Kerry regrets choosing Edwards

[dsa]

i'll be blunt--i don't like john edwards and consider him one of the least likable of the democratic presidential contenders. apparently john kerry now agrees with me.

"Kerry 'wished that he'd never picked Edwards, that he should have gone with his gut' and selected Dick Gephardt."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/05/23/200502.aspx

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/23/AR2007052301499.html

[bluestateguy]

1. Bob Shrum is really difficult to take seriously

So I'll wait to hear what Kerry has to say before passing judgement on him.

Gebhart would have yielded nothing for the ticket, and Kerry still would have lost Missouri.

[dsa]

4. gephardt would have galvanized labor

what did edwards bring to the ticket? aside from losing every state in the south?

[jcrew2001]

154. Gephardt's daughter can beat up Dick Cheney's daughter!

I wonder where Rupert Murdoch got the info - maybe Kerry gave it to him.

I think Clark would have been the best choice and I'm stunned that Kerry did not seriously consider him. I know some were concerned about him being a real democrat, instead of an oppurtunist. For a Dem lifer, like Kerry and Gephardt its difficult to accept late-comers.

However, Clark would have 'triangulated' the moderates who are scared off by 'traditional liberal dems' like Kerry.

[eridani]

6. I'll wait on Kerry also

Besides being a Bush enabler (who had not at the time admitted that he was wrong yet), Gephardt missed close to 90% of House votes before he even started presidential campaigning. He's a guy with an illustrious past of speaking out for fair trade (would Shrum et al. have even let him do that as VP candidate?), but he projected nothing but low energy and being totally past it in 2004.

[beachmom]

21. I doubt Kerry will ever say anything. This book is kind of like

McAuliffe's. I don't think we should take it seriously.

[bmbmd]

23. Gephardt would have delivered

Missouri. That would have been enough. Maybe Ohio, too.

[jcrew2001]

156. I'm not so sure, I've heard Missouri was solidly red in 2004

nt

[blm]

32. Shrum should point the finger at McAuliffe for not securing the election process

for the entire four years his Office of Voter Integrity promised to do so.

The strategist class has to knock off the blaming and start dealing with the election fraud that actually DOES rob Dem voters and candidates of the votes cast and earned.

[hijinx87]

106. I think gephardt would have delivered missouri

* only got 52 or 53% of the vote in 2004, and as we found out in
2006, missouri became a bit bluer when the voters turned out that
creep (his name escapes me at the moment) that looked like a corpse.

but he would have certainly come closer to delivering missouri
than edwards came to delivering a single southern state. edwards
is a very likable guy, but I have no idea what he brought to the
2004 ticket.

[jcrew2001]

159. Clark was the best option - why didn't Kerry consider clark?

He would have brought in moderates and disaffected military repubs. It was a slam-dunk.

[hijinx87]

163. the thinking at the time was that kerry had a sufficient military background

decorated viet nam veteran, etc., etc.

[bilgewaterbill]

146. I think I'd believe a winner more than this loser.

How many elections did Schrum cost us? 7? That's not a coincidence. I'm no John Edwards fan nor a John Kerry fan. I've always said that the only candidate with executive experience is Dennis Kucinich. But it's high time that party operatives learn to STFU when talking about other party members.

[JI7]

2. you should include this is coming from Bob Shrum who is selling a book

[jgraz]

3. I bet Edwards regrets choosing Kerry even more

The look on Edwards' face during Kerry's shameful concession said it all. The next time Kerry "goes with his gut" will be the first.

[dmosh42]

9. I'm sorry I picked Kerry for my vote!

-With his recent vote for the pharmaceutical industry against the Dorgan amendment to allow the purchase of foreign prescription drugs, along with his fellow Mass. senator, they are two of the biggest phonies in Congress.

[TheFarseer]

157. I'd rather vote for Dorgan than any of our candidates

that guy gets it and so does Conrad. Why can't Nebraska (or every other state for that matter) elect people that seem to give a sh*t about them?

[Mass]

14. Yes, his wife was just diagnosed for cancer and there next step was the hospital

to confirm the diagnosis.

I too would have had a weary look on my face.

This said, if you want to trust Shrum on his word, feel free.

[PDittie]

22. That's it precisely

Picking Gephardt instead of Edwards wouldn't have made Kerry fight back against the voter fraud any harder.

Dick Gephardt wouldn't have stopped Kerry from windsurfing in the middle of the campaign season, or from putting on that giant green condom outfit.

Fuck that loser Bob Schrum. He's trying to transfer his latest -- and hopefully, final -- failure onto someone else.

[blm]

33. Kerry and Edwards won. McAuliffe is the one who didn't secure the election process

for 4yrs he was charged to do so.

[JCMach1]

5. Dick Gehardt is about as exciting as warm spit...

Yeah, Kerry would have been better with a major Bush enabler! BOLLOCKS

[JerseygirlCT]

136. Just what I was thinking. nt

[Forkboy]

7. Maybe so,but I'm always skeptical of "second had quotes".

But if he did say I don't care.I don't give a shit if people get along,just get some results.If I want buddies running the country I'll vote for Bill,Poppy and a golf course.

[Divine Discontent]

8. oh dsa

what is your purpose... you should say at the end of that post title - so says Shrum

[acmavm]

10. All I know is that Kerry should have gone along with Edwards who

obviously wanted the White House more.

Kerry threw it away like it was nothing. All people's talk about 'there was nothing he could do' is just like the shit going on here now saying that giving bush** his funding with no timetables was the only option.

It's all bullshit.

[AndyA]

15. I question my support of Kerry as well.

He really didn't seem to fight much for those votes, did he? He caved in, just like the Dems seem to be caving in to Bush now. Perhaps Kerry wouldn't have made a good President. He didn't fight back with the Swift Boaters, and he caved on the election results and handed another 4 years to George Bush.

At this point, I wonder if he has what it takes to be President. I'm glad he decided to not run again, I'm very disappointed in him.

[blm]

35. Then you can post the legal evidence that Edwards had to take to court that morning.

Or at least his discussion of the legal case he planned to present.

The SAME Dem election legal team that told Gore he HAD a legal case and the math with him to continue in court could not find a legal case or the math for Kerry to continue in court.

Does anyone think so little of Edwards' character that he would let the theft go unchallenged if he HAD a legal case to make?

[jgraz]

49. It not a legal case, it's a political case

And Kerry didn't have the stones to make it. He knew there was something wrong with the vote counts the night of the election, and yet he did nothing. The Dems expected the theft, Kerry knew it was coming and he should have been prepared for it. Instead, he collapsed like a wet paper towel.

Waiting for some lawyer to give you the OK to be a leader is EXACTLY why Kerry isn't president today.

[blm]

52. The election process was NEVER SECURED by DNC's Office of Voter Integrity

that every Dem candidate and voter was told HAD been working on that issue. That is a FOUR YEAR JOB to counter the election fraud methods employed by the GOPs. It's not an election day job.

You are blaming Kerry for doing only his job as candidate and not doing McAulliffe's job, too.

And it ABSOLUTELY is a LEGAL case that Kerry would have had to made and had to do it WITH some math on his side as well as the DNC's backup. He had none of this.

No mystery to me why McAuliffe never bothered to lift a finger to secure the election process all those years.


