HOw many in here believe Kery deserves a second chance at the title?

[Imagevision]

yes/no/maybe?

[aquart]

1. NO.

[SteppingRazor]

2. No.

And not just because I don't want to run him for President, although there is that.

More importantly, we have a pretty good chance of taking back the Senate, and so I don't want any senate Democrat to get the nod. We need them where they are, even if they're from a supposedly safe state like Massachusetts -- after all, Mass. DOES have a GOP governor.

[Mass]

21. Two remarks concerning the replacement of a MA Senator

1/ We have special elections for Senators.

2/ Kerry's reelection comes in 08, so somebody else would be running for his seat.

This said, I understand that you dont want Kerry. Just pointing out for others that the second reason does not exist in MA.

[SteppingRazor]

29. Exactly. If he declares candidacy, someone else will run for his seat...

I want him right where he is.

[Tarc]

30. No worries on that angle, really

The Mass. Senate changed the rules last year in case Kerry won the White House. Rather than let the Governor (currently Mitt Romney /gag) appoint someone, now it would be a special election held to fill the vacated seat. There's little doubt that one of the great House reps like Lynch or Markey would run for and easily win Kerry's seat.

[SteppingRazor]

34. ah, OK. I get the picture now. Forget my above response...

still, I'd just as soon have the sure-thing incumbent keep his senate seat, especially when we've got some other good candidates from outside the Senate -- Warner, Clark, etc.

[SoFlaJet]

48. Yea Ed Markey

has very senatorial demeanor IMO

[radio4progressives]

35. Totally Agree. We need all Our Senators to KEEP their SEATS

And we need a fresh face to put '08 to rights when the time comes. We don't need to front load a candidate from the same tired list. I don't understand why people are wasting their time doing this right, it's damaging to the process.

No FRONT LOADING.. no point floating names to see what bites.

not for '08.

We need to beef up the numbers in Senate and the House in a substantial way right now, replace those that are retiring, and we need to replace at least a couple of DINOS if at all possible.

[SteppingRazor]

39. I agree with DINO replacement, but...

I think it has to wait until after we have control. For now, I'll vote for any DINO if it means the Dems get a majority. Because, of course, A Dem. majority means Dems run all the committees, which means we set the agenda, which means Bush is completely stopped for his last two years as president.

If it means a few more DINOS instead of some GOP, so be it. Anything for a majority -- at least, for now. After we're in control, we can worry about culling the herd.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. No

we need someone who is not a Senator to run for the President. A governor or a person not holding office right now would have less baggage, I think. Besides, I believe that the last senator to win the office was LBJ.

[DrGrishka]

59. Nope... not LBJ

JFK. LBJ became Prez after JFK got shot. Only 2 Senators ever went directly from Senate to the WH. JFK and Warren Harding. Other Presidents were Senators before, but did other things between that and becoming Prez (Nixon-VP, LBJ-VP, Truman-VP, etc.)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

139. agreed

but LBJ was a Senator before he was President, just not directly. Almost wrote JFK, but was afraid someone would mention LBJ, so I changed it.

[napi21]

4. no

[alkaline9]

5. he deserves it, but its not in his party's best interests ... nt

[Totally Committed]

6. No.

Not I.

No way.

TC

[ananda]

7. NO.

nt

[tk2kewl]

8. maybe in 2016

[BOSSHOG]

9. Let him throw his hat in if he chooses

General Clark is still my number one choice but I will vote for the dem nominee. Maybe Kerry has learned alot since the 2004 election; like dealing with republicans requires a great deal of energy and spunk. I'm not advocating his candidacy but lets not dissuade him from continuing his fight. His "loss" in 2004 may be the best thing to happen to this country in the long run. Kerry's "loss" may result in the permanent minority status of the gop, so Kerry's contribution may be considered priceless.

[vespucci]

27. Kerry..OK

But NOT Edwards....he looks like a high schooler. Jimmy Carter would
also be OK.....

[yy4me]

38. Isn't Carter 80 years old now?

n/t

[BOSSHOG]

10. Let him throw his hat in if he chooses

General Clark is still my number one choice but I will vote for the dem nominee. Maybe Kerry has learned alot since the 2004 election; like dealing with republicans requires a great deal of energy and spunk. I'm not advocating his candidacy but lets not dissuade him from continuing his fight. His "loss" in 2004 may be the best thing to happen to this country in the long run. Kerry's "loss" may result in the permanent minority status of the gop, so Kerry's contribution may be considered priceless.

