John Kerry For president 2008?

[Corey_Baker08]

When this campaign for Presidency began what were we really looking for? A Leader, or a follower?A Challenger or a president? these questions have kept me wrapped up for Weeks after the election. I keep wandering did we all pick Kerry because he was an alternative to Bush, or did we pick him for his Compassion and credibility, and would you vote for him again in 2008?

Answers will vary based on people, but think of this for a minute. Who was there to speak up when we needed a voice? Who was there when we eager for not only a candidate but a President?Who was there to concede the election November 3 so the Democrats wouldn't be faced with the dilemma of being "crybabies" The Answer, John Kerry. He was our voice of reason and our face of freshness.

John gave us an alternate way of life, a hope and a dream for a better, stronger, safer and more secure America. he showed great compassion for what he was talking about. He defended us in the face of adversity, and had our backs in the light of criticism. John Kerry is my hero, he fought for what he believed in until the end. regardless of the outcome, Sen. Kerry always had our backs, so quite simply put, should h run in 2008, I will have his back...and I hope you do too....

Happy New Years

[purduejake]

1. Hell no, I'm not voting for him again.

He said every vote would count and then gave up so quickly and left all the dirty work to the 3rd parties. This is the last time I voted for anybody just because they weren't a complete monster.

edit: welcome to DU. Glad to see ya here. :D

[Turn CO Blue]

89. THE POSTER IS 15 years old, DU'ers

My mom tendencies are coming out today, people! (Sorry Corey, I know that you are very well-informed and can handle yourself! I can't help myself.)

The point that I am making is that everyone here would likely rephrase her/her response a little IF he/she had known, or by knowing now, that the poster WILL FINALLY be able to vote in 2008!

(I'm not saying you would change your opinion, but would likely rephrase your response and you would try to understand the ENTHUSIASM of the poster.)

That is why the poster would be enthusiastic about 2008, about Kerry, about looking forward because most of the youth do tend to look forward and be optimistic! God, I hope so or else we really are sunk!

Let's not teach the current highschoolers about the "circular firing squad" techniques where we constantly trash-talk our own candidates in public, so that the Repugs dont' even have to! Let's learn to present a united front and never speak ill of our candidates in public (at least until we get control of one of the houses).

(sigh, rant over)

===
edited for grammar

[ClintCooper2003]

122. I agree. I'm sorry, but we need a Southerner next time around.

[Machiavelli05]

2. I like him... but no.

He may turn out to be valuable in the Senate. However, to win - we need someone who can get a convincing victory with charisma and positive energy. Impress the American people that politics isnt all about mud slinging and hate mongering.

[kerrygoddess]

23. We need John Kerry!

[RadicalMom]

34. Martin Sheen for president! Look at his history of active support

for many just causes. Don't think he'd want the job, though. But he's already comfortable in a different pretend White House.

[malatesta1137]

3. I'd just as soon vote for Jeb Bush

[kerrygoddess]

21. you do that

[LittleClarkie]

27. Indeed. A rather revealing comment Testy

And I say again, to whoever supported a candidate in this election that they didn't truely support in their hearts, DON'T DO THAT ANYMORE. IT DOESN'T HELP.

Don't "Dole" my candidate. He deserves better than to be either "Doled" or "Gored."

[Pacifist Patriot]

121. As a Floridian I find that thought highly offensive. Ew!

[Tinoire]

4. Pffft. Forget it. n/t

[Vektor]

5. Alright, I'LL vote for him.

What can I say, I love the guy.
My loyalty isn't about to waver now.

I agree with everything you said, and thank you.

[kerrygoddess]

22. Twist your arm!

LOL!

[Vektor]

46. No twisting required! n/t

[burn the bush]

6. no

[Carolab]

7. HAH!

I didn't want to vote for him in the FIRST place!

[LittleClarkie]

30. Then you shouldn't have

I mean it. The negativity didn't help.

[bunny planet]

65. omg is Testy von Testerton on this thread? I've had him on ignore since

forever so I can't see what some of you are responding to.

[Vektor]

8. Oh yeah...

He's my hero too.

[latteromden]

9. I've still got his back, too! He's a very good person. However,

he's not my first choice - that goes to Russ Feingold - but I believe that, while Kerry may not have been the best campaigner this year, he would make an incredible president. That's the thing about the good ones, though; they would be wonderful at the head of the country, but they have to cut everything down to 30-second soundbites and negative campaigning, first.

[LittleClarkie]

15. The best campaigner is not necessarily the best president, that's true

I wish we could just have each covered in the newspaper like in the old days. No image, just facts.

I agree. He would have made a wonderful president, and I hope he still can.

[tritsofme]

10. He had his chance

and he lost.

Its time for someone new, and Mark Warner is looking good to me.

[politicasista]

11. I am sorry, but I am tired of us tossing aside decent candidates..

then if the new candidates don't do well, we toss them aside again. Anyway, it is too early for 2008.

[LittleClarkie]

19. It's always time for someone new

We've been told that the Dem party needs to show that it stands for something.

Well, I'm not chasing after "electable" candidates. If we were so smart about knowing what an electable candidate looks like, we'd be getting candidates elected. As it is, I say throw out how it's been done before. If I like somebody, I'm staying with them. And indeed, I have found my guy. He would have been a magnificent prez in 2004, and I don't forsee that changing in time for 08.

How about sticking with somebody for once and showing alittle faithfulness.

It worked for Reagan. It even worked for Nixon.