This talk by historian Douglas Brinkley occurred in April 2004:

http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Whom does the biographer think his subject will pick as a running mate? Not Hillary Rodham Clinton. "There's really two different Democratic parties right now: there's the Clintons and Terry McAuliffe and the DNC and then there's the Kerry upstarts. John Kerry had one of the great advantages in life by being considered to get the nomination in December. He watched every Democrat in the country flee from him, and the Clintons really stick the knife in his back a bunch of times, so he's able to really see who was loyal to him and who wasn't. That's a very useful thing in life."
>>>>>


http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward


Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)

By M.J. Rosenberg
I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.
On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."

Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.
>>>>

[jgraz]

54. Yes, Kerry was the nominee. The buck stops with him

If he wasn't prepared to take on that responsibility, he shouldn't have run.

[blm]

56. Name the nominee who would've had a different DNC that secured the election process

before election day.


We now know, thanks to your conclusion, that the job of the nominee is to secure the election process, so it is OK that election fraud not be on the to do list for the DNC's Office of Voter Integrity - Dems should just wait until we find out who the nominee is and get that person to add that job to their duties for the 6 months before election day.

[jgraz]

57. Not the point, though it's very Kerry-esque of you to keep pushing it

The actual framing of the issue is simple: The election was stolen. The only reason the DNC had to secure the election process is because Kerry was running against a criminal syndicate. Kerry knew this, yet he chose not to fight.

From your point of view, Kerry gave up because someone else made a mistake. That's not exactly what I look for in a leader.

[blm]

60. Kerry DID his job and won. RNC vote stealing dragged Bush back into office.

You would blame a quarterback for losing a game where he played every play without his entire front line who failed to show up.

[jgraz]

61. He's not a quarterback and this wasn't a fucking football game

Ask the 1000 or so soldiers who've died since he conceded. They deserved better from Kerry, and so did we.

[blm]

63. Yet you can't name one thing that would've been different with another nominee

Would they have had a different DNC in place working for them and the voters to counter the GOP election fraud?

Did ANY of the others who could have become the nominee in 2004 take steps to ensure the DNC had worked diligently securing the election process for ALL Democratic candidates on the ticket and Dem voters?

You can't name ONE who made that a mission to secure the election process because they ALL beleived the Office of Voter Integrity was doing its job as they were ALL being told and promised by the DNC.

Would McAuliffe suddenly have done his job if only another candidate was the nominee?

This talk by historian Douglas Brinkley occurred in April 2004:

http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Whom does the biographer think his subject will pick as a running mate? Not Hillary Rodham Clinton. "There's really two different Democratic parties right now: there's the Clintons and Terry McAuliffe and the DNC and then there's the Kerry upstarts. John Kerry had one of the great advantages in life by being considered to get the nomination in December. He watched every Democrat in the country flee from him, and the Clintons really stick the knife in his back a bunch of times, so he's able to really see who was loyal to him and who wasn't. That's a very useful thing in life."
>>>>>


http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward


Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)

By M.J. Rosenberg |

I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.

On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."

Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.
>>>

[jgraz]

65. I absolutely can -- Edwards would not have conceded

I'm not the biggest Edwards fan, but I asked him this myself, face-to-face, and he said that he would've continued to fight for a fair count.

Maybe that wouldn't have guaranteed his "viability" for 2008, but, at the very least, it would have shed more light on the corrupt election process.

To use your analogy: The quarterback's line wasn't doing their job, and the team was down by two touchdowns. So the quarterback left the field.

[ChiciB1]

68. I Just Called John Kerry's Office And No One Answered!

Would HE really have mad such a statement?? I find it very difficult to believe. I really respected Kerry and waited for years for him to run. This will really "toast" it for me if he said that!

I want to "hear" it from his lips FIRST before I decide!

[jgraz]

69. Even if he made the statement, he probably won't admit to it

Ask Mark Crispin Miller. He got Kerry on the record saying the 2004 election was stolen, and then Kerry denied it up and down.

[ChiciB1]

71. This Is So Sad! I Just Wrote To Some People Who Are Going To Be

in D.C. in May and I think I'm going to try to hook up with them. It's called Swarm The Congress & UFPJ is involved. I can't really afford it, but I just can't give up without a fight.

REVOLUTION TIME!

[karynnj]

145. He SAID Kerry said

Very different from he got Kerry ON RECORD. The conversation - even as recounted by Miller - was casual, Miller said "you were robbed", Kerry agreed. Mysteriously when Miller thought this meant the election was stolen, Miller didn't ask any questions or clarify what was meant. Likely, because he KNEW that Kerry did not mean what Miller intended to believe - and had a book coming out saying.

There were plenty of unfair things in 2004 - from terror alerts, biased media, to the SBVT how could be said to have robbed Kerry of the victory he deserved.

[karynnj]

144. I have never read of a single negative thing that Kerry

ever said of Edwards. Remember that Edwards himself disputed a Shrum account that Shrum pushed Edwards and was reponsible for him voting for the IWR - which in reality Edwards co-sponsored. Elizabeth Edwards in her book makes a case that Howard Dean made a mistake in not pulling out before Ohio and endorsing Edwards - this in her mind - would have led to an Edwards victory. This is saying Kerry as President was a mistake. This is every bit as bad - and it is in Elizabeth's book!

There are two possibilities -
1) Shrum may it up - possibly because Edwards told him he was not interested in hiring him or to sell books. Given other things in the book - this is the hypothesis I would bet on.

2) At some point in private, Kerry said this. If so, it was intended to be private and it was a betrayal that Shrum repeated it. (I have also read that Kerry had really wanted Durbin and had been advised that two Catholics on a ticket would be a problem.) Also, consider Kerry would also be saying that he blew the biggest decision he made in running for President. Even if Kerry said it, it is not a personal insult, but saying that a different choice would have been startegically better.

What is known is that Kerry has never once, in anything I have ever read, said anything negative about either Edwards. Edwards has said some negative things about Kerry - which don't seem to bother you. Elizabeth Edwards had several unflattering things to say about Teresa. Saying someone's comment sent you into Depression is pretty strong. Those comments - by both of them- were intended for the public.

[GreenArrow]

73. easy for him to say

he wasn't at the top of the ticket, and the decision wasn't his to make. When it became clear the election was lost, he wasted little time making political hay out of a situation which didn't require him to do anything other than open his mouth. He's an opportunist of the first order, a political Joe Isuzu.

[blm]

74. With WHAT legal evidence that he had that election legal team didn't factor in?

Because he can say anything vague now and it will satisfy some here, but what would he have taken to court that day to continue?

[jgraz]

76. "Taken to court that day"? What country are you living in?

There is no legal requirement that a candidate EVER concede an election. They can keep fighting as long as they want to. Which, in Kerry's case, was about 4 hours.

[blm]

85. Then you would have no trouble finding Edwards SPECIFIC comments about

the route he would have taken - because, surely, Edwards wouldn't make such a vague comment and lead you to just BELIEVE there was more HE would have done without explaining what it was.

[jgraz]

98. Hmmm...so Edwards at the bottom of the ticket is held to a higher standard

His response to this was: it wasn't my campaign. Kerry was at the top of the ticket and it was his race to run. His concession was a shameful capitulation, and there was little a running mate could do once that happened.

[blm]

104. No. Just SOME standard requiring a specific explanation if he is going to imply

that he would have taken a different course. He's a lawyer and knows EXACTLY how he would've had to meet SOME legal threshold to continue, so what has he offered?

And, BTW, you don't want Edwards to be held accountable for Kerry's decision because it was ultimately Kerry's job - OK, the only way he would is if he had other evidence and chose to not share it with Kerry. We all know that did not happen.

