked my ass off for him in Ohio

I don't know about America giving him a second chance ....
I will not.

Bottom Line he knows that the election was dirty and has not said
one thing.

[blm]

9. He did. In Jan2005 and more detailed on the floor of the senate last June

He can only talk about what he knows that he can speak to the evidence.

Ever try blaming the DNC whose JOB is was to secure the election process for ALL Dems from 2001 - 2004? Thanks to blaming Kerry, the DNC and its office of VOter Integrity that was CHARGED with securing the election process for FOUR YEARS got off the hook, scotfree.

[Dover]

18. Yeah, I've noticed they are promising to monitor this election again

and put their attorneys,etc. in place. Yeah right.

Besides, they also stole it in 2000, so Gore should have first shot.

[Botany]

19. Never said it was all on him.

Lots of blame to go around .... but if you want to be my leader
step out and lead if not go away ..... I know that his top lawyer
was given data from both Lucas (Toledo) and Cuyahoga (Cleveland)
Counties that was damning in late November early December 2001.

I also know a few people on his staff and they are under orders not
to talk about "it."

BTW I still think he is great guy and good senator but he had many
chances and has not stepped up to the plate.

[leftchick]

49. thank you Botany!

very well said.

:)

[blm]

84. Well, not everything happening on election fraud is happening in a vacuum.

There have been behind the scenes dialogue on more than a few levels. Including the involvement of RFK Jr.

Hell, it took Kerry till just recently to finally get Chris Dodd turned around, and he has been the DEm party pointman on voting issues.

[AngryOldDem]

67. As did I, and the disappointment still lingers

I like the man, but losing Ohio and then not contesting that loss still galls. Whatever his reasons may have been for not speaking up, they weren't good enough.

[Ms. Toad]

97. Ditto

- AND I chose not to actively work against Issue One (marriage discrimination amendment) because I knew I didn't have time for both, and mixing messages would ultimately turn away some potential Kerry voters.

He at least owed those of us who put our personal interests aside to work for his election the decency of fighting issues raised by the immediately and easily verifiable problems (uneven distribution of voting machines, and punchcards counted against the wrong templates, for example).

[susanna]

223. A lot of us outside Ohio got the same impression. n/t

[rsmith6621]

8. Read My Sig......

at the bottom of the page.......Kerry gave into bush.....he's worthless...

read below....

[goforit]

207. If it walks and talks like a Bush, it is a Bush. And Kerry is a Bush

[keta11]

10. No

JFK, please step aside. You blew it.

[deutsey]

11. I feel a flame war a-brewin'

:hide:

[AngryOldDem]

70. All the more reason why he should not run

Consider DU a microcosm of the party. Do we really need more infighting in 2008?

I think not.

[paulk]

168. DU isn't a microcosm of anything

it's an echo chamber where Dennis Kucinich consistently won the "nomination" in the run up to the 2004 elections. If anything, DU is a microcosm of the left wing of the political spectrum, which doesn't even include the Democratic Party.

[Nihil]

180. Says ... you?

> If anything, DU is a microcosm of the left wing of the political spectrum,
> which doesn't even include the Democratic Party.

Strangely enough, the official "Democratic Party" is far closer to the Republican
Party ideals than to their supposed roots. Maybe they are just an "echo chamber"
for their sponsors?

[Name removed]

184. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AngryOldDem]

250. So you don't think a Kerry candidacy would be divisive?

Even if he has the proverbial snowball's chance, I don't think the party needs him in the mix in 2008. And with all the diverse views presented here, I do consider DU to be a microcosm. Note the prefix in the word -- micro. I never implied that it is a bellwether of the Democratic Party.

[paulk]

256. I don't see how Kerry could be more divisive than any other

Democrat running. Whoever runs, it going to upset some people...

He's got a lot of support, and he's got a lot of money - with a proven ability to raise more. That gives him as good a chance as anyone else.

DU could be considered a microcosm of the left, true, but I don't think it's at all a good place to base predictions on that pertain to who will be nominated or win. DU has been consistently wrong on those counts in the time I've been here.

[DavidDvorkin]

13. He has zero chance of getting the nomination again

So everything else is irrelevant.

[blm]

15. Yeah - because so many will best him during the series of debates.

Or not.

[IndianaGreen]

26. Hillary will beat Kerry in the debates

Wait until Hillary describes her staunch opposition to the Alito nomination, or her support for John Murtha's courageous call for a troop withdrawal from Iraq, or her leading role in the Kerry/Feingold resolution to bring all the troops home by next summer.

Yep, I can't hardly wait to see Hillary show how many times she has stood on the side of the US Constitution and defended our civil liberties during her long Senate career. I am sure that even the staunchest Kerry supporters will be mesmerized by Hillary's courage and leadership at a time when our nation most needed it to stem the tide of tyranny.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[Jersey Ginny]

112. I hope not

Hillary will solidify the Repukes. She should not be the dem nominee.

[ckramer]

118. I hope you are kidding

which you are...

Nobody in current potential democratic candidates is better than John Kerry when it comes to articulate the democratic side of the cause.

Every body should support John Kerry run again!

[Megahurtz]

196. LOL! n/t

[Le Taz Hot]

248. Au contraire

The Iowa caucus will take care of that . . . just as they did in 2004. The primaries are nothing more than a dog-and-pony show to give us, the unwashed masses, the illusion of choice.

[blm]

14. Kerry won 60-65 million votes. He needed a DNC to secure election process

for the four years it was their job to do so.

They didn't do it. Votes were suppressed, voter rolls were purged, and machines rigged all over the country by the RNC and its operatives.

Kerry won his matchups against Bush.

The DNC failed miserably.

[davidwparker]

29. What about the millions he had set aside and still left over to do

the fighting.

He lost to the worst president in US history. Moving on ...

[IndianaGreen]

31. How about the millions Hillary has amassed from the party fat cats

supposedly for her Senate campaign, that she intends to use to fulfill her Borgia-like ambitions for power?

[davidwparker]

37. She can have Gates money for all I care. She will not get my vote in

the primaries. She will get my vote only if she is the nominee in 2008. Then, when she looses, the Dem party can kiss my right butt check because I'll be Green at that time.

I had better get some satisfaction in the midterms and in 2008. I had better see a progressive leading the 2008 ticket. I'm seeing Gore/Clark or Edwards/Clark.

[blm]

33. The most PROTECTED president in US history being publically SUPPORTED by

the last Dem president.

Kerry won. Clinton's handpicked DNC failed to secure the election process they were charged with protecting through their office of voter integrity - four years they had to do their job, and the party infrastructure got WEAKER, not stronger.

Kerry won. DNC failed miserably. Possibily deliberately.

[IndianaGreen]

35. And the then head of the DNC has now joined the Hillary campaign

No one is charging conspiracy, but there is certainly a whiff of it in the air!

[davidwparker]

74. "Kerry won. DNC failed miserably. Possibily deliberately."

I agree with each of these.

Kerry won. And he should have known that and fought, regardless of how the press would have labeled him (e.g., sore looser). The claim that * got millions more votes in 2004 than he did in 2000 was just laughable on its face. People who bought his lies in 2000 were wising up to him by then. That, should have been enough for Kerry to at least put his name on an Ohio lawsuit. Was it Mark Crispin Miller who said that Kerry won 9 out of 11 of the swing states? He did this by running even a miserable campaign.

DNC failed miserably. Yes. Instead of having Dean's 50 state strategy, they just felt they needed to win the coasts. Just writing off half the country from the beginning isn't wise. It had become the Bill Clinton show and we lost state houses and other local offices and had no infrastructure. Dean is trying to change that now.

Possibly deliberately. Yes. Sen. Clinton was on record as serving out her full term. The timing was wrong for her, so if Kerry was the placeholder until 2008, oh well. How many Clintonistas were advising the Kerry campaign at the end? However, it was Kerry steering his ship and regardless of what the consultants said (regarding conceding) he should have had the sense to know that he won. He should have listened to John Edwards and fought to count every vote. Meaning publically, with a lawsuit and not what we imagined he was doing behind the scenes to look out for our votes.

BTW, for the possibly deliberately reason, this is why if Hillary is the nominee in 2008 and then looses, I will be Green because I don't like getting punked. I hope the new rules of the nomination process -- having other regional input to slow down Hillary and the Clintonistas from crowning her after Iowa -- will allow us to at least have a chance with Gore/Clark or Edwards/Clark.