[elizm]

11. NO

[Mass]

12. 060606060606060606060606060606

[Mass]

33. If I have to answer the question, YES.

[MADem]

13. Sure, why not, but that said....

Let's permit the primary season to tell the tale. We can hear from all the candidates, listen to their ideas, go into the booth, and Diebold willing, get ourselves a candidate who will run like a mad dog and win like Ali.

I don't believe in ruling anyone out, or in, before we have a chance to hear from all of them.

At the end of the day, though, I will vote for the Democrat. And I don't give a damn which one makes it to the finals, even if my choice does not make it, I'll mark my ballot with enthusiasm for whomever makes the cut.

We need change in Washington, and I can't wait!

[CrispyQ]

32. Holy crap!

I never thought of the impact of Diebold on OUR primary. :banghead: If the repukes want, they can put in the 'opposing' candidate THEY want, not the one WE want. Arghh!!!

[MADem]

99. It IS an issue, which is why, even though it can give one a bit of

'agonia' it needs to be brought up, again and again and again.

Paper, not vapor!

[SoFlaJet]

Hey it's a free country as they say

well it used to be anyway-Kerry might have won that election if it weren't for all the shenanigans that went on with the vote count and Diebold and Ohio and Florida.Why not he's a good man-that being said-I'm for Mark warner right now and don't really think a senator can win.A governor from the south were our last 2 dem presidents...

[DrGrishka]

61. There was no Diebold in OH

from the Ohio Democratic Party:

No Ohio County used Diebold Electronic Voting Machines Ohio did not use modern electronic voting machines in this election. Six counties use an older form of electronic voting, which has a means of verifying the accuracy of the vote. In 69 Ohio Counties, punch card ballots were used."

http://www.ohiodems.org/ht/display/ReleaseDetails/i/191152/pid/273258

[drb]

14. I'll pass, thanks anyway.

[ClintonTyree]

15. NO.

He doesn't have what it takes, he'll just roll over again. We need a fighter.

[Raffi Ella]

26. I agree.

I was beyond devestated when he conceded without a fight.I will never put my trust in that man again.Like you said we need a fighter.We need someone that can win and Kerry just isn't that man.

[calimary]

164. I have to agree with you there. I was SO crestfallen when, after months

of clinging to his promise that he'd fight for every vote, he rolled over and died on the day after the election.

And he allowed the swift boat swifties to mow him down and plant THEIR seeds in the national consciousness. I don't want to hear how he took the advice of his campaign manager, the hapless Mary Beth Cahill, and that it's her fault. Look, HE COULD HAVE OVERRULED HER. And he should have. You NEVER let those assholes have the stage to themselves. You NEVER let ANYTHING - NOT A SINGLE WORD - they say even fall all the way to the ground before you try to grab it. You pounce immediately upon its leaving the speaker's lips. He was so frickin' busy taking the high road and being a "gentleman warrior," when this was World Wrestling Smackdown versus Raw.

Sorry. I couldn't stomach it again. Besides, the bad guys will simply haul out all their old material and use it again, and they have enough people in the pipeline still manning the spin machines to keep him from getting much airtime.

I'm sorry. I voted for him. I worked my butt off and donated WAY more than I could afford to support his campaign. And he broke my heart. He's damaged goods. I don't know if he has the fight in him. I don't want a nice elegant upstanding statue going in the ring for me. I want a nasty, snarling, semi-rabid junkyard dog.

[robbedvoter]

16. No. Didn't deserve it in 2004 either. Squandered victory, support.

[BlueIris]

17. Yes, of course. Kerry didn't "mess up his chance." We did.

How many times do the sane people on this board have to post this? How? Many? Times? I'm sorry so many believe there was anything that Kerry could have done about the stolen election, the medias refusal to cover stories about fraud or anything else. I'm sorry so many continue to make excuses about their own failure to take action. I'm sorry so many continue to be so pathetically underinformed about the best candidate the Democrats have had in a long time, and one of the best statesmen in history.

[stillcool]

42. i should refrain from clicking on any...

Kerry posts. Everytime i do i am disgusted by the comments. You would think the stolen votes were his, and not those of the people. And, it will happen again, and again,.. people don't care enough about their vote....and the fingers will all be pointed to some other poor sucker who tries to make a difference. It is at times like this that i realize the government we have is a direct result of the citizens we are.

[ginnyinWI]

153. Well said, Blue

To trust a man to be the President and to vote for him--but then to second-guess his decisions regarding the election--that is what I can never understand. Kerry has moved on, and a lot of his supporters have moved on, but so many people are stuck on Nov. 3rd, 2004. :eyes:

[Adams Wulff]

18. No.

He should have had the title after his first chance.

Clark is the man for 2008.