Imagine that. A Democrat Nixon. Oh the irony.

[tritsofme]

32. How much of Kerry's incredibly strong showing

in this election was due directly to the ABB movement? Lots and lots of people only voted for Kerry because of their intense dislike for Bush, I myself was not particularly fond of him, but voted for him nonetheless.

Someone like Ronald Reagan who ran for the GOP nomination in 1968 and 1976 before he got it had an ideological following within his party that centered around him.

Kerry has no such strong faction within the Democratic Party, he was thrust to the top of the ticket because he was electable and percieved as the most viable candidate.

In 2008 we are likely to see a sea of fresh faces on both sides of the aisle fighting for the nomination in a new poltical environment. Someone like John Kerry has no place there.

[LittleClarkie]

37. Anyone who wants to be there has a place there

And how much of Bush's strong showing was due to the hate vote on his side.

Dueling hate. Swell.

I do hope 2008 will be different.

And who is there will depend on what the various contenders have been doing in the meantime. I'm not counting out Kerry until I see what he does between 2004 and 2008.

The field can duke it out again just as they did in 2003. May the best man or woman win. I'm not counting anyone out or saying they don't have a place there. We shall see.

[tritsofme]

38. I attribute Bush's success to the cult of personality

that has been created around him.

There is a significant portion of this country that kisses the ground that Bush walks on, and this is why I feel their 2008 nominee will be such a let down.

Bush has no heir apparent as Reagan did, 2008 should be an easy pick up for us if we play our cards right and nominate someone like a Bayh or a Warner.

[saracat]

109. I won't vote if it is for either of those guys.

[Old Mouse]

12. It doesn't matter the reason for his continued silence

but his lack of presence in Ohio will not be forgotten. He will be crucified by his decision to quickly concede if he seeks office in 2008. It doesn't matter if he is a good and honest person or not.

Assuming of course, the election of 2008 happens, or has any validity.

[LittleClarkie]

24. Forgotten by whom

Once again, fraud people are not the base.

As for his "his lack of presence in Ohio" being forgotten -- hell, his PRESENCE in Ohio already has been, and that was just on Monday. Apparently our attention spans are REAL short.

The vocal minority trying to crucify Kerry in 08 will have to get through me first. I don't think I'll be alone either.

[Old Mouse]

31. I don't speak of fraud

I speak of the disenfranchised.

He promised a fight, and there was none. He was vilified for making correct voting choices in congress. Think what his enemies will do whit his apparent abandonment of minorities. His lawyers joining a lawsuit does not speak of presence.

[LittleClarkie]

40. I don't see why he should be put on trial, declared guilty

then hung, all before he can get his butt into the next Senate session. I swear, the Gitmo detainees got better hearings than Kerry's getting. Why is everything so sped up?

The Senate is his turf. I would like to see what he does there regarding the election. I don't need words; I need actions.

[whometense]

72. No, you certainly won't be alone.

I'll be there with you. And I wonder if all those who say that most of the people who voted for Kerry were ABB ever visited the Kerry forum or blog. Kerry has at least as many fervent admirers as anyone else out there. We just stand behind him quietly. No need for shouting. ;-)

[LittleClarkie]

13. Yes, I'll be there

He is a thoughtful, compassionate, faithful, strong, and honest man who had some very interesting, progressive ideas about how to fix things in this country.

Those who fault him for saying that every vote would be counted, but then conceeding, don't seem to realize that he is right now involved in the process of making sure every vote is counted. I'm impressed enough that he's doing what he can in Ohio. He could have completely walked away, but he didn't. I'm also proud he had something to do with the win in Washington State.

I will be watching him for the next four years. I will expect him to do what he said in his video, fight against the Bush agenda. I expect him to fight for election reform, introduce the children's health care bill, form a PAC to better fight for worthy issues, go to Iraq.

If he does this, then I think he will have a chance in 08. If not, then probably not. He's been counted out before. I would hope people wouldn't make that mistake twice.

Even so, I think it's premature to talk about 08. All the potential candidates have time to show us what they're made of.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

14. I'll vote for him as an INCUMBENT!

But he'd have to stand up for the truth now.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

54. That is the only way he'd ever get my vote again.

[pamela]

16. I absolutely plan to vote for him in '08.

The only time John Kerry has ever disappointed me was when he didn't run in 2000. He was my first choice then, my first choice this year and will be my first choice in '08.

I love John Kerry.

eta: Welcome to DU!:hi:

[Brundle_Fly]

29. Proudly.

He went through the biggest dirtiest ugliest election against the masters of attack dogs, and dirty stinking gutter tactics. He ran a pretty "decent" campaign, not sliming and ripping Bush for the knob he is.

and I honestly think, he won in 2004.

[tandem5]

17. John Kerry for president... now nt

[Withywindle]

18. Yes, sure, but...

...waaayyyyyyyyyy too soon to be making any commitments. We have no idea what the circumstances of the country are going to be. We have no idea what Kerry or any of the other likely suspects are going to be doing in the next few years. We have no idea how this election-fraud matter is going to shake out.

I have no prejudice against candidates who have run before; that "you get one shot" business just doesn't make any kind of sense to me. Sez who? Why?

I was very happy about being able to vote both AGAINST Bush and FOR Kerry at once--I very emphatically did both.

[LittleClarkie]

25. You wanna know "sez who"

People who haven't won in a while, that's who. What makes us so wise about these little rules of election. First, we need to get a few candidates elected. Then I'll be able to see who our election experts are.