[sendero]

145. IT DOESN'T MATTER...

... if you are such a rube that you have traitors in your midst and don't know it, you have no fucking business being President because you will face much more crafty treachery than that after you are elected.

[davidwparker]

177. Agreed.

[Human Torch]

16. "Americans give people a second chance"

Yes, they do, and some Americans make it easy for them to do so. Sometimes people like the guy in the photo below get a second chance because they cheat and lie and break the law and those who are in a position to challenge them do not, or they do it for a little while and then throw in the towel. They just go windsurfing or skiing instead while the people who voted for them and worked for their campaign and sent them money they could not afford to send but they sent it ANYWAY because they BELIEVED in them have a frigging coronary.



I plan to vote for someone who will not remain silent for a MONTH when Karl Rove starts smearing them with his fecal matter.

:patriot:

[davidwparker]

44. Nominated for #1 reply in this thread.

I hate that bastard. They guy in the picture, not Kerry.

For Kerry, it is sadness for what could have been, but will not be, because he conceded in the early morning (I believe) to not get labeled a sore looser. How many Americans have died since Jan 2005? How many more Iraqis? How many more jobs lost? How much more added to the deficit because of trade imbalances?

Then, he had the grass/netroots ready to go to the mat with him in the fight to recount the votes.

[Catchawave]

60. I wish we could nominate responses.....

...and troll rate some of them too :evilgrin:

I think Edwards wanted to fight for at least another night. Whatever did the Kerry team do with the excess war chest balance? 15 million? Them there are fighting bucks!

[blm]

90. Your facts are wrong. Check the research forum data.

.

[glitch]

17. He may not deserve it but we certainly do he'd make an excellent President

Sometimes you have to forgive and do what's best for the community. I support him for President, along with Gore, Edwards, Clark, Conyers, Boxer, Dean, any of the other brilliant people we have on our side who choose to run.

May the best one win.

[IndianaGreen]

20. Kerry and Gore deserve a second chance because they were robbed

No doubt in my mind that Gore won the 2000 election, just as there is convincing evidence that Kerry carried Ohio in 2004.

Gore is the most qualified candidate, the one who can deal with all of the pressing problems our nation and the planet face.

Kerry has been outstanding in opposing the Bush regime efforts at establishing an American version of North Korea in our country.

The corrupt money men will support a candidate that will "grease their skids," so they are likely to support someone like Hillary. It is up to the people to prevent the selling of the nomination to the candidate most willing to sell herself to the ruling classes.

[LetsThink]

130. Diebold programming errors.........?

[Bucky]

21. Sure, he deserves a second chance; he just doesn't deserve the nomination.

He's simply not our strongest leader nor would he be our strongest candidate. If he's nominated, I'll gut up and work for him. But I don't think he'd be making statements like this if he didn't have a strong inkling that that ship has already sailed.

[Poiuyt]

22. I think he'd make a great Secretary of State

It's a shame that Americans are afraid of an intellectual as president

[davidwparker]

23. *** insert Stephanie Miller drop about he's joking ***

He must be. Really.

[Monkeyman]

25. John as a Veteran For Kerry don't do it

[blm]

42. Why? Because the DNC didn't secure election process, you blame Kerry for

winning 60-65 million votes?

[Nimrod2005]

27. Ok with me....nt

[lovuian]

30. One Skull & Bones president is enough for me

let someone else have a go with it

[OKthatsIT]

134. NO SKULL AND BONES POLITICIANS...enough!

[Raine]

235. I agree

I've had it with those Bonesmen...ENOUGH! :mad:

[mike_c]

32. no way in hell....

eom

[davidwparker]

34. Some more thoughts about Kerry's remark: It's a basic American

principle that we have habeus corpus, but that is going to be signed away next week. I guess you can throw out your second chance crap along with that basic legal right since the Magna Carta. Conceded without a fight.

If a recently defeated candidate is going to convince the Democratic activists about a second chance, Kerry needs to get behind Gore. He at least fought and was the first one robbed.

[brentspeak]

36. The bogus accusation that Kerry "didn't fight" the election result

What was he supposed to fight? What was he supposed to say? "This election was stolen. Uh, no, I can't put my finger on exactly how it was stolen. I just know that somehow it was stolen. Evidence? Um, we have nothing in hand at the moment..."

The people who blast him for conceding themselves can't point to any hard evidence that Kerry could have taken up as an issue at the time. Is there some evidence now? A little bit, but not the kind of thing that any sane runner-up could hold up to the American people and say, "Look! Look at this! We wuz robbed!"

[Lerkfish]

40. I disagree. There was plenty of irregularities in Ohio that were known

the day after the election: Warren county illegally locking up the ballots due to bogus terrorist scare, mostly black or democratic precincts with inadequate or nonworking machines, while white republican precincts had no waiting period.

there was PLENTY KNOWN the day of election.....

Kerry promised to make our votes count, said he'd got our backs, and then pulled out because he didn't think he could win.

winning was one issuse, protecting voting rights was another.

[AngryOldDem]

72. Then there was all that bullshit with absentee ballots...

...that invalidated many of them before Election Day.

Can't recommend it enough: "What Went Wrong in Ohio," otherwise known as the Conyers Report.

This was not like 2000 when the theft was by stealth. 2004 was brazen, and there for all to see.

[depakid]

45. Kerry chose NOT to fight and NOT to win

Right around convention time. He acted like Dukakis when he promised during the primaries that he wouldn't run that style of campaign.

He had his chance- and he gave it away. Along with all our hopes.

[brentspeak]

46. Good grief.

Another anti-Kerry post which contains no specifics. Just emotion.

[depakid]

66. How many specifics would you like?

You must have a very short memory. All through July and August the campaign allowed itself to be smeared on the air. When they finally began to respond- it was too late, The momentum has already shifted. What a STUPID thing to do- announce that we're not going to run any ads for weeks and weeks after the convention.

And there are many more instances- as when Bush asked him pointedly whether he'd vote for the war know what he knew now. Did he stand up and fight- take it to Bush- who was daring him like a schoolboy. Nope- he took the "safe" approach to losing. Face it- he ran a lousy Dukakis like campaign.

[blm]

50. Kerry won - the DNC failed to secure the election process

If Kerry was going to take a dive as you claim, he wouldn't have beat the crap out of Bush at the debates, and BushInc wouldn't have had to work overtime purging voter rolls and rigging machines.

[jazzjunkysue]

209. Right. The DNC didn't do its homework. Has it, yet?

I certainly hope so. Not holding my breath.

[SKKY]

38. If it's down to Kerry or Hilary, sure, I'll give him a second change...

...other than that, I'm sorry John. You were my man, but you reacted too late. If you had dumped
Cahill and hired Carville about 2 months earlier, or if you'd have shown some stones and reacted
to the Swiftboat Vets with as much vigor as they attacked you, perhaps you would be asking for us
to reelect you, and not a second chance.

[zonkers]

39. Hop off big guy... you're done.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

48. LOL, spoken like a true freeper. Which of course, you're not, LOL.

:hi: MKJ

[Malikshah]

41. Hmmm. What about the 650K+? Don't they deserve a second chance?

What about the 2750+ US Soldiers? Don't they deserve a second chance??

Sorry, Kerry. I am not buying it.

[paulk]

169. Kerry's to blame for that?

Is that what you're trying to say?

[Malikshah]

185. Yup--he's part of those whose vote helped lead to this

Yup-- along with others...

Feingold didn't Gore didn't

[paulk]

194. well, that topic has been discussed endlessly here on DU

I've never seen the IWR as something to blame Democrats with, as opposed to blaming Bush for....

But, that's also one of the main reasons I've come to despise the (self described) left wing of the party in the last few years - for their willingness to take the club the Republicans gave them and use it against other Democrats. I'm just glad that the only places I see this sentiment expressed is on fringe boards like DU - out in the real world people don't givemuch of a shit about that. They're more concerned with where Iraq is now and how to deal with the current situation. Kerry has some of the better ideas on that, and I'm not going to shut him out for something as debatable as the IWR.

[Malikshah]

199. Despise all you want-- I did not get any club from any Republican

I target my disapproval and disappointment and disgust at those who, through their own weakness and servile nature, pandered their morality to the highest bidder and lowest common denominator.

There are other Democrats out there who did stand up, and yet, again, we are having Kerry, Clinton, and now Obama shoved down our throats. It is the 2003 Primary all over again.