Yet, at the same time you want Kerry held solely accountable for not securing the election process that McAuliffe's Office of Voter Integrity was given FOUR YEARS to do.

Have you spent ANY time contacting McAuliffe for his failure to secure the election that Kerry and Edwards spent their time WINNING against almost all odds?

[jgraz]

116. Nice straw man. Too bad it won't work

We've done this dance enough that I could almost write your posts for you.

"And, BTW, you don't want Edwards to be held accountable for Kerry's decision because it was ultimately Kerry's job - OK, the only way he would is if he had other evidence and chose to not share it with Kerry. We all know that did not happen."

I actually have no idea what point you're trying to make here, but I assure you that I DO want Edwards held accountable if he was at all complicit in that disgraceful concession. However, no amount of blame on Edwards will take away from Kerry's part in this.

Go right ahead and kick up all the dust you want. Kerry was still the top of the ticket and ultimately responsible for what happened.

"Yet, at the same time you want Kerry held solely accountable for not securing the election process that McAuliffe's Office of Voter Integrity was given FOUR YEARS to do. "

You know that's not at all what I said. Do I need to explain the difference between "solely" responsible and "ultimately" responsible?

"Have you spent ANY time contacting McAuliffe for his failure to secure the election that Kerry and Edwards spent their time WINNING against almost all odds?"

Why should I? He wasn't the one who pissed away an opportunity to defeat the Worst President Ever. Kerry was. I didn't devote 100s of hours and 1000s of dollars to get McAuliffe elected. I did that for Kerry. And it was Kerry who betrayed our trust with one of the worst acts of political cowardice in modern history (until yesterday, that is).

[blm]

120. You're still attacking Kerry because he didn't do McAuliffe's job. We expect Dean to do it

and we ALL expect Dean to be working to counter eleection fraud tactics NOW, and have expected it since he took over stewardship of the party and we are NOT waiting for a nominee to be known before we concern ourselves with countering election fraud tactics.

[karynnj]

143. Give me ONE MSM link with Edwards CLEARLY saying that

the election was stolen. He didn't.

Your comment tells me that he is a charlatan willing to say anything.

[mtnsnake]

174. Keep dreaming! Kerry LOST to an imbecile because he ran the crappiest campaign in history!

Only John Kerry could lose to a moron who had already proven to be the worst president in history. Wow!

[hijinx87]

109. I've been hearing about this "office of voter integrity" a LOT

but the only hits google turns up are from you, personally.

I'm curious, because if it happened even remotely like you
say it did, then someone (or many someones) belongs in prison.
so I tried to look up some more info on the place.

where and when is/was this thing? does it still exist? how
do we know when we have an "insecure election process?" do we
have one now? if not, did the "office of voter integrity"
actually do it's job?

[blm]

117. It was supposed to be part of DNC's Voting Rights Institute. If you want

to submit that I conjured up the Office go ahead, but many of us expected that we were being told the truth when it was first promoted as the answer to the rampant election fraud employed by the GOPs after the 2000 election fraud hearings.

Are you saying they never followed through? Because when it comes down to it that is exactly what I am saying whether they used Voting Rights or Office of Voter Integrity.

[hijinx87]

119. I'm just saying that it doesn't appear to have ever existed.

and that surprised me, being responsible for so much evil in the
world.

[karynnj]

142. How do you prosecute this political case?

I'm sure the same Deomcratic leadership that was stabbing him in the back in Nov 2004 - whispering about how it was wrong that he had the nerve to think he was a party leader - would have stood behind him.

Give me a scenario of how he could have done this.

[karynnj]

53. That's not true

One thing I dislike about Edwards is that he said NOTHING about voter fraud or suppression in all of 2005. he did speak of other issues, so it wasn't that he was busy with EE's cancer or couldn't get press.

Then in 2006, he and EE imply in the blogosphere and write ambiguously in her autobiopgraphy that they didn't want to concede - leading to the idea they were in favor of contesting the election. Edwards was on the ballot and if he genuinely thought the election was stolen and thought it could be proven, he had as much standing to call for an investigation to do so publicly.

the fact is Kerry spoke of voter suppression and took considerable heat for it from January 2005 on. Find me a single quote in the MSM by Edwards in 2005 - even one. Until the RFKjr article made the issue more acceptable, I don't think you will find one.

[ChiciB1]

80. I Got Through To Kerry's Office... then Got Transferred To His Press

office who then transferred me to a machine where I could leave my name and address. The persons I asked my question to were VERY EVASIVE as they passed me through to my last connection!

I feel really sick right now... even IF he felt that way, what a horrible thing to say!

Hope is not a word I use anymore, but "say it ain't so" PLEASE!

This will really be a head-turner for me if Kerry did this and I feel very betrayed!

[blm]

87. Sure - Edwards deserves all loyalty of Dems far more than Kerry since he stuck his

neck out for all of us way more than Kerry ever has so Edwards is the one who deserves all benefit of the doubt.

Sheesh. They're both taking hits on the way this is being spun by the same people who failed the Dem party because they WANTED to, and that probably includes Shrum - Mr. "Can't mention BCCI because voters don't understand it" Shrum.

Beware ALL the strategist class and the DC elite who all work together.

And people like Kerry AND Edwards have been manipulated by them, too.

[ChiciB1]

91. I DIDN'T Say That! You Did... I Just Want To Know IF IT'S TRUE!

I didn't mention the word "loyalty" at all. In fact, when I was asked who I was from Kerry's office I told them and then they asked where I was calling from. In Florida! They wanted to know if I represented a Press Agency, and I laughed out loud and told them I was NO BODY... just an American citizen who worked her heart out to get Kerry elected!!

I only wanted an answer. I left my phone number and where I was calling from and told them they could check me out VERY easily!

[blm]

97. You said it would turn you away from Kerry. I say that turning away from Kerry

over something like this is silly since the political jockeying that is being done here comes from EVERYWHERE, especially the DC strategist class.

Edwards is not immune from the political jockeying games that he participates in and at some points, neither is Kerry. None of them can be pure from political jockeying - they'd never win ANY election or anything EVER.

You think Edwards' vague implications that he alone wanted to count the votes wasn't political jockeying? Beware the lack of specifics - when politicians are THAT vague it is for a reason.

And same goes for Kerry. And Kucinich. And Gore. And ANYONE who has ever run for a primary against another Democrat.

[ChiciB1]

101. Read My Post Number 99! I Don't Think Kerry Lost!

Kerry isn't running this time out, and I'm not giving Edwards a pass either. I have my reasons for supporting Edwards at this point in time. I have seen nothing yet to sway me, but there's a long time before 2008.

I HAVE been an Edwards supporter for a long time though, and I have some "alternative" reasons for my decision, but don't think many here will understand them so I don't talk about them.

[ChiciB1]

102. I Said It Would Be A Head-Turner... Not That I Would Turn Away...

there is a difference. I don't think Kerry is that type of person, but I would feel betrayed... I would love to know why he said it, IF HE DID!

[blm]

103. Ah - I took that to mean turn you away FROM.

Thanks for clarifying.

[ChiciB1]

118. You Are So Welcome... n/t

[karynnj]

147. Do you have any problem with the less than kind

things that the Edwards said about the Kerrys - which the Kerrys DID not respond to.

Elizabeth Edwards in her book blamed Dean for not conceding before Wisconsin and endorsing Edwards. She quotes Dean saying that he thought Edwards had the best chance to win. She published this and it is equivilent to a comment that Kerry - at worst, if true, made in private.