As it is, Clinton people know how to win. We should study what they do.

[tritsofme]

33. You're absolutely right, Clinton people know how to win

Kerry is not Clinton people, they tried to salvage his campaign but couldn't.

There is a reason the only two presidents we have elected in the past 25 years were Southern governors.

[LittleClarkie]

42. Or then again, they might have if you add back

the suppressed, disenfrancised and frauded votes.

Without a clean election, who knows. Personally, I believe the exit polls. When Bush was told by Hughes that Kerry was winning by an electoral landslide, I believe that was the actual truth.

You can't have it both ways. You can't bitch about him being a loser, and then talk about disenfrancised voters. Because if you add back in the disenfrancised, he might have been a winner.

As he himself said in his "man in exile" vid, it's a travesty that we still don't have an electoral process that we can trust.

[bunny planet]

66. as Faye always says

Kerry won, get over it!

[kerrygoddess]

20. ABSOLUTELY!

Voice of reason...
Hope for the future...
Better, safer, stronger and more secure America...
Real compassion...
He's my hero, too and has been for the past 30 years!

I've still got his back! John Kerry 2008!

[Wabbajack]

26. Nope

We have better candidates.

If there even is an election in 2008.

[Elise]

48. I nominate

yours for the best post in this thread.

Kerry will never win: he doesn't have the 'common touch' ... he does have a family which includes a long-time Repug wife who has the nerve to refer to her white self as an African-American only because she was born in Mozambique.

Again, we have many MANY better candidates ... ones who will actually WIN in 2008!

[Wabbajack]

56. Thanks!

[bunny planet]

67. Like who?

[Wabbajack]

123. Well

Dean, Richarson, Rendell, Clinton

[marcologico]

28. oh hell yes

Best candidate since JFK, that's for sure. Worth waiting for but I have a feeling we won't have to.

[njdemocrat106]

35. Kerry rocks

Honestly people, let's pretend no third-party candidates ran in 2008, and the only 2 choices were Kerry and Jeb Bush (or some other vile Repuke, like Bill Frist). Would you really abstain from voting, or (gulp) worse, vote for the Republican? That being said, in reality, I just don't think Kerry will run in 2008. IMO, if one of the other primary candidates were in the same position as Kerry, they'd probably do the same thing that Kerry did on that awful day of November 3.

[Barney Rocks]

36. no. n/t

[clydefrand]

39. Absolutely! But what about 2005? Where is all the

enthusiasm for his winning now? He'll be my candidate if he chooses to go through the slaughter again by the repugs and swift boat liars.

[whometense]

73. Well, I'd vote for Kerry in a heartbeat

in 2008, but that doesn't mean for a second that I've given up on 2005!

[Florida_Geek]

41. No way Kerry ---- Dean / Clark or a new Gov face nt

[bush_is_wacko]

69. I don't think it is possible to elect ANY Democrat into the office of the

Presidency without ELECTION REFORM. Which Democrat does anyone think is actively trying to look into these charges and willing to speak publicly about it, besides Conyers? I haven't seen Dean or Clark do anything either. Maybe all this is a ploy by the Greens/Libertarians to move voters into their column so they have enough people to actually be in the running. I'm rambling, but the Democratic party is going to have to do something to convince a large number of Dems that they are even viable in the next 2 years, and again 4 years from now. They (the Dems) do need to realize they are not just up against *. They are up against a growing number of Neo-cons that seem to have a cohesive plan to take over this country. Whether the election was fraudulent or not THEY will still be here 2 years from now and 4 years from now and they love the smell of Democrats burning at Sunday morning prayer meetings. Hate is a powerful emotion. The Neo-cons have shown us just how easily they can spread that emotion.

[bowens43]

43. Nope. He had his shot and he blew it.

He blew it the moment he walked out on stage , gave that ridiculous little salute and said 'John Kerry reporting for duty'. Right then, I knew it was over.

Making the election about his Vietnam record was a bonehead idea. As much as I admire the man, he won't have my vote in the primaries. If he does get the nomination, of course he'll have my vote.

[bunny planet]

68. Yeah, you're right, the present day situation we find ourselves in doesn't

resemble the Vietnam debacle in the least. Geesh!

[bowens43]

101. Making it about his Vietnam record and NOTHING else

was a stupid idea. What he did in Vietnam has absolutely NOTHING to do with what needs to be done today. Making his Vietnam service the centerpiece of his campaign ensured that the Vietnam Swiftboat liars would be heard and seen often rather then be dismissed as a bunch of nut jobs and it alienated a certain segment of his base. Obviously , the American people didn't consider Vietnam service to be important.It should have been listed with his accomplishments but not highlighted. He could have chosen to run on his excellent record in the Senate instead, he decided to run on something that was completely irrelevant, especially in light of his opposition to the Vietnam war upon his return. It made him look to many like an opportunistic hypocrite.

[bunny planet]

111. He did not make it the centerpiece of the campaign. I'll admit they should

not have even made it the centerpiece of the convention. The American people were lied to by the Swift Boat Veterans for 'Truth' and some of them believed them. The *'s played this campaign as dirty as possible. The war in Iraq has many similarities to Vietnam, unfortunately. It is the Swift boat controversy that caused the campaign to waste valuable time first avoiding confrontation with John O'Neil and then belatedly responding to him and his * sanctioned liars. Bush's AWOL status in Vietnam was and is very relevant, especially when he is sending young people to die in yet another unecessary war based on lies. The message should have been simple, you've got a war hero who served on one side, and a coward who didn't on the other. Vietnam is not irrelevant to what's happening now, having a man in office who understands war, understands sacrifice, and is honorable would have gone a long way towards solving this mess we find ourselves in now.