[Auntie Bush]

124. I say no...because I want CLARK.

[hippiechick]

19. Kery ?

Not sure about that candidate -- but Senator John Kerry ? No.

[Demit]

20. nope.

[EndElectoral]

22. No

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. Probably not.. I don't think so, but not die hard No. n/t

[NYCGirl]

24. No. NT

[Kukesa]

25. Nope. I worked too hard the first time and won't do it again. (nt)

[second edition]

40. I did too and I gave money too. I don't blame him for the loss.

To much of what went on was beyond his control. Some of the best world leaders suffered loses and came back stronger than before.

[MGKrebs]

28. No.

1. Senators really have a tough time winning.
2. Kerry may make a great president, but he is not a great candidate (for this moment in time).
3. We have no shortage of great candidates.
4. I suspect, if a Dem is going to win, it will at least partially mean that many people want to "move on". Voting for Kerry now would feel to much like going back.

[second edition]

31. Yes!!! n/t

[yy4me]

36. No. He gave up on us once, we cannot afford that again.

Kerry never should have been such a mild mannered debater and campaigner. And after the election fraud? Sorry, he let us down. We should have been hearing the commotion all over the country. No excuse. We are suffering under ****, what if the repubs pull more of their baloney next time. We cannot afford to have anyone run who is not a fighter. Kerry is an admirable man but failed the final test.

[karynnj]

140. Mild mannered debater?

He gain about 8 points in the race from the debates. The fact that he was dignified, polite and articulate in the deabtes was a major plus. It contrasted with three different weird versions of Bush.

[yy4me]

146. I agree with what you said but there were so many times

when he missed the opportunity to counter ****'s non-answers, mumblings and stupidity. How could Kerry not have known that **** was plugged in and that his answers were all canned. I believe, as good a man as Kerry is, that he blew the chance to take our idiot-in-chief out of the running. The debates are a forum to show your mettle and I feel Kerry did not live up to the job. My opinion only, no intent to offend.

[ginnyinWI]

154. C'mon--Kerry won all three debates decisively

If you doubt it, remember all the frantic spinning that followed each debate by the RW pundits and apologists? They were freaking out. Kerry blew Bush away.

[Einstein99]

37. No way!

We can do much better.

[vespucci]

41. I hope

Hilary is the one....with Evan Bayh from Indiana as a mate.

[Einstein99]

108. Not Hillary either

There are many things I like about Hillary, but she is not the right person to get us out of this war. Bayh for VP? Possibly.

[second edition]

43. I've already voted yes, but I wonder why this post was necessary

since a Kery never ran before. Oh, and how would you vote.

[ProSense]

50. To prove that even though Bush is the problem, Kerry not running

is the solution. Doesn't do a thing for me.

[Robert Cooper]

44. Kennedy/Clinton in '08

Freepers would have a collective heart-attack =8-}

Enough of these sleeper candidates who try to seem so innocuous as to keep the freepers from attending the polls.

Time for an old fashioned knock-down, hair-pulling donny-brook of the first order.

No more bitching about Bush and his wars. If you won't put out your first stringers under the current conditions, you deserve what you get.

[vespucci]

52. kennedy and

anybody would be GREAT!!! Maybe that Gavin Newsom guy from
California would run with him....he is cute!!!

[Imagevision]

93. If elected? --Kennedy/Clinton in '08 would be lethal - A dreamteam!

[Robert Cooper]

101. Draft 'em. America is torturing people, how can K/C refuse...

...and still have any credibility?

Kennedy for Prez, Hillary for VP in '08

Hillary for Prez '12

[karynnj]

141. Kennedy has already endorsed a candidate for '08

and seems to back him 100% - Kerry

[bluedog]

45. NO

[WI_DEM]

46. I don't think so

I would be much more willing to try Edwards at the top of the ticket in '08 than Kerry. But it looks like he is planning on running, so it will be up to the Democratic primary voters.

[second edition]

47. Oh, I get it, kerry does something good and the anti-Kerry people

have to smack him down. How dare he do something good and just, how dare he give money to other Dems, how dare he support other Dems, how dare he still be around fighting and doing his job. It's just to much for some people.

[Der Blaue Engel]

168. Bingo. n/t

[DinahMoeHum]

49. No.

He and his campaign team choked at critical points and especially with regard to counting the votes in Ohio. His group started a legal defense fund that would contest any vote-counting hanky-panky, and then he conceded, like a folding cheap suit.

Sorry, we can't have that shit anymore. I don't want any chokers running for President or running the campaign.


:kick:

[area51]

51. Hell, no.

His word means nothing. He promised he'd stay & fight for all votes to be counted, then turned tail & ran like he was GW Hoover.