You obviously had no problem with Elizabeth saying this or Elizabeth accusing Teresa of nearly sending her into a depression because in giving her information on cancer treatment, she listed one of Elizabeth's doctors (unknown to Teresa) as one she wouldn't recommend. Ignoring that Teresa has hosted a major annual conference on women's health and toxins for 12 years and thus certainly had incredible access to top people, this was a tacky comment.

[Inspired]

11. This is so laughable! Gephardt? n/t

[onehandle]

12. Hearsay. nt

[JTFrog]

13. How about being blunt

and complete. I haven't seen Kerry own that comment. It was taken from a book written by a guy who has it out for Edwards. :shrug:

[Vinca]

16. Gephardt is as exciting as a bowl of warmed-over oatmeal.

Edwards was a great VP candidate. Unfortunately, he was disappeared by the media.

[wisteria]

39. Gephardt would of brought knowledge and a statesman like demeanor to the race.

He also would have know how to be the attack bull and defend the presidential candidate. This was something Edwards did not do well at all.

[Carolina]

17. Gephardt =Liebermann

remember the White House photo-op after IWR... all repukes lined up around Bush along with Liebermann and Gephardt. A most sickening site, I'll never forget it. It was on this site and Bartcop (tutu Democrats) for weeks. Kerry/Gephardt would have been a losing ticket for SURE.

[democrat2thecore]

107. Gephardt was nothing like Lieberman

Unless you think Hillary and everyone else who voted for that is. Gephardt was a champion of labor and led the fight for liberal causes through the 80's and 90's. Gephardt was a REAL person, too. A great guy. To claim he is like Lieberman is just not true at all. Yes, I remember the Rose Garden photo and his IWR vote. He was the unfortunate one who was picked to show the "bipartisanship" of the bill that Hillary, Edwards, etc. also voted for.

[Red Knight]

113. Read "The Selling of Free Trade"

by John R. MacArthur.

It goes through the political history of NAFTA.

Who did what.

Gephardt used labor for what it could give him but in the end the toothless and overly broad "side" agreements he pushed for made nothing more than easy misdirection for slipping NAFTA through with political cover.

Toss Bill Richardson under the bus for me too, by the way. Big NAFTA guy.

[primative1]

18. I kind of Liked Gephardt

Must have just been me ... I never really studied the guy but I wasnt upset by his presense.

[flpoljunkie]

19. Kerry needs a "gut check." Remember Gephardt in the Rose Garden with Bush striking a deal on IWR?

Biden and Lugar unveiled their proposal on Friday, September 27. Senate moderates, including Republicans, such as Chuck Hagel, Arlen Specter, and Lincoln Chafee, expressed interest, and Biden suggested the resolution might draw 60 to 70 votes. Bush quickly rejected the plan, publicly complaining that it would "tie my hands." In negotiations with congressional leaders, Bush aides pressed for fast action on their original resolution. But the multilateralists nonetheless felt they were gaining momentum.

Then, on October 2, just five days after Biden and Lugar offered their plan, Gephardt pulled the rug out from under them, notifying Daschle that he'd found common ground with the White House. Within hours, CNN was carrying live footage of Gephardt standing next to Bush at a Rose Garden ceremony where the president boasted of a "bipartisan resolution." The implications were instantly clear: Gephardt "gave the White House some cherished high-level Democratic support," The New York Times reported, and another step toward "unstoppable momentum," as The Washington Post put it. According to Democratic sources, Daschle aides were "just livid" and "felt betrayed," realizing their hopes for an alternative resolution were doomed. Biden and Lugar quickly canceled a Foreign Relations Committee hearing on their measure. "I'm a realist," Biden told the Times, which noted that "the day's developments would peel away Republican support for his measure and make him unlikely to succeed." Lugar spokesman Andy Fisher concurs: Gephardt's deal "really ended the whole Biden-Lugar idea," he says. (Gephardt aides say that, at the time, Lugar had begun to retreat from his plan under White House pressure. But Fisher denies this, and news accounts from the time support him.)

Gephardt's move also shattered the prospects of two even more restrictive proposals that would later emerge--one sponsored by Carl Levin in the Senate and another by John Spratt in the House--that would have required Bush to first seek a U.N. resolution authorizing war and then return to Congress for another vote if he failed. "Gephardt is trying to portray himself as essentially being John Kerry, as someone who had real doubts about the way Bush was going about doing this," says a Democratic foreign policy aide. "If Gephardt were honest about saying, 'Mr. President, you must go through the U.N.,' he wouldn't have done that."

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031006&s=crowley100603

[MistressOverdone]

20. And how does Edwards feel about

going with Kerry?

[MH1]

41. Keep in mind that the original post is not credible

It is not a quote from Kerry. It is a quote from Shrum who claims to know what Kerry thinks. Since Kerry is not given to make those kind of statements even if he did think that (which we have no way of knowing) it is incredibly low class of Shrum to put it in a book; and it is idiotic of any of us to give it the slightest credibility.

I'm sure you don't consider yourself idiotic...

If Bush were to say something so unsupported and implausible, DUers would call it a "lie".

[Adelante]

24. Shrum's judgment of Kerry's judgment of Edwards

Not Kerry's own, as far as we know.


--------

The IWR vote being used in this thread as a hit on Gephardt, in defense of its co-sponsor Edwards, is pretty funny, though.

[flpoljunkie]

28. Was disappointed when Kerry bypassed Wes Clark and Russ Feingold for VP.

Wes Clark, to his credit, did a much better job campaigning for and defending John Kerry against the Swift Boar liars than John Edwards.

[Tellurian]

29. Kerry was afraid of being overshadowed as the "star" by either one of them!

Kerry even became jealous of Edwards at one point during their campaign when Edwards was well received by huge crowds.

[karynnj]

148. Kery always had MUCH MUCH bigger crowds than Edwards

in the primaries and in the general election. Even in Virginia when they appeated close to the primary, Kerry got many times the crowd size Edwards did.

[GreenArrow]

30. Clark was a winning choice

Edwards wasn't.

[Adelante]

45. I only have my imaginings, like anybody else

What I've thought of over the years is a frank discussion between Clark and Kerry in which they mutually decided the VP slot was not really suited to Wes's particular talents, even though Wes would excel at any job. I've wondered if Kerry might have tried for a Congressional exception so Wes could serve as SoD, but I don't think so, because Wes was only a few years out of the military at that time. Kerry had others ahead of Clark on SoS, which was my best pick, but heading NSA might have been viewed by both as a perfect fit. I would never imagine Wes saying no to Kerry if Kerry truly wanted Wes as VP, but I think they're both smart enough to make an honest evaluation.

About campaigning, though, as opposed to the VP office, in actual ticket value, and against all common wisdom on DU, Wes would have been far more effective than Edwards, simply because he would have thrown his heart and soul into it, every minute of his time and every ounce of his energy. I mean, he almost did that as a surrogate, and astonishingly even more in the 2006 races when he campaigned for 94 Dems, so imagine if he had been on the 2004 ticket himself. Edwards wanted to run for VP for its value in running for president again, imo. Clark would have been in it for Kerry, the actual nominee.

[jcrew2001]

127. Clark would have fought against the Swift Boats which harmed Kerry

more than anything else. Forget Gephardt, Clark was the best choice because of the military/swift boating. He would have delivered Arkansas and Ohio.