We're supposed to stand, lockstep behind the safe, stable, fair-weather candidate

So say the Conventional Wisdome/More of the Same Crowd--

Yup-- that's done just wonders over the last six years. Just wonders.

Maybe, just maybe, people can move away from their "It's a chess-game" mentality and begin to look at the options out there within the Democratic party.

If that's something to be despised, well then, that's their own oblivion.

[paulk]

202. it's the same difference

"weakness, servile nature, pandered their morality, etc., fair weather candidate"

blah,blah,blah

Rove couldn't have said it any better

[Malikshah]

204. Yup- and Rove won. So why play be his rules and dance to his

tune.

I've no fear of Rove. Just disgust.

I also have a fair bit of dismay and disgust to those that will play into his hands by trying to play politics with peoples lives (i.e. those that voted for the war, unread Patriot Act, torture bill)

The fact that people keep dancing, bobbing and weaving to Rove's pot shots and then yell at those who tell folks to find a different way, a different band, would be humorous if it weren't so disappointing.

[lynne]

43. A Kerry "DO-OVER" ???

Thanks . . . but NO THANKS!

[jazzjunkysue]

210. That's pretty much the sentiment: Don't bother. Stay home, Kerry.

You blew it.

[leftchick]

47. hell yeah! fuck me over again!

wife beater mentality. :eyes:

[Catchawave]

61. Unfortunately,

I agree with you leftchick :hi:

[leftchick]

64. thanks

oh god what a nightmare Kerry II would be! :scared:

[Catchawave]

76. The "Swiftboat" nightmare would return :(

I'm still married to one of those cranky, old fart Vietnam vets who won't forgive and forget :cry: It would be redux campaign from hell for me.

[blm]

91. So all vets who WANT Kerry can eff off? Vets who just wrote THEIR OWN BOOK

that will soon be released and should deserve more credulity than any misinformed vet gave the swifts.

Kerry didn't lose to the swifts. He didn't lose to Bush. The DNC lost the ELECTION PROCESS to the RNC and its operatives.

[Catchawave]

119. My dear blm...I may not have been clear...

Kerry lost to VN veterans who were under the radar in 2004.

Kerry lost to those veterans. Move on.

[karynnj]

153. Do you have a good estimates of how veterans

split their vote in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004? As we were at war, you would predict a generic Democrat would have gotten fewer veteran votes than in the other years - running against a wartime CIC.

I have read that the veteran population normally leans right. Are they more likely to support Hillary?

[blm]

That's not true. Kerry brought OUT alot of vets who had previously stayed

out because they never felt represented.

There were some articles written about these vets.

And the fact remains that TRUTH doesn't change because it is convenient for others who want to move on for their own preferred candidates.

You want to tell the vets who just wrote their own book that they should move on because "other" vets with poor comprehension skills won't take their fingers out of their ears long enough to listen to what they have to say?

[Kurovski]

51. I no longer trust him, I won't vote for him in the primaries,

and of course if the powers that be decide he's to be the candidate, I'll vote for Mr. "Kerry good-cop".

[ProSense]

52. Kerry's statements on Iraq make the case against Bush

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2885625&mesg_id=2885625

[INdemo]

58. Kerry supporters..We will not win this argument

until November 2008..Then we can say "I told ya so"

[Malva Zebrina]

53. Kerry and Hillary Clinton are both has beens in my opinion

Both voted to give an incompetant man the ability to get where he is now. Thousands upon thousands of deaths--they are drenched in blood and neither has owned up to that politically inspired vote--although Kerry says it was a mistake and he was "duped" uh huh--the ordinary guy the common man, the backbone of this country, was NOT duped and knew very well of the lies that the two Senators--in their elite surroundings, with all the help from aides to research KNEW NOTHING ABOUT???

I am not of the school that says I am against Kerry and Clinton but will "vote" for them if they get the nomination. I have had enough of it--the hypocrisy--and the spin from Bush.

I will not vote for warmongers--ever. Put either up and force me to vote a third party of my choice, but it will never ever be for anyone who supported Bush's war. They knew better and were playing a political game, perceiving perhaps their war mongering will be viewed as a "strong'stand against the fake wars their votes enabled. They lost and do not have the courage to admit they played that game--neither of them . Never could I vote for anyone who supported this invasion and occupation=-==NEVER

Kerry--stay in Massachusetts, and Clinton, stay in New York and let's have a candidate that does not play these games. It is time truth and honesty becomes a criteria to choose the next president and not players of a game who have the most money to spend on cajoling a vote from the common man who knew this war was nothing but a lie, while they voted to give an incompetant boob these "war powers" Either they fess up, honestly, or they do not get my vote. Period

[iamahaingttta]

54. No he doesn't.

I won't vote him again.
I will happily vote again for Al Gore.
Or just about anybody else.
But I won't vote for John Kerry.
Or Hillary Clinton.
And she's my senator...

[merwin]

59. Didn't Gore roll over as well? He had the option to protest, and he didn't

do it either!

Note that I agree with both Gore's decision as well as Kerry's decision. Gore did what he did because he is a great man. Kerry's career would have been ruined if he had contested the election. Namely because there was only circumstantial evidence to support his claims. Lots and lots and lots of it, but only circumstantial evidence.

[iamahaingttta]

63. Is there a law that says...

...that you must concede before noon on Wednesday?

[davidwparker]

80. To me, Kerry's national career is ruined because he didn't. Gore did

fight, but the Supreme Court trumps the Florida State Court. Gore could have allowed the Florida vote to be contested, but he was trying to heal the divide that had occurred. This is a Democrat trait; Republicans would NEVER have done that. Witness the remark that Darth Cheney makes: "When I vote, we win."

[Ms. Toad]

100. There was lots of solid evidence of problems,

some very specific. Voters in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, were told by pollworkers to vote in booths which contained the wrong template so their votes were counted for the wrong candidates. Polls were kept open into the wee hours of the night in heavily democratic precincts because of uneven distribution of election equipment. Those are objective direct evidence of problems.

I don't know whether there would have been enough additional evidence to merit a protest within a reasonable time period - but there certainly was enough available at the time of the concession to make it reasonable for him to wait without his "career ruined." Kerry owed us that much.

[AlGore-08.com]

139. I think it's misleading at best to say Gore "roll(ed) over as well"

After the automatic recount of Florida, the official vote count still had Bush ahead. Gore could have conceded then, and his life would have been a lot easier. Instead, Gore asked the FBI to investigate the vote fraud, his campaign worked with the NAACP to collect evidence of fraud and intimidation, and Gore spent over a month in various Florida courts, demanding that all the votes be counted. He spent a heck of a lot of time on TV news shows talking about the need to count all the votes, and how many votes hadn't been counted, and how basic the right to vote is, etc. He fought his case all the way up to the Supreme Court, and after they made their insane ruling in "Bush v. Gore", there was no legal way for Gore to become President in 2000. (There were things that other people could have done, but none of them would have led to Gore serving in 2001.)

So when he conceded, he said that he strongly disagreed with the Supreme Court's ruling, but in America we follow the rule of law.

Kerry conceded on the night of the election. There was only a very short time where the outcome of the Ohio election was uncertain. You can't compare that to the Florida recount and Bush v. Gore decision. It's apples and oranges.

[Tellurian]

225. The only time Gore had Bush on the ropes...

was when Bush asked brother Jeb to secure the electoral votes for him...even if Jeb needed to
change the electoral representatives. That little happening would have created a Constitutional
Crisis. Had everyone kept quiet and allowed Jeb to go forward..it may by happenstance have changed
the outcome of the court battle.. That was Al Gore's ONLY chance.. His advisors did not use it.

At the time, rumor had it David Boise's life and that of his family had been threatened if he pursued legal
redress in that vein. If Boise went ahead and pursued the first break in the Constitution, it would have stopped Bush dead in his tracks and allowed Al Gore the wherewithal to pursue an alternative road which could have revealed the conflicts of interests (read conspiracy) between Jeb, KH, and the undue influence applied to FL's electoral Representatives. It did not happen. Boise backed down and so did Jeb. I hope history refects in some bit of triva
this little historical footnote.

My own thoughts about Al Gore are I like him very much. I think he's happy right where he is and campaigning
for the presidency is not something he is interested in pursing..Not many would these days.
And the ones who do, know what they're getting into...