The thing about Kerry that may have alienated his base (and I'm not convinced he really lost so that point may be moot) is that he was not clear enough in explaining why he supported the descision to go to war in Iraq. He was not succinct in explaining why he voted one way at first and seemingly changed his mind later on. This is what hurt him, it was a muddled explanation and really could have been very simple. He apparently was voting for * to have the option to go to war as a last resort, after the inspectors had been allowed on the ground to check for any more WMD. He did not authorize the illegal rush to war that * really was planning for his own reasons. Kerry also voted against borrowing the money for the war, he wanted the funds to be raised by taxing the top 2% of income earners in the country. Bush threatened to veto that war spending bill unless he could get the money by borrowing it and consequently raising the deficit, not by taxing the rich. Kerry never made this clear, and the flip-flopping name stuck to him instead of to the Flip-Flopper in Chief.

Kerry never made his whole campaign about Vietnam. He tried to run on many other things, and as you saw in the debates, all three of them, he had substantive things to say about everything while * just stammered, and made a fool of himself. * made his whole campaign about tearing down Kerry. Because they were most afraid of his war record, that is the thing they concentrated on tearing down the most. Then Rathergate came along and caused more discussion of Vietnam, which was not Kerry's doing. Kerry never once looked like an opportunistic hypocrite. You'd have to be pretty cynical to see him that way. I marched against the Vietnam war when I was very young, and he was a hero to us then. He still is now.

[bowens43]

117. Look, I like Kerry a LOT but I don't think he has chance in 2008.

I voted for him. I contributed etc. I just think that pushing the military career was a mistake. I will of course vote for him and support him if he gets the nomination. And I agree that he is the much better man. I too marched against the Vietnam war and I know several people (strong liberal democrats) who considered Kerry's embracing his military career as being opportunistic and hypocritical. I know very well what Kerry has done and I followed the campaign very, very closely. I think that who ever told him that highlighting his Vietnam career was a good idea , made a terrible mistake.

That's my opinion.

[bunny planet]

118. He did highlight it too much, in light of what the * people did to tarnish

it. That's my point, I don't think he would have focused so much on it if he wasn't forced into a defensive posture eventually.I think Kerry could have anticipated that they would be as low down and crooked as they indeed were. He walked into their trap in that regard. I just don't think his embracing of his military career was opportunistic. I think Vietnam changed who he was as a person in deeply profound ways and so 'highlighting' his service was nothing more than trying to get across who he was and is as a man. It backfired terribly because of the mean-spirited liars on the other side. I personally admired that Kerry did not Bush bash at his convention the way the Republicans did him at their hate fest. In retrospect, would it have been better had Kerry gone after the myriad of weak spots in the Teflon President's hide, yes it probably would have been wiser. The fact that he didn't sink to the same level as Bush says much more to me about his character though. I just don't see anything hypocritical there. Have you seen 'Going Upriver'? Just wondering. Thanks for the back and forth. We are not so far off in our opinions.
;-)

[Raksha]

44. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt...

...to fight this battle in whatever way he needs to; to stay "under the radar" and out of the media spotlight for now if that's what his game plan requires--PROVIDED of course that there really is a game plan! If he keeps his promise to see that every vote gets counted, if he's willing to take on the BFEE as he did in Iran-Contra, he can do it any way he wants, even if it means I have to be kept in the dark for a few weeks and continue playing these agonizing guessing games about his strategy.

But if he wimps out and decides to play it safe, thinking he'll have another chance in 2008 as some here have suggested, then NO WAY will I support him in 2008, and the same goes for any other Democrat. EITHER the candidate stands up for the American people OR he/she is merely an enabler for the neocon empire. And I'll know one way or the other, because I now have a litmus test: What did Kerry (or any candidate) do to challenge the legitimacy of THIS election? He can fight the battle in his own time and his own way, as long as he actually fights it.

[Quakerfriend]

49. Right there with ya, Raksha!

:headbang:

[neweurope]

45. I see you're keeping your optimism up...

I can't really believe that there will be an election in 2008. And if there were one it will be rigged like the last one. So why even discuss a candidate...

[Turn CO Blue]

88. Corey_Baker04 will be *old enough* to vote in 2008!

===The poster is 15 years old===

*THAT* is why he is keeping his optimism up. Jeepers!

AS A MOM OF A 14 YEAR OLD I AM SAYING,
LET'S NOT TEACH
THE NEXT GENERATION THE TECHNIQUE
of the CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD
that is COMMON TO THE DEMS

[Cherie59]

47. Sounds good to me!

[ladjf]

50. Next time, let's at least pick someone from a different fraternity.

[Vinca]

51. Without a doubt - NO!

I really liked Kerry until he did his disappearing act on November 3, but thinking back, he made some HUGE mistakes in the campaign. The major blunder was the garbled message on Iraq. To this day, I have no idea how he thought he would bring allies to the table. We need a new face and it's got to be someone who'll fight till the end.

[JPJones]

52. No fucking way - he IS a flip-flopper, his wife is a PR disaster,

his Senate record is indefensible (I tried, it can't be done), and his war record was negated by not defending himself against the Swifties (duh).

He had his shot and blew it (wasting a few hundred million dollars in the process). If he can't beat the lying doofus, how could he beat a respectable candidate?