[venable]

132. You may very well be right about Arkansas, but just for the record..

Edwards wanted to attack the SwiftBoaters, but Mary Beth Cahill nixed it.

[karynnj]

149. Per many many people involved in the campaign this is not true

[venable]

130. WesDem won't see this because he announced that he has me on Ignore

but I must respond, for the record.

The statement that Edwards didn't work hard, didn't give every ounce of energy to the campaign is absurd.

He is widely acknowledged as one of the hardest working people in politics, and the fact that the campaign put him in bingo halls and county fairs doesn't mean he didn't work hard.

The judgement that Edwards didn't care about Kerry is insulting and woefully inaccurate. Why spread these lies? Really.

The basic problem here is Edwards was chosen, and Clark was not. This is, I believe, where so much acrimony from the WesDems comes from. I know this will be denied, and I also allow that reasonable, smart people can easily choose Clark over Edwards, but the acrimony is just so high, so consistent, that this is the only thing I can figure out. My guess is Clark likes Edwards just fine, if you look at their positions on things. I know that Edwards has high esteem for Clark, as he should.

WesDems view seems to be that Kerry and Clark discussed Clark as VP, but basically (theinsinuation here is) Clark was just too darn qualified.

I like Clark, but come on. You don't need to make Edwards seem like the second choice. Fact is, local Dems around the country exerted pressure en masse for Kerry to pick Edwards. Kerry wanted Edwards. Teresa wanted Gephardt. Many party activists wanted Edwards, so Kerry made his choice.

[Texas_Kat]

178. WesDem is mostly correct

I have had the story from an unimpeachable source. (No, I won't tell you who....)

Kerry had "the VP conversation" with WKC early on. WKC told him that he wasn't interested in being VP, but if Kerry thought he HAD to have WKC as the VP candidate in order to win, WKC would do it. Kerry apparently thought he could win without Clark.

This is absolutely consistent with the comments made by Clark all through the VP selection discussion. At the time, his statement "I'm not interested" confused Clarkies, but it was a lesson to learn.

Clark ALWAYS tells the truth. He is not a 'typical' politician and won't even tell half-truths.

Believe that Clark and Kerry had this conversation or not...... it doesn't matter. Reality isn't faith-based -- it depends on facts. This conversation took place.

[LWolf]

25. More to the point, for me:

The Democratic Party should have gone with a better nominee than Kerry.

[politicasista]

134. Like who? Who was THE perfect candiate to go against Bush

Otherwise you don't speak for the Average American or Average Voter.

[LWolf]

137. I don't claim to speak for anyone but myself.

I've certainly never claimed to be, or wanted to be, the "average" American. There were several people I would rather have sent to the general election, and some of them were even on the ballot during the primaries.

If "average" Americans and "average" Voters want me to join them in '08 they'll make a better choice.

That's simple enough.

[politicasista]

161. And I speak for myself as an average voter

Looks like they thought things more differently than you did about 2004.

Nice of you to dodge the question of who do you support in 2008 or are you just loving to attack Kerry?

[LWolf]

173. That is certainly correct.

The average voter thought differently than I in 2004.

I didn't dodge; I didn't realize that you were asking about '08. I thought you were asking who was the best candidate in '04. I wasn't trying to push an '08 candidate with my post. I don't like it when every conversation has to be somebody campaigning for their candidate. I don't expect everyone to agree with my choice, anyway. I don't expect anyone to change their mind because I campaigned on DU.

Since you asked, I'll be happy to share. Be advised, though, that I'm not doing so because I want to argue with you about my choice, or because I feel the need to read anyone's opinions about my choice.

Who is the best candidate in '08? I should point out that my definition of "best" is who would make the best president, not who the powers that be have declared "electable," and therefore the perfect choice to maintain the status quo. I vote for the best person for the job. If everyone voted that way, we'd get better people in office. Another area that I think "differently" than the average. I guess it's because I want the best, not the "average," in office.

Of those currently declared, there's one who stands head and shoulders above the pack. He has my support.

The man who has consistently opposed the corporate agenda all along.
The man who has consistently opposed the march to war with voice and vote from the very beginning.
The man whose platform on labor, health care, the environment, education, voting and election reform, and international relations is the most powerful and beneficial to the "average" American.
The man who has done the most to hold government accountable during the Bush administration.

Dennis Kucinich.

[papau]

26. LOL - a move from slick progressive to pretend union guy whose owned by ins. co's - - Kerry

is too smart to have said that.

[MaineDem]

27. Just an attempt to marginalize Edwards

I don't believe this for a second!

[politicasista]

112. Agree. I smell a smear campaign

Too bad people here are buying into whatever they see/read instead of getting it straight from the horses mouths.

[venable]

31. Edwards fired Shrum. Unceremoniously. End of story.

I know from very inside sources that Kerry wanted Edwards and Teresa wanted Gephardt. The delay in choosing was getting Teresa on board.

My guess is that she was not happy that Elizabeth was such a star. Tweety's lame joke, when Kerry got the nomination: "He married Teresa and got the nomination. If he wants to win the presidency, he needs to divorce Teresa and marry Elizabeth Edwards"

Teresa would have heard of this, and have been, understandably furious.

I think Kerry is a very good man, and I would hope that he would disassociate himself with Shrum.

It's also possible that Kerry does wish things had gone differently (duh!), and the VP choice is one way to do that.

I've also heard that Gore wishes he'd chosen Edwards, not Lieberman (this makes more sense than the Kerry story).

[ChiciB1]

96. I Love Gore... But We Did Dodge A Bullet When They Stole The Election

from Gore because of Mr. Lie!!! I just thought Kerry was so very UPSTANDING myself!

[CTLawGuy]

34. Gephardt would have been worse

a LOT worse...

[spooky3]

36. Bob "0 for 9" Shrum? The paid consultant who hasn't helped anyone

win a campaign?

Yeah, he's REAALLLLL credible.

[w4rma]

47. If 0 for 9 Shrum says something, it's probably best to do the opposite.

His track record is the worst.

[NastyDiaper]

37. Who among Kerry or Edwards would continue this war?

The Drooling Freeper electorate is the problem. They know shit but claim limbaugh makes them smart. They support our troops by killing them in support of Iranian style theocracy (when i say dumb, i mean REALLY git-er-done, fill-er-up /smacktard PTL stoopid). It's slow, painful work beating these 'morans' down. But someone needs to do it.

As for the Dems in the senate, I'm not big on spurs. But as of yesterday I say we strap them on. Anyone voting 'Yay' on the war capitulation bill is not suitable for candidacy. That's where we focus. Not on yesterdays choice.

Beating up on Kerry/Edwards makes no sense to me.

[wisteria]

38. I don't know if I believe this or not, Sen Kerry is not one to speak badly of anyone personally,

but I was always disappointed in his choice. I knew it was considered to be a good move to generate some votes in NC, but I just never cared for Edwards and thought Gephardt would of been a better choice based on experience and personality.

[venable]

40. I agree that Kerry is classier than this

(but I disagree about Gephardt as a choice- I think Edwards was better, just not used very well by the campaign.)

Anyway, John Kerry is more decent than Shrum, by a long shot. He's a good man, I believe.

[chimpymustgo]

42. Agree with ALL you've said venable.

There is a LOT of behind the scenes info that really need not be public. But at the end of the day, both Kerry and Edwards are decent men. Campaign consultants? Not always, so much.