Another thing you can Thank the Republican's for:

Campaigning for the Presidency has become a "bloodsport".

Not exactly something I can visualize generating enough enthusiasm to attract Mr. Gore, as a new endeavor.

[Skip Intro]

62. I'd definitely give Kerry a second chance. I hope he runs.

I was all for Dean during the primaries the last time, but came around to Kerry, very slowly. He kicked ass in the debates. The convention was beautiful. His rallies were awesome. Could he have done some things differently, yes. He could have hit back at the swiftboat liars earlier and more strongly. But there were a lot of bush fools out and about the last time. The pro-bigotry, pro-war/mass-murder "christians" for one. There were anti-democracy efforts in OH and elsewhere. I can't blame Kerry for that.

Also, no offfense to John Edwards, or his supporters, but maybe we could have had a better second on the ticket.

I'll have to see who else runs in the primaries, and what the field looks like after its been narrowed, but I'd have no trouble supporting Kerry again.

I don't understand the anti-Kerry sentiment. He ran a bad campaign and didn't fight in OH. Huh? If there was something to fight for re: the OH returns, then he must have run a winning campaign, right? And if he'd had evididence at the time, re: OH, I don't doubt for a second he'd have fought. I blame the criminals, not the victim. (And later we find out that our own Carville tipped off the repukes that there were plans to fight the OH results - I don't blame Kerry for that).

Bottom line is - I'd support him again because I think we'd have a great advantage with the "I told you so" argument. With the "we were right, see?" argument. And we'd seem consistent. We'd have this advantage with Gore as well, but moreso with Kerry because he was the last we ran.

But I'd really support him for a bigger reason - I think he'd make a great president. Its not so much about giving Kerry a second chance, but about giving America a second chance.

[INdemo]

69. There is one major difference between 2004 and what we will have in 2008

We have Gov Howard Dean as DNC chairman and that will make a big difference as far as fighting for and counting every vote.

[blm]

83. EXACTLY!!!! Dean is doing the job McAuliffe DIDN'T do.

It's all about the INFRASTRUCTURE at work securing the election process.

[INdemo]

96. Well Thank You..I dont have to defend my statement..

And you are correct..If we still had McAuliffe we would not be nearly as optimistic about gaining a majority..
Nor would we have the quality of candidates running in as many states.

[AngryOldDem]

65. I like Kerry, but I can't support him in '08

The way he caved in in 2004 would dog his campaign from start to finish. I'd rather find someone whom the entire party can support. In some Democratic circles a Kerry candidacy would be divisive, and that is exactly what we DON'T need in 2008.

[bamacrat]

68. He can try, but, not gonna happen.

[Kingofalldems]

71. I will vote for the Dem nominee

Don't care who he or she is. There is no reason to trash LOYAL Democrats here on DU. No one is perfect and all Dems are better than what we have now.

[Pepper32]

73. I beg to differ....

However, he's welcome to try.... I guess :nopity:

[WestHoustonDem]

75. Not on my watch

That dog don't hunt any more.

[citizen snips]

77. no thanks

it is time for a new candidate.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

79. He'd make a great Senator!

:patriot:

[JVS]

81. He doesn't

[bambo53]

85. Only if he promises to have Cahil & Shrum run his campaign

And then only if he promises to have Donna Braizle be his chief adviser & spokesman. I don't see what could possibly go wrong.

Joe Lieberman should be his VP, after all, everyone deserves a second chance, no?

[stillcool]

86. I get so tired of the same old replys..

whenever Kerry's name is mentioned. While I understand the disappointment of another stolen election, I don't hold the Senator responsible for stealing our votes. The different election laws, and how they are applied...or not... appear to be the problem to me. But if it's easier to blame Kerry...what the hell...

[bambo53]

92. Kerry has no blame for piss poor choices?

The team he "chose" to run his campaign had a long record of losing races and utter incompetence, a fact most of us found out near the end of the campaign.
He also went "wind surfing" and vacationing when the swift boaters were beating the hell out him, he was kind enough to let them know he would be gone beforehand.

He "chose" not to defend himself from political assholes, but swore he would defend us? NOW he says he's ready to fight?

The man seems to enjoy giving long, detailed speeches that end up nowhere.

Please John Kerry,,, go lay down.

[stillcool]

104. ...exactly

[sendero]

146. I don't hold Kerry ..

... responsible for stolen votes. George Bush, at the time of the election, was WEEKS from polling negative. Kerry should have absolutely TROUNCED him in the election, a few more points and the election fraud would have been moot.

I don't want to reward JOHN KERRY for giving Bush 4 more years to screw up to the point where Daffy Duck could beat him, it's just not fair.

[Rose Siding]

87. No one "deserves" to be president

I hope he didn't say that -He doesn't use that word in the quotes in the article. It would be a terribly arrogant thing to say, suggesting privilege.

[featherman]

93. Hard to have much faith in the leadership abilities of a candidate who

let the Swiftboat smear go unanswered for so long. I love both Kerry and Gore but both have shown they were not quick enough, tough enough, or merciless enough to mount the kind of campaign that can succeed in the current media climate. I agree the deck was stacked against them with a heavy media bias favoring a GOP takeover in 2000 and a continued "War Presidency" in 2004.

Perhaps charisma (or lack thereof) is the key here. It's tough enough to beat the GOP's money and resources without having to struggle against 3/4 of the media attacking your candidate at every turn.

[robbedvoter]

101. I say I deserve to be Miss Universe!

Entitlement and cluelessness - so easy!
And doesn't even acknowledge now that he won the election - compares self with Nixon - who lost....
yeah, John, you learned plenty!
The timing of this is also remarkable! I thought we had congressional elections in a few weeks...

[karynnj]

154. Apply then if you meet all the qualifications

Kerry meets all the qualifications for running for President. There are not that many.

Good luck on your beauty contests

[confludemocrat]

106. His main oponents would be Hillary, Feingold, Edwards. I bet on Edwards.

But think Gore could get it if he wanted his second chance. And you know, Kerry doesn't say why he should be given a second chance, just that others like Nixon got a second chance, why shouldn't he. Because you folded John and can't blame the press, DNC and the brain dead way you campaigned for the quiet way you caved, this was all of a piece with who John Kerry is: a detached, stiff, cautious uncharismatic moderate who makes bad decisions.

[ckramer]

120. Edwards is only a baby

and nobody would vote for a political light-weight.

[galloglas]

127. And Kerry is....

You then imply that "Wind-Surfin" John Kerry is a heavyweight?


"and nobody would vote for a political light-weight."


That is what they said about Harry Truman. You know, in 1948, when Dewey "won" the election!!

Knowing he would not be able to serve out his term (IMHO), FDR knew exactly what he was doing when he picked Truman to run for VP.

He watched Truman take down Prescott Bush and his corporate toadies in 1942, for war profiteering. He saw past Truman's "weight", and saw his honesty, then picked him as the next President of the US.

Then Truman won it on his own in 1948!


PS. Don't diss Edwards. It only makes you look "light-weight".

[karynnj]

157. Kerry has occasionally windsurfed,

a demanding sport requiring physical stamina and intense concentration. In 2004, the day he windsufed for 2 hours was spent mostly concentrating on material for the first debate. If that break helped him in that debate, it was a good thing to do.

By the way, the photo used in the ad was an old picture, not from the late August outing.

Kerry wasn't a light weight in Vietnam, in the anti-war movement, going after the mob as a prosecutor, proposing the use of the trading pollutants method of controlling acid rain that the NE governors accepted (and that was used in the clean air act - and is a mechanism proposed by some to control carbon emissions) as Lt Governor, or as the Senator, who with Kennedy authored the precursor bill top S-Chip that gives many kids health insurance, or the Senator who had the guts to stand against his own party as well as the Republicans to help close OBL's bank. Not to mention one of the 2 authors of Kerry/Feingold.

It is laughable that as you attack Kerry as a light weight, you claim that "dissing" Edwards as a light weight is wrong. There are positive things you can say about Edwards, but he is clearly not more of a heavy weight than John Kerry.

[galloglas]

166. And you are clearly so biased

that your opinions are worthy only as a political flack for Kerry.

You walk in, tout Kerry as "the Man", and don't even consider anyone else, except with disdain.

Your man, "the MAN", broke trust with his Democratic constituency not once, but TWICE!