[bunny planet]

71. this kind of post is what the ignore button was made for.

Indefensible Senate record????
Try reading the Winter soldier speech, try reading up on BCCI, try examining his environmental record. You're either very young, very judgemental, or both. Watch 'Going Upriver' and then get back to me.

Kerry, btw wanted to go after the Republicans and the Swift Boat Liars for Truth with both barrels blazing. It was the DNC that convinced him to hold off. That was his mistake, he shouldn't have listened to them but to his own fighter instincts. His first wife Julia Thorne was so appalled at the lies that were being told about his service record (she was there after all when he came home and could attest to the physical and psychological pain he went through because of his experiences there) that she was about to come out of seclusion and call a news conference to hand the Swifties their asses. The DNC convinced her to wait a couple of days because they said they were going to address it.

Kerry is a brave, intelligent, honorable man, who had to campaign against an evil, dishonest, worm of a man whose nasty machine would stop at nothing, not even another theft of an election, to win. They are the people to blame for disenfranchisement and denying civil rights, and tainting the voting process for millions of Americans.

Kerry is doing something about it. He just hasn't made a personal phone call to you to apprise you of what's going on. Sometimes the smartest thing to do, especially with the crooks he's dealing with, is to not be obvious. If I'm wrong I'll eat my little Reynold's wrap hat :tinfoilhat: If the Repuklicans had as much loyalty as some of you have shown towards our candidate, they'd be out of power by now.

needed the rant. I feel much better now.

[whometense]

74. LOL

Well done!!!!!!!!

[sportndandy]

53. Did he win the primaries because of rigged machines?

I would like to know. Maybe Dean really should have won.

[marcologico]

104. No, Kerry won IOWA, which doesn't have primaries, it has caucuses

So put that in your pipe dream and smoke it (meant in the nicest way).

[bklyncowgirl]

55. Depends on what he does between now and then.

If Kerry turns his attention to the issues that matter, and to me these are election reform, insuring that the middle class is not going to be screwed by Bush's tax reform and social security reform and becomes the reformer that he was during the Iran Contra scandal, I could support him again.

If he becomes another go along get along Democrat, I will not support him.

[SammyWinstonJack]

57. Why, so he can walk away again without a fight?

When did he have our backs? If he is the Dem nominee in '08, I will vote for him but I won't be happy about it.

[roenyc]

58. NO -

I want a candidate who says what he means and means what he says. done easy.

kind of like dean.

i liked Clark - before he got on the campaign trail and they turned him into a damn talking point.

If Kerry would have stood by his principles early on and said what he really meant and stuck by it he would not have gotten that silly tag of flip flop.

he needed to defend his character and his statements and so did those around him. and if he thought his people were making mistakes he needed to say so.

And just like now when he promised every vote would count he owed it to disenfranchised voters all over this country to come out and say SOMETHING! Sorry guys! i know its just like 1955 - hey nostalgia what the hell. soon we will have ya'll pickin Cotton. whatever. man they deserve an apology from Kerry/Edwards. from America. And from the democratic party who went out and asked them to vote.

sorry but this is really emotional for me. i put myself in their place and it is painful to feel like less then a person because of your skin color. and its shameful that the only people doing anything about it are people of color and third party candidates.

[whometense]

75. It continues to amaze me

how many so-called dems are given to spouting repug talking points.

[roenyc]

102. not republican talking points at all

just how he made me feel. when he had a chance to explain that stupid 87 billion dollar mess on the Daily show to so many people, did he? no. he didn't. could have easily. but he let that chance pass. could have explained his position on Viet Nam and the swift vets that night. but nope. not a word. Nada. zip. it was his chance to clear up all these lies that were spread by the GOP. the flip flop crap. nope. let it go.

i knew all about it and you knew all about it. but do you think the average guy around the corner knew anything about it that hannity didn't tell him?

these are things that you and other Dem's need to realize. We are not your average democrat or republican. not everyone knows all the stuff about the candidates that we do. most only know what fox or CNN tells them. and you know how dangerous that is. so its the responsibility of the candidate and the party to clarify the candidates position and his past and his intent. and present that to CNN and FOX in a talking point manner.

and our candidates NEED to spell it out for them. if they say something and the neocons twist it. he must untwist it right away. sternly and with conviction. its not a republican talking point its the way it is.

we are at war with these people. We can not afford to be polite anymore. we can not afford to be dignified. we must fight and we must do it by being strong and no matter what our candidate does we must stand behind him. support him and immediatly get out there and say something in support of him when attacked. its too late for kerry in 08 IMO. sorry.

[Chimpanzee]

59. I won't know until I see the people that throw their hat in the ring

Whichever person has the best chance to beat the neo-cons, most likely led by Jeb Bush, will have my vote. ABB should still be golden in 2008!

[gotitans2]

60. Kerry fought hard, but

He was way too inconsistent and really did not hit his stride until the debates, and even then he would occasionally go off script, which always seemed to backfire on him (e.g., "Wake up America" two days before the election).

We must find a candidate who can execute a 50 state strategy. If that means a Southern moderate, then fine. To me, a moderate Dem is better than no Dem at all.

[bunny planet]

76. He was all but dead and buried when the Swifties got thorough with him.

He fought back from that point in the debates and was ahead in most polls going into the election. If he was such a lousy candidate, how did he rise from the ashes like that (I'll admit *'s astounding stupidity helped).

