9th Place

[Dr Ron]

The latest nonsense today is how some sports handicappers put Kerry's chance for the 2008 nomination in 9th, behind Obama, Daschele, Bayh, and every other person mentioned.

Considering how well Kerry did after the polls had him behind Al Sharpton, it looks like we have them right where we want them. Those other candidates are in big trouble.

[Mass]

1. I laughed when I read that in the Boston Herald

If this is the way we should select our candidate, may be auctionning the presidency is not such a bad idea after all.

[whometense]

2. Eric Alterman piled on

on his blog today. I know he's only got one vote, but I find it depressing anyway.

That said, I doubt the extremely busy Senator Kerry is giving it any thought at all.

[TayTay]

3. Sigh! Once again, none of this matters

What is going to matter in '08 is
Money
Organization
Money
Name Recognition
Oh and Money

The Dems look like they are going to frontload the primaries again and again make Iowa and NH the massive media drops of the early race. The minimum entry fee for this race, in order to be a serious contender, is going to be $50 million. Very few horses can run in that race. Hillary might be able to, then we have, ahm, well, John Kerry and uhm, well, maybe John Edwards and the Player To Be Named Later. (Who will no doubt emerge in mid 2007, same as always.)

How many times do I have to tell you folks -- nobody knows anything. It is a truism that John Kerry can't run again. (Because nobody has done it before, exept that STevenson guy and he still lost.) It is a truism that someone from the Northeast can't win (Ahm, then why is Hillary running, but I digress.) It's a truism that Kerry had his chance and no one in the hinterlands likes him (Ahm, there are folks who are from 'the hinterlands' who seem to like him just fine.)

It was at one time a truism that:
The Democrats would never nominate another Mass liberal (but they did)
That there would never be a Polish Pope (but there was)
That the Red Sox would never win the World Series (but they did)
The United States would never launch a pre-emptive war (but, alas, we did.)

Some things are true until they aren't true anymore. Kerry has a great shot. He might run again, he might not (I think he will, but only he knows.) If so, he has some advantages that won't really become apparent until 2007. (Money, staff on retainer, name recognition, etc.) Until then, nobody knows anything, because it is not yet time to know.

Relax. Some of the nay sayers don't know anything more than you or I do. It's just that they get paid to not know anything.

[whometense]

5. You are the best!

Seriously, what would I do without you to slap me back to my senses? :pals:

The judge stuff got me down today. I admit it. I kept hearing that quote from Kerry in my head, "They vote so monolithic." They do, indeed. I find it terribly disheartening that these people who were elected to take care of their constituents and do right by their country and constitution are serving such a hollow master.

This perked me up a bit, though.

As the public grows skeptical about the war effort, Republicans in general are getting less love from the American people. Sixty-one percent of respondents said that Bush and the Republican leaders in Congress are not making good progress on solving the nation's poblems, and of those who said progress isn't being made, 67 percent faulted Bush and the Republicans for the lack of positive action.

Poll results also showed that this month is the first time since 9/11 that more respondents said they trust Democrats than Republicans to do a better job in coping with the main problems the nation will face in the next few years -- with 46 percent putting their faith in Dems, versus 41 percent who favored the GOP.

It's a good thing I wasn't standing on the Senate floor. If I were and heard the CatKiller say "up-or-down-vote" one more time I would not be responsible for my actions.

[kerrygoddess]

4. LOL!

You are so right Ron!

[whometense]

6. Little sidebar on the subject

Ed Schultz today called for dem candidates for president in 2008 to declare soon, to "end the confusion." I think that's what he said. I thought it was kind of bizarre. But he's boosting HIllary, so maybe he wants to freeze things the way they are right now.

[TayTay]

7. Ed Schultz has a bit of a consistency problem

He was pissed that some of the Dems took offense that he had harsh comments for Chairman Dean. Yet It was Ed Schultz who took off after the people who were giving Joe Leiberman a hard time. Ahm, it would be better if Ed was consistent. If he can defend, then so can the fans of Gov Dean. If he gets pissy because the fans of Gov Dean don't like criticism, then he he might want to rethink that Leiberman thing.

It is idiotic to declare for the Presidency before the '06 race. Remember, at this point in *'s first term, 9/11, the defining issue of the * years hadn't even happened. There are oceans of time to go before the political zeitgeist even begins to settle around any '08 race. Ed is talking out of his hat on this one.

[whometense]

8. Oh, I agree.

When he said it I had a "Say WHAT?" moment.

[BlueIris]

9. Looks like I'm a little late to the party here with this, but

oh, for fuck's sake. That really is nonsense.