For whatever reason, he sat on the millions of dollars that had been promised to insure that "every vote was counted", and, within hours of "winning" (according to all exit polls) he concedes defeat to his Skull and Bones brother?

If he lost because he was "out-Roved", he should not run again because he lacks the sense.

If he was not "out-Roved", but actually won the race in the Ohio, but was instead cheated out of his victory by Blackwell, Urosevich, and Company, then he is too cowardly to fight the fight he promised us he would.

If the latter, then he paid attention only to his own perception of his own public image.

And, I would offer, that if he falls down and concedes to Bush, when there were still so many outstanding issues and votes uncounted, then he sold out the rights of each of us who cast a vote for Kerry.

And who has suffered for that? Kerry remained a Senator, and all of us who voted for him have had to bear the brunt of four more Bush years.

It is always the same, poor men fighting rich men's wars. Bush-Kerry '04 was no different.

As for a SECOND chance, please see my second post, copied here (while you denigrate Kerry's possible opponents).

Remember Kerry's last minute appeal to the grassroots, last January, to stop Alito? To start the filibuster and stop the vote to confirm (and we broke our asses while he (Kerry) rounded up just 23 votes of the 40 needed!!)?

Well, IMHFO, that WAS his second chance !!

We've already got a President who can't count. Why the F**K would we need another one??

Further, there is no other possible nominee who has sold out his own voters TWICE! (a lack of distinction Kerry alone holds)

[karynnj]

174. You are incredibly biased

Kerry lost both those issues - not because he "broke faith" - but because the numbers weren't there. It is insane to think Kerry would have magically become President if he challanged. The numbers are still not there with regards to 2004. As to the attacks, the party did an abysmal job backing him up. Take just 2 people - if 2 of the very few Democrats on cable tv had sat down for even an hour and looked at Kerry's web site - they could have defended him. As it was their defense of Democrats starts and ends at Clinton.

On Alito, he said in the very first post to people that it was a long shot. There are only 100 Senators - at least say 45 were completely not in play. Kerry needed to persuade 41 of them to vote no on cloture or not vote at all. Kerry knew they didn't have that number - if they did, there would have been no appeal. The only hope was for enough people to learn what Alito was for and to push their senators to vote against cloture. There were 44 people who voted against him on the vote itself. There were enough people that they could have won had the centrist wing not been hypocritical - voting for cloture than voting against him. Somehow, I have more respect for Kerry fighting because he cared then for someone giving a fancy speech on why he was wrong than dissing the filibuster or even voting for cloture.

I have looked at other canddiates - I prefer Kerry, but I would be happy with Gore, Feingold or Clark. I don't want a return to the Clintons and I am less impressed with Edwards than I was in 2004. In fact, I would say that his selection was a mistake on Kerry's part, because he was pretty light weight.

You have accused Kerry of

[galloglas]

176. being incompetent to serve. Yeah, so what? n/t

[karynnj]

155. He specifically said that he would make a case

for running when and if he decides to. He had 30 seconds and he clearly had no intention of announcing on Fox news.

The CSPAN appearances of Kerry show a very engaged person who connects exceptionally well. He was charismatic in 1971 and he is charismatic now - far more than Edwards will ever be.

[DemGa]

107. Please No

[The Count]

108. Geez, I thought we have elections in a few weeks..But noo, it's about John

It always is!

[karynnj]

159. What BS - Kerry had an interview on Fox

and gave great answers on NK, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Wallace asked about 2008 and Kerry gave exactly the answer he has for a year and a half. Wallace then asked about second chances and Kerry gave an answer as to the history of that - he could as easily be speaking of Gore.

Kerry has been all over working for people for 2006 and has raised more money than any other politician for other candidates. Read any of his requests - he (or someone in his PAC) took the trouble to make the case for each candidate they have tried to raise money for. It is not all about John - there are many many people who deserve that criticism, he doesn't.

[Donnachaidh]

109. Oh Horse Manure!

Guess he's trying out that set he's only recently grown on "us" now? Please -- spare us.

[against all enemies]

110. Thanks, I'm going to puke now.

[smoogatz]

111. If anyone "deserves" a second chance, it's Al Gore.

And I think most Americans would jump at the chance to let Big Al repair the country, get us the fuck out of Iraq, take down al Qaeda, balance the budget, nationalize health insurance, and fix the global environment. I know I would.

[ckramer]

115. You kidding?

Al Gore is busy making money

[smoogatz]

117. I think he'll run.

He hasn't been making money so much as he's been turning himself into a national celebrity. Frankly, I think the country needs him right now. Gore/Clark sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

[karynnj]

160. That's actually not fair

I have no idea if he is making much money. What I do know is that he is raising the issue of global warming in a way that makes sense to people who have no scientific background. This is an issue that Gore addressed for decades and wrote Earth in the Balance (in the late 80s I think).

Whether he intends to rejoin the political world as a candidate or not, he will have suceeded in moving public opinion in the right direction on a critical issue.

[sendero]

147. At least Gore..

... was blindsided by the Republican electoral tactics. Kerry had full warning, and then apparently, according to a vocal booster here, delegated/assumed/hoped that someone else would take care of the problem of securing Oh and Fl.

Not the mark of a real leader.

[Tellurian]

226. Dead on Balls accurate assessment..nm

[ckramer]

113. Kerry should be president of United States

I whole-heartly support his ambition the second time. He is the best democratic candidate out there.

[ckramer]

114. Hillary is a closet republican on Iraq war

She will continue Iraq war as the president until every Iraqi is dead.

[Tellurian]

227. You're talking like a fool..

no matter WHO the Dem candidate will be; their first priority
will be sending the troops home..

[NoodleyAppendage]

116. Bullsh*t. We the Dem voters will determine what he deserves.

Typical that someone born to wealth and power would expect that he "deserves" to be our party head. F'em. I will vote and hold my nose if I have to pull a lever for Kerry. I'm so sick of his crap.

J

[OldSiouxWarrior]

121. Nobody "deserves" the nomination. NOBODY.

Think about what the word "deserves" means. It is like saying that he is entitled to it and that an injustice is done if the nomination is not given to him. Bull!! He can run for the nomination and take his chances just like the others.

[galloglas]

123. Kerry can't count to forty!!!

Remember Kerry's last minute appeal to the grassroots, last January, to stop Alito? To start the filibuster and stop the vote to confirm (and we broke our asses and he rounded up just 23 votes of the 40 needed!!)?

Well, IMHFO, that WAS his second chance !!

We've already got a President who can't count. Why the F**K would we need another one??

[OnionPatch]

124. If I give anyone a second chance

It will be Al Gore.

[SnoopDog]

126. Agreed....!

When a leader realizes that out earth is dying, we need to rally behind him to save not only our country but the world.

It is about time we put statesmen/women in office.

[krkaufman]

125. *IF* Kerry said ANYTHING like this at this point, 3 weeks before midterms.

... then he just doesn't get it. Every other possible Pres. candidate I've seen has been all about keeping the focus on the mid-terms, rather than their own political futures.

Kerry seems to be, in comparing his situation to John McCain's, forgetting that John McCain hasn't been the Republican candidate for President, yet. McCain hasn't lost in a Presidential election; Kerry has. I'm not saying this disqualifies Kerry; just pointing out a difference.

-----

p.s. According to the article, this is our pool of possible candidates...??

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Joe Biden
Russ Feingold
Christopher Dodd
Bill Richardson
Evan Bayh
Tom Vilsack
John Edwards

Where's Wes Clark? Al Gore? Barack Obama? Ned Lamont?

And you just KNOW we have heard the last of Joementum. :)

[LetsThink]

128. A Good Voice to Hear More Often...........

...whether or not he runs in '08, Kerry has good things to say and we need people with his experience out there talking about ideas to get us out of the mess we're in...... or should I say, all the messes. He's a realist. He has experience in war. His is a voice of reason.

[Cheney Killed Bambi]

129. Everybody deserves a second chance

But not everyone deserves to be President.

[Renew Deal]

131. I say bullshit.

He didn't even deserve a first chance. There were several better and more inspirational candidates, but dems didn't have the foresight to nominate one of them. Instead we got an equivocator with malleable positions.

[PittPoliSci]

132. yeah sure why not...

he probably won in 04, so let him try again and if people like him, it's their choice.

he should run with gore as VP. that'd be pretty cool.