The exit polls showed that he won for f*ck sake, they stole it period, in a way that takes tenacity to prove. How many people have to explain this. If he hadn't conceded the media, at *'s behest would have made another three ring circus out of things and kept K/E from being able to dig through everything and find evidence of fraud.

Then there's the little matter of Elizabeth Edwards CANCER, when your VP's wife has to undergo chemotherapy and radiation, it might not be the best time for a media circus. These people are human folks, unlike Pretzel boy, they really do have compassion. Sometimes remaining in the background and weighing your options is the best plan, especially when one on your team is in less than perfect health.

I hope he is in office as an incumbent in 2008 but if he is running for his first term then, I will vote for him, no question.

[flounderinginflorida]

61. John Kerry For President 2008?

Hi all, While I'm a newly registered DUer, I've been an avid reader for quite some time. I look forward to many lively exchanges in the future. I wanted to share this letter with you that I sent to Senator Kerry a few weeks after the election. Thought it was appropriate for this topic.

November 20, 2004


Dear Senator Kerry,
While I'm happy to support and sign the pledge for the "Every Child" bill, I want to make it perfectly clear that I am not at all happy with your early concession of this last election before all the votes were even counted or the election certified. I want to make it perfectly clear that I and untold numbers of moderates, democrats, independents, liberals, leftists, and yes even some republicans, whatever the label, are not sore losers. We are not uneducated, morally inferior, anti-Christ or just plain nuts peasants wallowing in a hole somewhere. We are AMERICAN citizens exercising our rights (what little is left of them) of free speech, free press and the right to organize. The mounting evidence of voter irregularities, fraud, disenfranchisement, tampering and the like effect ALL Americans. How can we as the so-called "greatest free nation on earth" even begin to promote the likes of democracy in other countries when our own elections and government is riddled with secrecy and partisanship? No Senator, I am not some left-winged radical full of loathe for this country, I am simply an average working American citizen filled with such pain and sorrow for our country. I personally will not freely accept George Bush as my president unless and until it is proven that all votes were counted and counted correctly, that if tampering or fraud is proven, those responsible will be held accountable no matter how high up the "food chain" and that going forward measures are put forth to guarantee transparency in our elections and government. Lastly Senator, I would like to know where you stand in all of this. If you want my support now and in any possible future elections, show me; not tell me why you deserve that support.



Respectfully,


xxxxxxxxxxxxx

[seito]

92. Hi flounderinginflorida

That was a very nice letter and first post.

Welcome to DU :hi:

[Stand and Fight]

62. I cannot rightly or fairly comment on this...

I cannot comment on this in the spirit of true fairness because it is much to early to tell. I'm not of the camp that "2008 is too far away to think about," but I do strongly feel that I cannot comment to any ONE candidate this early in the game. Not Hilary Clinton, not Howard Dean, not John Kerry. Nope -- not of them are deserving of my vote at this point, because the future could go in many different directions at this point. We all saw how quickly the social, political, and economic landscape changed under George W. Bush after September 11, 2001.

Too many things could happen to make a certain candidate -- like it or not, Democratic or Republican -- to be the perfect candidate for 2008. Democrats will continue to have my vote, because while greatly flawed in their will, ability to truly stand up for the little guy, and to refuse to back down on HUGE issues -- Democrats are the true party of morals despite idiotic political pundits like Coulter, Hannity, O'Rielly, or the rest of the right-wing spin machine. Democrats have got to sharpen their claws and use them, not only in 2008, but in 2006, 2010, 2012, 2014... They're good people who have to learn to really fight. Also, while some of you may not like to hear it -- not ALL Republicans are corrupt on allied with the Bush-Cheney Axis of Evil. So, it is possible -- however HIGHLY HIGHLY unlikely -- that a Republican could receive my vote in 2008, but not one of the guys that they're proposing now -- McCain, Guiliani, Frist, Jeb Bush; fuck all of them, as they all supported that nefarious little chimp.

Secondly, I, like a good number of others here, feel that this election was hijacked from A to Z. It was not just a matter of padding the votes. It was not just a matter of crooked election officials. It was not just a matter of tabulators programmed in advance for Bush. It was not just voter suppression or dirty tricks. All of these things worked in collusion to produce, what I feel, is one of the greatest political upsets and out-right coups that most of us will -- hopefully -- ever see in our lives. November 2, 2004 is a day that will remain engraved on my mind as the most heinous act of blatant treason and insurrection along the lines of Caesar and Brutus, Jesus and Judas...

Thirdly, a lot of reform has to be done in the electoral process in this country between NOW AND 2006. The honest truth is that if we can't make a strong showing in the next mid-term election and out-root the machines, then we don't have a snowballs chance in hell. Mark my words -- as long as the machines and partisan election officials rule the rouse, WE WILL NOT WIN. So, for those of you who want to play at theater and vote Green or Indy, go right on ahead and waste your vote at a double-time.

Lastly, we have to focus NOW on rooting out the machines, the crooked officials, and the bigotry involved in our electoral process here in "the land of the free." People like John Kerry who can demand public attention need to get on the news and publicize just how ugly this election was. Doing so will cause the public to sit up and pay attention. Election reform has to happen, and it needs to be in high gear come January 2005. Only once this is accomplished can we begin to rightly consider candidates for 2006 and beyond.