[karynnj]

143. He did not promise to fight if it was unfightable

There is still no prove that will stand up in a court of law. There are many proven incidents each of which should be addressed. But for Kerry to win, they would have had to definatively prove before Jan 6 that he had more votes. This was enough time for a recount, but it would have been impossible to prove fraud.

[LondonReign2]

53. No.

n/t

[Raffi Ella]

54. To all those angry at

me and the others who are stating the reasons why we wouldn't want him to run again and saying it wasn't his fault he lost;I beg to differ.
HE knew how important this election was.HE said so himself.If there was even a chance that election fraud had occured he should have shut down the government as a LEADER would do and DEMAND there be an investigation.
The election was stolen in 2000.WE let it happen.Gore rolled over.In 04 there was no excuse for it to happen again.
Fool me once shame on you.Fool me twice shame on me.Shame on Kerry.FOR SHAME.with all that was at stake!With our boys dying in an unjust war!With womens rights hanging in the balance he gave UP!??

NO EXCUSE.NONE.

[Mass]

65. People are not angry at you, just stating the reason why they would

want him to run again.

If you dont support him, dont vote for him in a primary if he runs, that's all.

[second edition]

69. Wow, your just crazy. I won't get into it with you, but I don't see how

you can lay the blame on everything that is wrong on Kerry. As much as Kerry fought and people gave their all? As much as we pushed we just couldn't be ready for a four year setup and a power machine that was going to see Bush elected no matter what.

[Mass]

73. And they can say it with as much passion as you do.

[karynnj]

144. Kerry didn't have the ability to shut down the government

He wouldn't even have had the support of the Democratic party unless he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was fraud. Even if Kerry refused to concede, Bush had the electors.

Which higher court should Gore have taken the decision to after the Supreme court gave it to Bush.

[MH1]

55. If you mean nomination for president - Absolutely YES.

But it's a really dumb question anyway. And WTF is this "title" crap like its some kind of sporting event?

[Noisy Democrat]

56. Yes! I voted for Dean last time; I look forward to supporting Kerry

in a primary.

[darkmaestro019]

57. No. He conceded when he told us he'd fight. eom

[Lost-in-FL]

58. No

He didn't do a good job convincing people, he did not fought hard enough and look where we are at now...

[snowbear]

60. Not just no..... but "HELL NO"

Not this time around..

[Carolab]

62. NO. n/t

[tibbiit]

63. no im sorry

He didnt speak out against the lies.swiftboat and others
He didnt speak out against a stolen election in Ohio.
He may say he will do those things but its too late for him even though its too bad for him.
tib

[frogmarch]

64. Absolutely

Yes. Kerry in 08 would get my vote.

Having said that, whoever is chosen as the Democratic nominee will get my vote.

[AtomicKitten]

66. No thanks.

I wasn't impressed with him rolling over for the Swift Boat Liars. Bill Clinton would have come out swinging. Those bastards deserved to be slapped down from the first moment; instead they were allowed to trash Kerry's bid.

If anybody deserves a do-over, it's Al Gore. I thought he ran a much better campaign. His populist approach didn't make the DLC happy, but that's a plus in my book. He was robbed.

No? Okay, then I want some fresh meat. I would prefer nobody that voted "yes" on the Iraq Resolution as that will really separate us from them. I'm looking at Barack Obama as a dark horse (no pun intended) or Wes Clark.

[elfin]

67. No - he blew it

He is always just a bit too late and too verbose to make himself clear. Parses words and issues too carefully to appeal to inspire the general public. Despite how close the last selection was - he has been branded "Loser" by the press and the public.

[mithnanthy]

no...

n/t

[MsAnthropy]

68. Absolutely not

[second edition]

70. Yes!! n/t

[LibertyorDeath]

71. Will he concede while the polls are still open this time.

[Mass]

78. Sure, he is French. :sarcasm:

And you are showing your Rovian origins. This is exactly what the GOP says about France. And whether it is said about France, Kerry, or anybody else, this gets only one answer from me :puke:

[LibertyorDeath]

128. First time for everything

Never been called rovian before. LOL
Mainly because i'm NOT.
Kerry's a good man but I want to see him walk the walk
not just talk.

He conceded the last election WAY TO FAST IMO
and anyone speaking honestly would at least admit that.

[second edition]

72. Yes!! n/t

[Mass]

74. Great effort - I renounce - Some people dont understand what primaries

are for.

If he runs, they can vote against him. But they seem so insecure that they cant even accept the idea that he runs in a primary.