[Megahurtz]

197. Now THERE'S an Idea! n/t

[zalinda]

133. Did any one notice that the headline says

Kerry says he deserves 2nd chance in '08, and not Kerry himself? Kerry's quote "Americans give people a second chance. And if you learn something and prove you've learned something, maybe even more so. Now, I don't know what I'm going to do yet. We'll make that decision down the road." Doesn't say anything about deserving. Headline was done to make him look bad.

Oh, and btw, he explained why he couldn't do an all out blitz against the swift boaters, he couldn't. Because they had taken federal money for the campaign, they had to abide by certain rules. I think at the time they had run out of the federal funds and couldn't spend the other campaign money until a certain date. Part of this problem was because the RNC was held so late. I'm sure the swift boaters timed their attack knowing full well he wouldn't have the money to defend himself.

If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around does it make a sound? The same question can be asked if a dem speaks and the media doesn't report it, did he really say anything? Just about every news cast ran the swift boat ad, but they didn't run a rebuttal with it.

I think Kerry will make a hell of a President. One thing his friends have said about him, is he learns from his mistakes. The rest of the world loves and respects him. I think if he is elected, we Americans can redeem ourselves in the eyes of the rest of the world.

zalinda

[Tellurian]

229. Someone mentioned upstream the 08' hopefuls are focused on the midterms

except for Kerry..

Why is he distracting from those seeking election?

[davidinalameda]

135. I'd vote for Hill before I'd vote for him

hell, there are some Repukes I'd vote for before him


:puke:

[BlueStater]

140. Then why are you posting here?

Claiming you'll vote for the Republican candidate if Kerry wins the nomination doesn't sound like something a true Democrat would say.

[davidinalameda]

200. true Democrats also don't promote anti-gay laws like he did back in 2004

he was in favor of overturning the Mass. Supreme Court decision that allowed same-sex marriages; he also came out in favor of the Missouri amendment to outlaw same sex marriages in the same year

and if you go back and re-read what I posted, I said that the are some Republicans I'd vote for before I'd vote for Kerry

I never said that I'd vote for THE Republican candidate

[BlueStater]

233. What are you talking about?

He was against a nationwide ban on gay marriage.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/02/ballot.samese... /

"Opponents of gay and lesbian marriage are also pushing a federal constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage nationwide, though it failed to gain the needed two-thirds majority to pass when it came up for votes in both the House and Senate.

The federal amendment became an issue in the presidential race, with President Bush supporting the measure and Sen. John Kerry opposing it."

And what Republicans would you vote for over Kerry?

[davidinalameda]

238. he wasn't

Drawn into a Missouri debate over same-sex marriage, Sen. John F. Kerry
said in an interview published Friday that he would've voted for the gay
marriage ban passed overwhelmingly this week by state voters.

The Democratic presidential nominee, who spent parts of two days
campaigning across Missouri, told the Kansas City Star that the ballot
measure was the same as one his home state of Massachusetts passed a few
years ago. Kerry supported that measure.

and why do you want to know what Republicans I would support

are you making a list and checking it twice

[BlueStater]

240. Cite?

And the reason I ask what Republicans you'd vote for over Kerry is out of sheer curiosity. This is site designed for Democrats and I'd be interested in finding out which Republicans you'd vote for and why you supposedly despise Kerry so much that you think any Republican is more worthy of getting elected than him.

[davidinalameda]

251. cite?

google

I know this is a site for Democrats-I've been on here for a while-check my post total

just because this is a site for Democrats doesn't mean that we all march in lock-step with the party all the time

there are some decent Republicans out there just like there are some really crappy Democrats-Kerry being one of them

I don't know what Republicans I'd vote for-Lincoln Chaffee is a pretty good guy; I respect Olympia Snow and some of the other northereastern Republicans for bucking their party at times on issues like abortion and foreign policy issues and gay rights

you had a handful of Republicans in the Senate vote against the federal marriage amendment and some in the house as well

I like Jim Kolbe as well-I think his is a voice that's needed in the House and it's a shame that he's retiring even though his seat will go Democratic so that's a plus

[BlueStater]

252. Post a link

Just a few posts ago, you referred those Republicans as "Repukes" .I guess you don't think very highly of them.

In your eyes, what makes Kerry a crappy Democrat? Unlike the Republicans you mentioned, he never voted for any of Bush's idiotic nominees nor did he vote for the god-awful "harsh interrogations" bill that brings us one step closer to a dictatorship.

[blm]

162. Really? Name the Republicans you prefer.

.

[area51]

136. Kerry: no fscking way.

He promised us he'd fight, claimed he had an army of lawyers ready, then turned yellow, turned tail & ran. FU, Kerry.

[Tellurian]

245. !

[Lautremont]

137. What will he do when they call him a "Weep-O-Crat"?

That'll be the true test.

[karynnj]

161. Why would they call him that?

[Lautremont]

175. They've been spreading that one around like manure lately.

There's nothing particularly weepy about Kerry - or any Democrat I can think of, in fact.

[karynnj]

186. Thanks for the explanation

it does seem both strange, and not appropriate.

[Rex]

138. If the dude runs and is the candidate, I will vote for him.

I'll be disappointed, but I'll be dam if I EVER vote for a Repuke.

[Eurobabe]

141. No, no, no...won't go there

Kerry was the WORST of that field (excet for LIEberman and Gepfart). Gimme someone who FIRES ME UP!

Kerry put me to sleep.

[Demit]

142. I doubt he'll get within "deserving" distance of the nomination.

Memo to Kerry: the American people deserve a fighter for president. Never mind what you think you deserve.

[BlueStater]

149. I wish one of you would actually bother to READ the original post

Kerry never said he deserved anything. That was the headline Yahoo used for him.

Once again the media puts words in his mouth and you Kerry-haters buy it hook, line, and sinker. Ugh.

[Demit]

156. I'm not a Kerry hater. And here, the direct quote from the article—

"Americans give people a second chance. And if you learn something and prove you've learned something, maybe even more so. Now, I don't know what I'm going to do yet. We'll make that decision down the road."

No, he didn't use the word "deserve", you're quite right. But are you claiming that the "you" construction he uses is not referring to himself? He says that Americans, who give people a second chance, are "even more so" going to do it for him (if he decides to run) because of what he has learned.

Tell me—because this wasn't in the article—what was the something he learned? And in what way did he prove to us that he learned it?

[FedUpWithIt All]

143. Short memories folks....

Kerry filed several motions in Ohio courts regarding fraud.

Kerry Files Motion to Protect Ohio Vote Evidence
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Report

Monday 27 December 2004

This afternoon, an attorney representing the Kerry/Edwards presidential campaign filed two important motions to preserve and augment evidence of alleged election fraud in the November election. The motions were filed in the matter titled Yost et al. v. Delaware County Board of Elections and J. Kenneth Blackwell (Civil Action No. C2-04-1139) with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The document is titled "Motion Of Intervenor-Defendant Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc. For A Preservation Order And For A Leave To Take Limited Expedited Discovery."

He did fight.

BREAKING: Kerry/Edwards File More Ohio Election Motions

By WilliamPitt

Thu Feb 24th, 2005 at 06:32:43 PM EDT :: Voter Rights
Kerry-Edwards 2004 has just made two filings in the Ohio recount case currently pending before Federal Judge Edmund Sargus in Columbus, Ohio.

Kerry-Edwards 2004 has been relatively quiet in this case for the past several weeks and its filings today indicate its continued interest and involvement in this litigation.

So what is it? Did he lay down and give up? Or were you expecting to see his challenges on CNN or FOX. The truth is out there for anyone who is interested in finding it. Unfortunately some prefer knee jerk reactions. We can all see how well THAT has served us.

What part of CORRUPT power are people here missing. The administration got it's torture bill. bush's unconstitutional wiretapping was essentially disregarded. The outing of US Spies is no longer considered treason or even worthy of prosecution in US courts. And people are whining because Kerry was unable to sway, in his favor, the courts in one of the most corrupt states in the nation. Go back and reacquaint yourself with Judge Moyer. You might remember him, he benefited from a fraudulent election then sat in judgment over this SAME election.

What about the people. Why didn't WE contest the election? Some did. Too many did not. Always easy to cast stones.

[sendero]

148. thanks for posting..

.. I find it beyond ludicrous that anyone would think that legal action against election fraud more than a few days after the election is worth a bucket of warm spit.

Do you think these folks are going to leave smoking guns sitting in boxes in warehouses?