[bunny planet]

63. I'd definitely vote for him again if he ran. I'm still holding out that he

will be in office in 2005 (guess I'm one of those 'bitterenders' :tinfoilhat:) I definitely did not pick him as ABB, I have loved and admired the guy since I was a young person protesting the Vietnam War. His record and his dedication to the environment is excellent and it is going to be THE issue in the very near future, we need his strength, knowledge, and leadership in that arena. I just hope there is a recognizable country left to lead after the * crime family gets through with it, if, and that's a big if, they get a crack at it for another four years.:scared:

[pixelthief]

64. Nah

I really warmed up to him during the debates, so I like him a lot. But no, I wouldn't vote for him (in the primaries) in 08.

He's had his chance, and truth be told, he could have run a much better campaign. We'll see if he redeems himself by fighting to expose this fraud. So far, no good.

[whometense]

70. I'm 100% with you.

Not only do I respect and admire John Kerry and want him to be president, but I also think the democrats give up a huge advantage if they insist on starting from scratch every election year.

Considering the laughable amount of positive coverage the MSM grants the left, Kerry came from no one outside of MA knowing him to (at the very least) getting a huge number of votes. Now a lot of the country knows him and likes him. Why throw that away?

He's my hero too. I will always have his back. And I think the country needs him.

[ecoalex]

77. Kerry ? No !

The Dems need a consistant strong candidate. Kerry did twist as to how the wind was blowing. Compared to Dean, he was a flip floper. Best to say you're against the war, then to have slowly moved to be for it and pursueing bus*'s mess. Iraq was better off with Saddam, and now Iraq will slide into a religious/civil war, chaos for decades. Saddam kept the lid on, and the U.N. and the U.S. could of kept the lid on saddam for decades, pursuading him like Lybia, to join the rest of the world.Kerry did not show pluck, deciciveness. The Dem party also needs to lose the DLC DNC , both are conspiring to lose for the reps.We need a new Dem party like the PDA.

[bunny planet]

82. Nobody actually got to see how Dean would have behaved had he been

the nominee, so it's easy to say he would have done a better job against the * crime syndicate.

[KerryDownUnder]

78. He isn't willing to fight to be president in 2004...

why would I support him in 2008? If he's the nominee I will support him, of course, but there is no way I'll be backing him during the primaries.

[mopinko]

79. only

if he is the one senator. sorry, i wan't someone with balls. like hillary.

[yojon]

80. R U Serious?

He caved immediately after an obviously stolen election. Maybe he will pull a rabbit out of a hat on Jan 6 but if he doesnt, I would

1. watch your back

and/or

2. apply to Yale and try to get tapped for Skull & Bones.

[Darkhawk32]

87. Right... for me Jan 6 is do-or-die day for the Dem Party...

show some balls folks or the party will die a slow death. Although it already IS dying in many ways.

[enough already]

81. Fat Chance

He quit rather than fight the blatent fraud that took place. He's been in hiding the last two months while this fight is raging. Of course, that doesn't make him any worse than all the other "establishment" Democrats who can't be found in this fight.

[henslee]

83. It's so obvious this can't happen. Dimwitted Republican sheep gravitate

towards the familiar out of fear, laziness and convenience. It would be too easy for Repub. machine to dust off same old anti-JK memes and pick up where they left off -- even perfect it. Media would find it too easy. Old anti-JK alliances would be fortified. And another JK defeat would be crippling.

[CraZdem4life]

84. no...he sold us out for the bush administration, never kept his word..n/t

[dpbrown]

85. Not.

I'm a little tired of Democrats looking like Republicans trying to coopt their issues instead of using our own.

Kerry -

Wrong on the war.
Wrong on the death penalty.
Wrong on NAFTA.
Wrong on Venezuela.
Wrong on gay marriage.

And now "rethinking" Roe v. Wade.

And yet still got 49% against an incumbent?

News flash: that was because the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party temporarily suspended its disbelief to come to his aid and support.

If the DNC caves in to the pathetic DLC this time on Roemer, kiss the party goodbye.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Al-CIAda]

95. Ditto-

"I'm a little tired of Democrats looking like Republicans trying to coopt their issues instead of using our own.

Kerry -

Wrong on the war.
Wrong on the death penalty.
Wrong on NAFTA.
Wrong on Venezuela.
Wrong on gay marriage.

And now "rethinking" Roe v. Wade.

And yet still got 49% against an incumbent?

News flash: that was because the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party temporarily suspended its disbelief to come to his aid and support.

If the DNC caves in to the pathetic DLC this time on Roemer, kiss the party goodbye."



Wrong on the 9-11 cOmmission
Wrong on so many other things...


Kerry had more ammunition at his disposal to use against this disaster of a president than any dem. candidate had on the opposition in my lifetime. He ran a piss poor campaign, period. What really got me was when he responded 'yes' to the question about 'would you still have gone to war (Iraq) even though no WMD's, no connection to AlQueda, and certainly no connection to 9-11....and Kerry said 'yes'?!

WTF

[dpbrown]

114. Democrats who can't distinguish themselves from the opposition...

...aren't opposition at all.

Kerry ran against the worst President in the history of the United States. And he lost.

At least here in Minnesota we turned incumbent Republicans out of office. Apparently, we know they're liars, cheats, and thieves.

What of John Forbes "Skull and Bones" Kerry?

What exactly does he have on Bush and why was he afraid to use it?

If the DNC/DLC was willing to jettison Al Gore, who actually won, then there'll be no tears shed for dumping John Kerry next time around.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[msongs]

86. QUITTER...until proven otherwise eom

[nashville_brook]

90. nope -- his goose is cooked

he has no chance of surviving the primary unless it's tampered with.