[flaminbats]

43. Edwards is now running the kind of campaign Kerry could have..

I think Edwards learned from the mistakes of the Kerry campaign and his own primary campaign in 2004. but it appears that Kerry has learned nothing from the last election!

I was impressed when Kerry almost defeated Bush in 2004. Edwards brought back many of the moderates who supported Gore in 2000. I believe that if Kerry had picked Gephardt instead of Edwards, Kerry would have done just as badly if not worse than Michael Dukakis.

were there better choices for Kerry to pick? sure..and I think Gore and Bob Kerrey are two examples. but I believe Edwards helped Kerry's campaign far more than he hurt it! too say otherwise is only an insult and a stab in the back to a fellow Democrat who is willing to fight for our principles.

[blm]

58. Why would you say Kerry learned nothing from election? Who has led more than

Kerry on all the major issues facing Dems since that election? Downing Street Memos? Alito filibuster? Iraq withdrawal bills?

[flaminbats]

72. maybe I should have said Bob Shrum..

I voted for Kerry and was proud of my vote. Kerry actually ran a competitive campaign and nearly beat Bush, although the odds of doing that were stacked against him.

I think Kerry should either make a statement that Shrum took his remarks out of context, or one defending John Edwards against Shrum's attacks.

If Kerry has learned something from the last election, then he should denounce Bob Shrum and embrace the message that John Edwards and others are now running on. but Kerry shouldn't allow Shrum to use him or Edwards for some short-lived publicity of another client.

[blm]

77. Why would Kerry embrace Edwards message when Kerry preceded Edwards on

most of that message?

[Cameron27]

78. On this we agree.

[flaminbats]

89. because backstabbing another Democrat doesn't help..

if you wanted a Kerry-Edwards feud...you have it! ;)

but I doubt this will bring us any closer to universal healthcare, balancing the budget, ending the war in Iraq, or winning the Democratic nomination. The older I get, the more I understand Reagan's eleventh commandment. Democrats can and should disagree on how to achieve our common objectives, but we should never undermine that message with personal attacks and reconcilable differences. we should save the insults and criticism for Republicans, who rarely use that against each other...but never hesitate to use it against us!

[ChiciB1]

99. Frankly, I STILL Think THEY Won!! I'm Not Wanting To Attack Either Of

them! I sat here at my computer and watched county by county as the votes came in here in Florida BECAUSE of 2000, and when Ohio was rearing it's ugly head as a problem for the Bushies, the STATE OF FLORIDA was quickly called and it was stated that The Idiot took Florida!

So many votes got dumped at one time it made my head spin! They were watching Florida like hawks UNTIL they saw Ohio was going to give them HEART-BURN! So they dimped voges here and went to Ohio and let Blackwell do his scam bit!

I just don't understand why Kerry would ever say such a thing! But I'm NOT afraid to hear the truth about it. I certainly think Shrum is a scab, but it's all over the place and if I WERE John Kerry, I WOULD be making some sort of statement. I seriously doubt he doesn't know this stuff is being talked about right now. I called his office and brought it to THEIR attention myself!

[jcrew2001]

125. The best VP option was and still is Clark

forget gephardt

[karynnj]

152. What?

Kerry ran a great primary campaign in 2004, far better than the Edwards campaign has so far. Had Kerry run, we would know if he was able to do it better - from his Faneuil Hall speeches, he would have.

Gore would NEVER have accepted the VP slot and Kerrey has very major baggage and is a loose cannon - not to mention that Kerry/Kerrey alone might preclude it.

Kerry has never publicly said one word of criticism of the Edwards, even while they said some unkind things about the Kerrys.

[flaminbats]

176. Kerry probably would be running a better campaign in 2008

I realize now that the comments made about Edwards were made by an untrustworthy source, and I think Kerry and Edwards are being used by Shrum as a reckless publicity stunt.

I think Kerry and Edwards need to work together on this one, so that Shrum or others like him aren't taken seriously when using these kind of smear tactics. I disagree that Kerry ran a better campaign in 2004 than Edwards is now. I think Kerry ran a better campaign than Edwards did in 2004, but Edwards now acknowledges that the war in Iraq is a mistake. Edwards has also taken a much stronger position on healthcare reform and providing an exit strategy for Iraq than Kerry did in 2004.

please remember I voted for John Kerry and I am proud of that vote. The last thing we should do is turn this into a Kerry-Edwards war. Again..Kerry and Edwards should work together to discredit Shrum, but this doesn't mean that I want Kerry to now endorse Edwards over another primary candidate.

[karynnj]

179. As to whether Edwards is running a better campaign

only time will tell. It seems to me that both he and Clinton have already shot themselves in the foot at least as many times as Kerry did in the entire run to the nomination. Kerry's positions were very good on domestic issues. He also had solid credentials on National Security. The ISG has adopted many of his 2004 positions on Iraq.

Kerry's own 2008 position on Iraq would have been better than Edwards - and rooted in his position on what to do in 2004. Kerry did see the war as a mistake in 2004, which is why he spoke of "misleading into war" and "wrong war". No one has moved public opinion on the war more than John Kerry, nor has anyone had more people sign on to their exit plan.

Kerry's health care plan was very well received in 2004 and was praised as highly as Edwards is now. It also covered almost everybody. Kerry's biggest innovation was how to handle catastropic costs and was a case of Kerry trying to find an elusive solution. Here, he also had the roots from work he did on the Kerry/Kennedy bill that was revamped as S-CHIP.

Kerry also had an incredible alternative fuels/environment plan that rested on work he did as an environmentalist going back to the 1970s.

Kerry is not running - the reason I listed this was to remind you that Kerry's platform was excellent. We will likely find ANY Democratic platform excellent. The point was that on each of these issues, you had very solid, long term work, which led to the strong answers when asked about almost anything. Casual Kerry was better than his prepared remarks - Edwards is best when near his prepared remarks. (That Edwards stays close to prepared remarks is not always a negative - sometimes when you first say something it could get you in trouble.)

2008 is likely to be an easy Democratic year.

[PresidentObama]

44. My question would be why? They were a great ticket. Don't trust Shurm n/t

[here_is_to_hope]

46. And I regret choosing Kerry....n/t

[MH1]

48. I don't regret choosing Kerry, but I wish mods at DU would delete outright lies that defame Dems.

The original post makes a claim that is untrue - Kerry did not say that.

Shrum is reporting what he (Shrum) wants people to believe that he (Shrum) thinks Kerry thinks.

Got it?

[flyarm]

50. gee hillary going to dump iowa..and now her puppet master schrum comes out swinging at Edwards...

it seems HRC is scared shitless of Edwards...they are all over the internet boards with their paid and not paid posters plastering this bullshit..its all over aol message boards as well....hey schrum..are you sucking on HRC toes right now??

this is bullshit..total bullshit..and Edwards is scaring the shit out of HRC..

enough already..i thought we were smarter than this kind of tactic at Du..obviously i was wrong...

this is not better than aol message boards where the Neo Nazi's get 6 -9 cents a post to post talking points garbage..

this is garbage!! worse than garbage ..this is propaganda!

fly -2004 Kerry/Edwards elected delegate

[karynnj]

51. Bob Shrum has said many other unbelievable things

Senator Kerry has not said this in many interviews where he easily could have. This is disgraceful of Shrum in that it is either his conjecture or he is betraying a trust. This also puts the Senator in an awkward position. He has never publicly said anything negative about Edwards since he chose him. (while Edwards has made some negative Kerry comments).