This crap was window dressing and nothing more. "Shaking it boss" stuff.

[JNelson6563]

151. I'll take you back further

December??? February of the following year??? Hilarious!! Almost as goddam funny as a three week wait to reply to the swift boat liars.

No, you need to go back further friend. Like to the day after elections when they were still counting the votes and all chances to challenge teh outcome were flushed down the toilet with a premature ejacu, er, concession.

Yeah, a real fighter! Bush was nice and safe with his "re-election" so THEN it was time to make a stink.

You may find that admirable, I call it a Special Kind of Stupid.

Julie

[FedUpWithIt All]

158. So, with the luxury of nearly 2 years hindsite...

you are suggesting a better plan for the first tense hours after the last election. Brava.

I am fairly certain that EVERYONE, Kerry included, can see where he might have made different choices. I mean who cannot make "better" choices once all the FACTS are actually out.

Of course, this is running on the assumption that the decisions you think Kerry should have made would have in fact made any difference. Personally, i think the only difference it would have made would be LESS public awareness of the actual fraud. Kerry would have been standing up with NO proof, the mechanisms (of the fraudulently won side) would immediately demand that he provide proof (which had not yet been compiled), people would believe the fraud claims are a non issue, and any discussion about irregularities after such a fiasco would be immediately dismissed and you would be sitting here years later insulting Kerry's choices with the benefit of hindsite.

I am not sure which candidate you would prefer in the next Pres election but i will assume he/she is not currently holding a position of power. Because if such a super-candidate WERE holding a seat in either the Judicial or Legislative, surely He/She would not allow the current level of corruption to continue.

This person would know how to use the Courts and Congress, not to mention the media,to maximum advantage and stop injustice and fraud as soon as it occurs...right.

Surely they would not make such grave errors as President Kerry has. After all, it is a small thing to get the sitting party in power, not to mention the Courts and Congress they control, to go along with an accusation and the subsequent correction of the very fraud which gave them their power. Those who steal power want nothing more than to allow justice to prevail.

::sigh:: :eyes:

[JNelson6563]

191. Hey, you're the one who prompted

the stroll down Selective Memory Lane. :toast:

[karynnj]

163. As an exercise, try to compose the logic he would use to defnd

his challange. Remember that he was 118,000 votes short and votes not cast don't count.

[JNelson6563]

192. There seems to be no shortage

of ideas to right the wrong after he conceded. How very, very safe and unlikely to offend our dear friends the Republicans.

:puke:

Julie

[JNelson6563]

150. Hey, I like dreaming too!

No. Fucking. Way.

[hughee99]

152. John Kerry is my senator...

and I like him, but he doesn't "deserve" a second chance. Kerry made many campaign promises, but since he didn't get into office, he only had the opportunity to keep his word on one of them. He promised to fight for our votes, and IMHO, he didn't. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be able to run for the nomination again, but I don't think he is OWED any special treatment in the primaries, and he certainly will not receive my vote in the primaries if he chooses to run.

[flordehinojos]

165. kerry folded to bush pressure and diebold machines. he didn't even put up

a fight. no vote for kerry. not from me. not this time.

[mopinko]

167. he must be f'ing dreaming

save your money, john boy. ain't nobody in their right mind will work for you, except for money. if you can't take down ken blackwell, you are not the man that we need to muck out the stalls. we need a real fighter. not a bunch of empty promises.

[jokerman93]

170. I agree he deserves a second chance

He was framed, maligned and cheated. But I also think he ought to get in line behind Al Gore who has a greater claim imo.

My dream ticket is Gore/Clark. That would be a solid, grounded, one-two punch with all the integrity, vision and foreign/domestic policy expertise we're going to need to dig ourselves out from under the pig-stye the neocons have made of this country.

J

[YankeyMCC]

171. Reality does not usually respect what people deserve

So regardless of the merits of him 'deserving' a second chance it's probably NOT a good idea. Instead work like hell to help a more viable choice take back the oval office. And continue being a good senator.

[StrongbadTehAwesome]

172. Ugh. Held my nose the first time, and I'll fight like hell during

the primaries to keep from having to do it again. There are much better choices for a nominee.

And shouldn't we be focused on the midterms now anyway? Egotistical, much?

[CJCRANE]

173. He won first time out.

Unfortunately the Bush-cons changed the rules at the last minute.

[Dr Fate]

178. If he comes out with guns blazing in the primaries...

...and impresses the base that he has learned not to trust the old guard "strategists" who lost the last 3 elections, then he can win the primaries.

If he sticks to what will win the primaries for him (Blazing guns & not trusting the Donna Brazille types)- then he will win in '08 too.

Lotta ifs, I know- but if you have been paying attention to Kerry lately, he can do it.

[Katzenjammer]

181. That fool is delusional, I swear.

I can't think of anyone LESS entitled.

[bobbie]

189. No no no, don't think he's delusional...

Think he's a mole. Skull and Bones mole.

[confludemocrat]

182. Kerry fatuously trying to out-monger the war mongers on N. Korea:

More fatuous "positioning" by this new Harold Stassen (except Harold ran only every four years-John is now never not campaigning). Typically trying to talk tougher than Bush, when he should be reminding people that Bush brought this on by his "bring-it-on" "axi of evil rhetoric", refusing to give N. Korea assurances that we wouldn't nuke 'em so they are trying to arm up and Bush has refused to meet in bilateral talks.

Everyone knows these sanctions are grandstanding by Bush, but Kerry seizes the moment to try to look tough. North Korea, nuke-armed or not, is already ground into the dirt and John is trying to make sure we starve them out. China, Russia and South Korea, their neighbors can't bring themselves to talk this tough out of shame what it could do to the enslaved population there, but John Kerry steps into the void in his typical (but still vague, blustery and vague-who else but Kerry can accomplish that?) way:

JOHN KERRY: "This administration is tolerating, this administration is doing exactly what it said it wouldn't do, which is allowing North Korea to get away with what it's doing. China walked out of there and said we voted for it, but we're not going to enforce the cross-border mechanism, it's too dangerous for our region."

Shame on you Kerry.

[Jamastiene]

183. I say, "Sure, why not?"

I'd consider voting for him again, depending on who he's running against. Sure, he deserves another chance. It sort is still a free country, somewhat, kind of, maybe.

[Deja Q]

187. No way.

His inactivity in the debate was pathetic.

How he acted for months after the election was interesting. Then he flip-flops and comes out fighting.

Now he wants us to trust him again?

[bobbie]

188. I'm open to second chances if someone makes a mistake...

But he didn't make a mistake; he sabatoged the race and handed it to Bush*.
Uh, don't think he should get a second chance to do the same thing.

This is too important. On the outside chance that there's anything salvagable about the US after 50 years of CIA fascism, let's try to get a nominee in there that's not in The Country Club.

*I have to add "IMO" here...

[Darkseid69]

190. No..

Al Gore deserves a 2nd chance before you do, Kerry

[bklyncowgirl]

193. I like Kerry but I think he may be the wrong man this time.

Don't get me wrong, If he gets the nomination, I'll vote for him and work for him enthusiastically. He's a good man and would have made a good president.

I think though that the Democrats need someone who's more in touch with the real world. Perhaps someone with executive experience in government. Perhaps someone who's got experience in the private as well as the public sector. Perhaps someone who does not come from an elite background. Perhaps someone who is more willing to mix it up and slam back hard at anyone who attacks him. Someone who had the good judgment to oppose the war in Iraq from the get go for the right reasons. Someone inspiring.

Frankly, I don't know if my dream candidate exists. Of the usually mentioned contestants, Gore has all the public sector experience in the world and since "losing" the election, considerable private sector experience. He can be inspiring when he talks about the environment. He was right on the war but he comes from a background that is elite--southern elite but still elite. Feingold is inspiring and has been right on more issues than I care to count but would middle America vote for a twice divorced Jew? Brian Schweitzer, great guy from a western state, with the cutest dog in politics (take that Barney) and a real rancher to boot, but short on experience. Edwards and Obama are inspiring and come from working class backgrounds but lack experience. Richardson has tons of government experience and as an Hispanic and a westerner comes from outside the power elite--the question is can he inspire? Will he fight? Clark has enormous administrative and foreign policy experience and was right on the war but has to have a better political game than last time. Hillary Clinton has Bill but I won't vote for her in the primaries because of the war. Ditto Joe Biden. I don't know much about Evan Bayh but what I do know does not inspire enthusiasm.