[understandinglife]

91. That'll be his second term, correct? ;-) Thank you; great post (n/t)

[Goblyn]

93. 08?.. I am focusing on 06 for now

I will see what happens jan 6 then proceed to have a "culling" of the weak.

[OnionPatch]

94. No

I think he would have been a pretty good president, 1000x better than Bush, but he was not my first choice. I would much rather have someone more feisty, someone with a real backbone, like, say, Howard Dean.

The biggest disappointment I have had with Kerry, the one that really clinches my non-support for a 2008 run, is that he did not stand up to this election fraud. I don't know what might or might not be going on behind the scenes, but as it stands now I feel betrayed by him for that reason. We need a REAL leader who will stand up to the evil that is the Republican party. I'm through with wishy-washy Dems who are concerned with their political future more than our democracy.

[Razorback_Democrat]

96. Two Words: No and Way!!!!

I hope we don't let Iowa and New Hampshire decide our candidate next time around. Obviously they have defective pickers.

Clark and Edwards were the two that could have beaten *

So Kerry better not count on my vote unless he steps up and screams election fraud very soon, then maybe I will think he isn't just another politician, and that he has a spine!

Otherwise, he can just forget about it!

[seito]

97. LOL, OK, I'll take the bait

Two words...Wait and See.

John Kerry is a man that I believe in, always have. He did not run a perfect campaign, but who does? I will not judge the man based on information that I do not have before me. I will not judge him because he did not scream fraud from the rooftops on Nov 3rd. History will judge what John Kerry did during this campaign and in the months after.

I believe many leaving the ship were never Kerry supporters to begin with. I would even venture to say that the knowledge of John Kerry, for many, was defined by the corporate media and the Republican spin machine.

I have taken the time to study the man and his life and I know that he would be one of the greatest Presidents of our time. It is far too early for me to think about 2008. What he does between now and then will definitely impact my decision.

I believe in keeping an open mind, especially in matters such as these. I believe that John Kerry has and will continue to fight to keep every promise that he made during the campaign.

[Darkhawk32]

98. I sure hope you're right..... n/t

[politicasista]

100. Thanks seito!

Your posts are very inspiring. I think it is too early to think about 2008. We have to take back the media in 2005. That should be our first goal in addition fair future elections.

[Kota]

106. Yes I agree with what you say. Especially the importance

of the next 4 years. He has alot of political capital
right now.If he leads well and does good things I think
he has a chance in 2008.

[abbiehoff]

99. Yes, Absolutely.

I love John Kerry. He's been my idol since 1971 when he testified in the Senate about Vietnam. I believe that he had a big part in bringing the general public around to seeing the horror of that war. He is my ideal candidate, and I believe that he won this election. Anyone who thinks that we could have won with a different candidate is in denial about election fraud. No Democrat will win until elections can be held fairly with everyone who wants to vote being able to vote and with every vote being counted. Democrats have a popular and electoral majority, but they don't own any voting machine or tabulating machine companies. As long as swing states are run by Republican governors and Secretaries of State, Republican candidates will win. I will certainly vote for John Kerry again, but I won't expect him to win unless some very substantial changes are made to our voting systems.

[RaulVB]

103. Sure, running as the incumbent (n/t)

[IStriker]

105. Please NO! Which is exactly what I said after Iowa.

[mousie]

107. I would LOVE to see Kerry in '08!

If we can't have him this time, that is. I still believe he'd make a GREAT PRESIDENT, and I'd hate for this country to lose out on that opportunity... even if we end up having to wait another four years! Go Kerry! He WILL be one of the GREAT ONES!

[candice]

108. yes, if he reports for duty and speak out about election fraud

and castrates the efforts of the Swift Boat Liars and the dirty tricks of Karl Rove. We need him to be the shadow government and the American conscience.

[Vote4Kerry]

110. Kerry got more votes than anybody in history for a reason

He simply is by far the best candidate available to be President! I'd vote for him again in a heartbeat!

[bowens43]

116. He didn't get more votes than bush

[marcologico]

119. That's what Bush says

And would he lie to you?

[Cheswick2.0]

124. yes and the reason was

that so many people think Bush is ruining the country that they went to work for GOTV organization which registered record voters in massive numbers, and then got them to vote on election day.

ABB got all those votes for Kerry. Most people I talked to voted for Kerry because he was not bush.

[saracat]

112. Let us see what January 6th brings.If no Dems stand up,

I will have to think about it. I believe that if this isn't contested now ,Kerry will be as finished as Gore. Too bad too. I really like him. Besides which, it is entirely possible there will not ever be a "rel" election again, if this isn't stopped NOW!

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DemonFighterLives]

115. Is it possible to flip-flop on the issue?

I like Kerry a lot though he was not my first choice. Dean or Clark stood out as intelligent fresh faces. Kerry never really took on W or the swift liars or the voting debacle of 2000.
I would like nothing more than for him to take command and send the neocons packing. If nothing is said or done about fraudulent elections, I will slip my tinfoil hat back on and wonder about the Skull and Bones connection.
This leaves us second guessing him up until the last possible moment. He better be there for us or else he can forget about me being there for him in 2008. If he couldn't beat the clown the pukes put up, how could he beat a real candidate?

[Diane R]

120. He will be a fabulous president

I will definitely support John Kerry and vote for him again. I believe he has the intellect and integrity to be a world class president. How sad that we are stuck with stupid again for 4 years.