I don't think that Edwards was all that good - but it was clear that he was the favorite of the media and of supposedly both Clinton and Kennedy. If that is true, someone who impressed both Kennedy and Clinton has to a reasonable choice.

[ProSense]

55. Shrum: Edwards said "I'm not comfortable around those people (gays)"

here.

Damn six people recommended Shrum the bum!

Edwards can't get a break!

[Capn Sunshine]

59. Hey , I regret choosing Kerry

But at least I fought it TOOTH AND NAIL, unlike the Senator, who apparently just went along with whatever they told him.

[enough already]

62. The title of the OP is wildly misleading

Shrum is the one speaking, NOT Kerry.

[ChiciB1]

64. I'm Going To Call Kerry's Office Right Now...

Is this REALLY true???

[ChiciB1]

66. There Is No One Answering At John Kerry's Office! How Can This

be?? Don't they at least have an answering machine? This is VERY weird!!! I let it ring 20 times!

[rucky]

67. Now, Shrum...Don't get all "Dick Morris" on us. n/t

[mnhtnbb]

70. Gee, Kerry, we regret you got the nomination and threw the election away.

Maybe the decision you should really regret is letting Bob Shrum run your campaign.

[AlCzervik]

75. why do you just believe Shrum, really? Do you need your own opinion validated?

you must be totally happy now, right?

[ChiciB1]

82. I Just Talked With Kerry's Office & Talked With Two Different People

who would not confirm or deny the comment... they just passed me along to a machine to leave my number!

What do you think THAT means?? I'm not saying Kerry said it, but it sure makes me wonder!

[AlCzervik]

83. maybe Kerry thinks Shrum has zero credibility and he doesn't have to defend himself

from Shrum's stories.

[ChiciB1]

86. Hey... I Don't Want To Go "Negative" Here... But Shrum Is On TV

much more than Kerry is these days, so I would suggest Kerry make a statement. Just my opinion. I am really really hurt, but will wait to cry until I KNOW the TRUTH!

[flaminbats]

93. Shrum wants us to cry!!

he wants to pin the label on all Democrats that we are just a bunch of thin-skinned whiners without optimism, but you and I can have the last laugh :thumbsup:

[AlCzervik]

94. maybe Kerry has already talked to him, Shrum accuses Kerry and then shrum

accuses Edwards of being anti-gay, who's next on Shrum hit parade?

[karynnj]

158. The comment came out yesterday

Kerry is dealing with Iraq and an immigration bill amendment - and likely other things.

Even if Kerry said this in private, it is no worse than things Elizabeth said in her book and you have no problem with her. Kerry, to my knowledge, has never made a single negative comment on Edwards - even when prodded to do so.

[karynnj]

153. It likely means that Kerry is busy with the Iraq vote and the immigration

amendment and they do not have a position on this piece of gossip that surfaced late yesterday.

In the scheme of things, it is not the most importan thing he and his office are dealing with and they likely haven't had a chance to ask the Senator what the answer is and they are not going to make one up.

[dsa]

170. it's a plus!

considering how much crap i've put up with from edwards supporters.

:hi:

[madfloridian]

79. Shrum is a gossip. Wait till you hear what he said about Hillary.

and others.

He is two-faced. He pretends to be friends and attacks behind backs.

[chieftain]

81. I've been in losing campaigns and a lot of regrets and

second guessing occur for years after. As JFK said in a different context "Success has a thousand fathers and defeat is an orphan" I am certain Shrum believes what he is saying and Kerry may well have given him reason to think it. My bet is that there more than one Kerry confidant who has reason to believe that the senator regrets choosing Shrum for his role. To John's credit he has not chosen to publicly discredit his running mate or his operative.
That said, I keep wanting to like Edwards, but he never seems to connect with me. And , Shrum aside, I am still baffled by his less than stellar performance during the '04 campaign. I still wonder why he seemed to disappear. Did Kerry hold him back; did the corporate media decide not to cover him; or was he not ready for prime time? I would love to know because there is a significant chance he will be the nominee and if so we have to have a much better showing from him in '08 than we saw in '04.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

84. wouldn't have made a difference - votes were fixed by GOP anyhow

I mean c'mon

[ChiciB1]

88. It Makes A Difference If Kerry REALLY Said It... At Least It Does To Me!

I just don't a person should talk about his running mate like this, if it's true! It's just so, well UGLY!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

92. I don't think he did say it

[ChiciB1]

95. Well, Nobody Would Verify Or Deny At Kerry's Office When I Called.

I had to leave a phone number and I KNOW I won't get a call back! I have never said a bad thing about John Kerry, I was one of his biggest supporters here in Sarasota County. I even drove many miles to see him speak two times during the 2004 election, so I have no AXE to grind. I pushed my way in front of many people just to shake his hand for crying out loud!

I just don't WANT it to be true!!!

[karynnj]

162. Then shouldn't the man honored by the person Democrats

chose to head the ticket be held to the same standard. Edwards has said a few things that he shouldn't have about Kerry - and he and Elizabeth said them PUBLICLY. At worst, this was said "in house" and should have been private.

[BlueIris]

90. Daaaaaamn.

Not sure how much credence to give to this, but...daaaaaamn. The fall-out from this will be interesting.

[jillan]

100. Another reason why I LOVE JOHN KERRY!

Whether is said it or not.

Edwards reminds me of a used car salesman.
I don't think I could vote for him, even if he was the last dem standing.

[jcrew2001]

124. Kerry is an idiot

for picking Edwards, which did not help him in any way - other than making people wish Edwards was on top of the ticket and Kerry as VP.

Edwards has the personality to attract voters as president.

Kerry should have picked Clark to stop the Vietnam attacks, no one cares about gephardt except rupert murdoch.

[BlueIris]

135. I'm pretty sure that had Kerry chosen Clark as his running mate, not only

would the Swiftboat Bushlovers for Lies attacks have come anyway, they would have been even worse. Ever Googled "Clark" "military record" "2004"? Nevermind, I know you've never bothered to do any real research (or thinking) about this. The Swifties and Karl were well prepared to spread outrageous lies about Clark's service as well. People didn't buy the lies about Kerry's record either because of whom he chose as his running mate or because the lies were believable. They bought them because they wanted to, and because Rove, the corrupt MSM, the churches and idiot "progressives" worked triple-time to paint non-belief in the lies as the equivalent of hating our soldiers and America. Neither a Kerry-Clark, Kerry-Gerhardt, Kerry-Clinton or even Kerry-Stewart ticket would have done anything to improve the poor character and warped mentality of those who couldn't resist the neo-con propaganda.

[FrenchieCat]

138. Yes, I've googled Clark's military record......

And fortunately for Clark, the only "smear" available would not have "worked" in 2004 during a General Election.......unless you think that a winning war just 5 years before was somehow a "bad" thing. Understand that his "record" is very recent....not 35 years old.

The "Googled" shit you are talking about was erected to turn "Democrats" against Clark, not Republicans. Other than the Waco Bullshit (which was debunked by high sources), there was nothing in Clark's record either during his time in Vietnam nor since that would have "hurt" him that hadn't already been put out there.....none which "took" which is why Clark was still able to win in Oklahoma, where the voters are more conservative.

In reference to the folkslore, the documented facts would have worked just fine!
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/10/smear_debunked_clark_would_hav.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/01/gen_clarks_band_of_brass_opini.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/03/facts_on_the_1999_rts_tv_stati.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/12/kosovo_was_about_genocide_not.html

[jcrew2001]

139. IMO Clark would have improved Kerry's military/foreign affairs credentials

and put the Iraq question on the table, instead of Vietnam.