Kerry ranks in the middle of the pack (but toward the top). He has enormous public sector experience and knowledge. My concerns are that he's too much of a gentleman at heart. He has been so smeared as an elitist that I fear that too many voters will simply decide that he has nothing to say to them. It is too bad really because he is a talented and honorable public servant who could have done really great things for this country.

[Strawman]

195. We need a new face

If he couldn't trounce an imbecile like Bush, how will he carry a single swing state against someone with more surface appeal like Rudy or McCain?

He's burnt out. We need someone who can catch capture the public imagination and give them something to be hopeful about. Someone who can credibly carry the Democratic banner, and not some tired old waffling patrician Senator.

[allisonthegreat]

206. absolutely..new face n/t

[wisteria]

198. I think he SHOULD run for president again. He certainly has the

resume for the job and the leadership necessary to be President. What is wrong with another shot? And, please don't give me the bull about not running a candidate again because the one time we did he lost. What a lame excuse that really is. If you believe in superstition in regards to the presidency than it would naturally extend to the VP and not attempting to try running any sex or any person more than once. We had Geraldine Ferraro running as VP and that ticket lost to Bush 1. So I suppose we shouldn't try to give another woman a shot at the Vice Presidency ever again. What a shame to waste some of our best. It is a real shame for this country to reject good people, who could accomplish so much good, just based on one run.
Sorry, but I am not that closed mind.
Maybe, the pollsters need to ask if Dem's are ready to run a good candidate that they ran before. I bet the results would surprise all the negatives.

[OKIsItJustMe]

201. Three Words - Ronald Wilson Reagan

In 1976, Reagan lost in the primaries to Gerald Ford (he was the incompetent challenging the incumbent.)

In 1980, when Reagan tried again, <i>I</I> laughed.

When he won the nomination, I was amused, and concerned.

Then, when he won the election... I was depressed.

[Alameda]

203. running after defeat

Let us not forget Nixon, who ran against JFK and lost, then ran again and won.

[IA_Seth]

208. or McCain...

Just sayin.

I'd prefer he use his clout to support other candidates (namely Wes Clark), but hey when it comes to primaries I think everyone should get their say.

[TroglodyteScholar]

205. America doesn't need to take a nap, it needs to wake up! n/t

[jazzjunkysue]

211. Edwards in 08! Go, Johnny, Go! Go! Go!

[jazzjunkysue]

212. And Barach Obama as vp. I'm just sayin'

[Placebo]

214. What would their slogan be?

ALMOST NO EXPERIENCE/NO EXPERIENCE '08

:)

[yojon]

215. Yeah... right.....

he'd wander around with his head up his ass after they stole it out from under him again. He demonstrated his 'leadership skills' the day after the election by disappearing.

Forget it!

[GetTheRightVote]

217. I volunteered for him in FL, I would again, I want a smart Pres for once

and he was elected in 2004, he deserves a second chance as well as Gore. I will back either one in their run for the White House. Both of them are pretty smart so I can not lose, I dream of having an intelligent president, who can speak, who can think, who will listen to their public, etc. etc. etc.

:kick:

[TankLV]

218. Sorry - not buyin what he's sellin...

Nope.

Nada.

Zilch.

There are MANY more qualified than this has been/failure.

Keep him in the Senate where he belongs.

Gore on the other hand...

[Divine Discontent]

232. has been loser???

I bet you were pulling for him big time (i'd hope?) the day of the vote. he had so many horribly hidden things going against him, and he still was on the verge of being pres. just like gore.

the people behind him told him it was hopeless. he did give up, on his own choice, and that he HAS to live with, because I wish he hadn't, but to call him a has been, is rather rude.


he's a great fighter for americans' rights, and he is much more caring and intelligent than Shrub. any denigrating comments should be directed towards him and his cabal, not Kerry.

I prefer Clark, just like in 04. Then Edwards, Gore, and that Senator from way up north! :)

[TankLV]

258. I did/was and am WAY over it.

There are sooo many MORE qualified ahead of line before him...

Sorry, I just don't like him or want his underwhelming candidacy to be repeated...

No browbeating or scolding will convince me otherwise - in fact, it will insure that I remain MORE against his candidacy.

Keep him in the Senate.

[XemaSab]

231. not!

n/t

[Raine]

236. NO...if anyone should have

a second chance it's Gore NOT Kerry!

[crikkett]

237. Boo!

:hurts:

:nopity:

:hangover:

[hedgehog]

239. If he wanted to run again, he should have started 11/07/04.

He has one of the most secure seats in the US Senate, and where has he been the last two years? Where are the ringing denunciations of Bush that are on everyone's lips? Where are the catch phrases used to list Bush's crimes? As a US Senator, Kerry could have been dogging Bush's every step and rubbing people's noses in everything that Bush has done. Instead, Bush has operated in a vacuum. Kerry has failed to lead us. Even if he tried to lead us, clearly he is ineffectual.

[BlueStater]

241. Oh, bullshit

Kerry has been one of the Chimp's most vocal critics the last two years.

Where is Al Gore? It's not like he's going suffer any sort of consequences from criticizing this dipshit and he's been far more quiet than Kerry ever was.

[hedgehog]

242. If that's what Kerry calls being a vocal critic, then clearly he is

incapable of mounting an effective campaign. He could be saying the very things we want to hear, but if he can't get the word out, he might as well be silent.

[BlueStater]

243. What would like him to say/do?

He has opposed every nominee that turd in the White House has foisted upon us. He has slammed the prick at virtually every opportuniy. What do you expect from him?

[hedgehog]

244. Maybe say it in such a way that the networks have to put it on the

air? How can someone have a juicy target like Bush and manage to make his comments so dry?

[Dr Fate]

264. I support Kerry- but hedgehog is right on this one thing.

And it goes for all DEMS, not just Kerry.

They all really need to take the gloves off-go on TV- and start making some really pointed charges-(like the GOP has done to us for tha past 10 years- except we dont have to lie)

It is the only thing the media is interested in and the only thing the swingvoters seem to understand.

[David Zephyr]

247. Why is Kerry talking about himself in 2008 again on eve of 2006 midterms?

Jeez! Just when I give him a pass, he goes and let's his ambition betray him.

Sorry, John! This isn't about you, but the midterms.

[Dr Fate]

265. Actually, Kerry has been talking about, raising $$ & stumping for '06 DEMS

Do you need a list of '06 candidates that Kerry is walking the walk for?

Did you consider that he may have been doing these things or did you just assume he was not?

[colorado_ufo]

253. Not as long as Wes Clark and Al Gore are still breathing.

[Dr Fate]

254. All 3 are terrific and will shine in the primaries.

May the best man win!!!

[TankLV]

259. yeah - just l ike LIEberman...

ugh...

[Dr Fate]

262. Errr- NO. I'm talking about 3 good Democrats here-Kerry,Gore.Clark. n/t

n/t

[Dr Fate]

255. I agree. Let's see what he does during the primaries. n/t

n/t

[Zavulon]

257. Screw "deserve," John. Go out and earn it yourself.

I'm sorry, but this "it is a basic principle that Americans give people a second chance" crap when pleading for a candidacy makes me sick. It sounds like whining, and pathetic whining by whining standards at that.

There's a tough field coming up for the nomination, especially if Gore runs. My choice would be Gore or Wes Clark right now. If you want my vote, give me a better reason than "it is a basic principle that Americans give people a second chance." I'm not going to give any Republican a second chance just because of this "basic principle," which means you don't get one automatically either.

EARN it, for fuck's sake. Don't expect it just because of this supposed "basic principle," and don't plead for it based on that, either. Learn from your experiences and TAKE the nomination, don't just try to tug at voters' heartstrings.

If you get the nomination, you've got my vote - but you don't DESERVE my primary vote just because of this "basic principle."

Oh, and please tell me that if you get the nomination you'll resort to better tactics than this. We can't afford four more years of the bullshit we're being forced to eat now.

Sorry for the rant, but this really pisses me off.

[greeneyedboy]

260. we'll be the judge of that.

we deserve a better president than either party has put forward recently, and we will decide whether Kerry gets another chance or not.

[Dr Fate]

263. Exactly. That is what it boils down to whether you support him or not.

n/t

[lakeguy]

261. nope. if he didn't care enough to have ALL the votes counted

the first time around he does not deserve anything except a good swift kick in the ass.