[dsa]

166. that's what i keep saying

he's like a corporate shark hiding behind a thinly-veiled country bumpkin "aw, shucks" persona.

nice haircut though... :rofl:

[InvisibleTouch]

105. It would be very sad...

...if some political hack spewed out something that was never said, and turned former friends into enemies without either of them ever exchanging a word on the subject.

For what it's worth, I thought Kerry/Edwards were a great team, and I'd be very disappointed in them both if they got manipulated into taking potshots at each other.

[karynnj]

164. The Edwards did take some small potshots at the Kerrys

especially in her book. John Kerry has never said anything negative about the Edwards.

[orleans]

108. kerry's an ass (imho) n/t

[ProSense]

110. Wouldn't it be funny if Kerry endorsed Edwards?

This story is such bullshit! Even if Kerry did have regrets, who the hell cares? Edwards is the one running for president.

This is who cares...

May 24, 2007 -- THE Post was red-faced over its famous front-page headline about John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign - "KERRY'S CHOICE: Dem picks Gephardt as VP candidate." (Kerry picked John Edwards after the paper went to press.) But it turns out New York's favorite newspaper was smarter than Kerry. In his new book, "No Excuses: Confessions of a Serial Campaigner," veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum says Kerry "wished that he'd never picked Edwards, that he should have gone with his gut" and run with Gephardt. Shrum depicts Edwards as a hyper-ambitious phony who snubbed Kerry once the campaign was over. In excerpts published in The New Republic, Shrum reports that when Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, had a recurrence of cancer, and Kerry reached out to his old running mate, "Kerry told me that the Edwardses simply stopped returning calls or talking to him and Teresa."

link

(emphasis added, that's believable)

...crackheads and anyone trying to damage Edwards' momentum, if he has any!

[Elidor]

111. Dick Gephardt??? What, his campaign wasn't flaccid enough?

This has got to be a joke.

[depakid]

114. If Shrum isn't irrelevant- he should be. The man's a LOSER

who repeatedly takes others down with him.

[HootieMcBoob]

115. Hilarious

Shrum is laughable and Kerry is stupid for having hired him. As a matter of fact the way I feel today has brought back that angry/sick feeling I had the morning after the election when Kerry (who said he would fight to see that every vote was counted) told us all that he was giving up. We don't need to hear shit from Kerry or Shrum or other Democrats who quit like they did today. I lost a lot of respect for Kerry last Presidential election and I never had any for Shrum. I don't need to hear any more from either of them.

[politicasista]

131. He is not stupid for being a senator and sticking his neck out

unlike most of our other representatives.

If you are running for the highest office in the land, you are going to make mistakes. If you think that any of the 08 candidates will be perfect, smear-free, ungaffe-prone, and the media will be nice to all of them, then YOU are in for a rude awakening. You should walk a mile in Kerry's shoes before buying into a propangada hit piece.


I am glad one dem is moving forward and not moving back.

[jcrew2001]

121. Clark would have been way better than Gephardt!!!

Clark could have turned Arkansas and Ohio. But did Clark even want VP, I think he did. Kerry didn't trust Clark because he was a 'new' democrat, but Clark would have been way better than gephardt.

A VP candidate should have experience and deliver some states. While Edwards is a great politician, he didn't have either at the time.

Clark would have stopped those Vietnam attacks.

Maybe Rupert Murdoch scared him from Gephardt.

[goodhue]

122. I don't believe it

But now that we are on the subject, any regrets about picking John Kerry?

[Tiggeroshii]

123. Edward's charisma neutralized the ticket in that area, making up for Kerry's lack of it.

If he had picked Gephardt the Democrats might as well have nominated my smelly armpit as their candidate.

[politicasista]

126. Funny, the media said Kerry had charisma in 2000

Interesting people choose to believe a failed campaign strategist instead of what came straight from the horses' mouth.

[dsa]

169. what is your armpit's position

on antiperspirant reform?

:P

[MaineDem]

128. Looks like a drive-by posting to me

Wonder where the original poster is in this discussion?

[troubleinwinter]

129. Ya think? I do.

[dsa]

167. i had to go to bed!

i honestly didn't expect this to produce so much discussion.

[Unbowed]

133. This is a pointless topic. Gossip and hearsay are the least of our worries at the moment. n/t

[laugle]

140. I voted for Kerry in both elections and couldn't stand

Gephardt. I was hoping he would pick Edwards as were many of his supporters. I remember that well.

In any case, this comment by Kerry makes him look like a sore loser.....I'm surprised anyone would want to re-hash this.....it's soooooo over....

What I would like to know is, why isn't he running this time? He is fully qualified.

BTW, IMO, Edwards had nothing to do with Kerry losing.

[Downtown Hound]

141. Edwards is legions better than Gephardt. n/t

[mzmolly]

150. Gosh you think Shrum doesn't like Edwards or something?

:eyes:

[LittleClarkie]

151. The headline should say that Shrum says that etc etc etc

It's not a first hand account.

And Shrum is apparently a shmuck.

[IndianaGreen]

155. Dickless Gephardt?

The man that stood next to Bush in the Rose Garden extolling the virtues of the Iraq War Resolution? No way!

[jcrew2001]

160. Does Gore regret choosing Lieberman?

if he had chosen Edwards, Kerry, or Bayh - Gore would be in the white house. Instead he gave lieberman a national stage and millionaire donors.

If there was any worse VP choice - it is Lieberman.

[QC]

165. Democrats Regret Choosing Kerry

What in the bloody fucking hell were we thinking???

[politicasista]

181. Who and where was THE PERFECT CANDIDATE in 2004?

Who would have stood up to the Rovian lies? Who would have stood up for the Average American voter? Who would be impossible to smear? Who would the media been nice too without using fear tactics?


Name THAT PERFECT 2004 CANDIDATE? Intersted in what you come up with.

[Trajan]

168. Edwards ....

Wonderful man ....

Shrum ? .... Loser asshole ...

Purveyors of Shrum's crap ? ... as useless as his advice ....

Some DUers who promote hatred of Democratic candidates based on unsubstantiated rumor ? .... not so wonderful ....

[fooj]

171. Shrum's a loser.

I'll believe THAT when I hear John Kerry tell us himself. Until then, forget about it.

[Justice]

172. Gephardt, the guy that stood with Bush in the Rose Garden supporting IWR?

This Democrat does not think so.

[mtnsnake]

175. How many first choices did Kerry have? First it was John McCain he wanted...now it's Gephardt?

Good gawd, even in retrospect Kerry can't make up his mind who his first choice was to be his running mate. I'm just glad that asswipe, John McCain, shunned Kerry's overtures to be his VP running mate. How embarrassing that would have been! At least his second choice, Dick Gephardt, is a Democrat.

haha, here Edwards thought he had played second fiddle to a Republican...that was bad enough...now he finds out he was THIRD fiddle!

[jcrew2001]

177. He was for Gephardt, before he was against Gephardt hahaha

At least Gore hasn't slammed Lieberman in public.

[karynnj]

180. Kerry hasn't slammed Edwards in public

or said anything negative about him. There were rumors of Gore's frustration with Lieberman. Neither Kerry of Gore make a habiot of trashing peers.

The Edwards have publicly said unflattering things about the Kerrys.