[snowbear]

76. Hey now... you're stuffing the ballot box.. you already voted!

Second edition is cheating! :spank:

~~~~~~ http://eliteleague.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/lol!.gif

[Blue_In_AK]

75. Yes.

[second edition]

77. Yes, for all the things he has done since losing for his leadership

and for his vision, and yes because those who say no do so for non constructive reasons.

[NYCGirl]

79. Voting three times? How FR of you.

:evilgrin:

Edited because I didn't see your other TWO votes.

[second edition]

82. My votes are about as fair as this poll is to Kerry. So, yes again!

[NYCGirl]

84. Lame excuse. If you don't like the post, alert. Or put it on ignore. NT

[second edition]

90. I have already made my thoughts known to the administrator.

As for ignore, I ignore nothing.

[RadiDem]

80. No, I'd rather see Gore, and I'm not that big of a Gore fan

[jenndar]

81. Anybody who is qualified and eligible

deserves this chance. To disagree with that just because you weren't thrilled with Kerry is really not great citizenship, IMO.

[emulatorloo]

83. Kery no, Kerry yes if he wants to run

anybody who is eligible to run for president and wants to outta.

however, Kerry is focused on 06 as am I right now.

[second edition]

86. Yeah, who is Kery anyway. And if Kerry wants to run again he should.

Although these ungrateful people don't deserve a wonderful President like Kerry would be.

[Mass]

89. It's not about them, it is about this country

The problem is exactly that. They think it is about them.

[politicasista]

85. Yes, but let's focus on 2006 right now please

Otherwise you bring out the Kerry haters, which has already happened.

Any Dem should have the right to run.

[LittleClarkie]

87. It's cool that he's keeping his options open but

even he isn't concerned with the answer to that question until we get through 2006.

[Jai4WKC08]

88. Deserve? Hell no

If by "second chance at the title" you mean the nomination, hell no. No one "deserves" the nomination. Let him work for it like everybody else. I won't support him for it, but of course he has the right to try to convince others if he can.

I thought it was stupid to pick a New England senator last time around. But of course, the selection had been made before I ever got a chance to vote.

[ladjf]

91. No.

[liberalpragmatist]

92. Nobody DESERVES a Chance

They have to earn it. I quite respect Kerry and think he ran a flawed but overall decent campaign and I think he'd make a great president. I still like hearing what he has to say and I'll certainly consider him if he runs again in '08.

But nobody's entitled to a nomination. That's for the GOP - and it's what got them Shrub. Needless to say, I think we should aspire to do things a little differently.

[LittleClarkie]

112. Nobody has to earn shit. You could run for president if you wanted to

It's not a matter of earning or deserving. You try and you either make it or fail.

[liberalpragmatist]

118. Well, my point is you have to earn the nomination

Anybody can run. But nobody deserves the nomination - that'll go to whoever can get the most votes.

[LittleClarkie]

121. Oh, well, that's quite different

Nevermind...

(/emilylatella)

Indeed, I just got done saying that. If he gets the nom, he earned it. If he does not, he didn't. Simple as that.

[fedupinBushcountry]

94. On a week

that the Dems are working to get the truth out to Americans, you have to post this to divide us.

Then you go and double post it in GD, not enough negativism for you ? How lame.

[Raffi Ella]

102. ahhh.How right you are.

Thats so true.At a time when things are beginning to look up for us this is hardly a topic that will focus us anything that will bring us closer to gaining back power in 06.
To whoever said I am 'crazy'-you're right.Forgive me my out burst.I guess I am not over the elction yet-still too fresh and I didn't think before I posted.
I am angry at Kerry but if he were the Democratic nominee you bet your ass he'd be who I'd vote for.Like him or not Democrats need to unite and quit the infighting.

Thank you FedupinBushcountry for snaping me back into reality.:blush:

[designforce]

95. NO!

Had his chance, should of shown some of that backbone he showed during his tour in Nam. So, no, bring on another candidate who can kick some repug ass!

[nicehuman]

96. No way

I was so pissed when he conceded so quickly after promising
that all votes would be counted.  He could have at least
waited a day.  I felt like requesting my donations be
refunded.

[calimary]

165. Welcome all of youse - nicehuman, designforce and DemEtienne

and GLAD to have you with us!

As long as you're here, why not

Visualize IMPEACHMENT!!!!!!!!!!!
Then go DO something about it.

[AmericanDream]

97. NO. I never thought he was the best choice then and never will.

[_dynamicdems]

98. YES. But only IF he wants one.

He has served our country for many years and this is a huge undertaking. During the last election his mother passed away, he was operated on for a deadly form of prostate cancer and he had to contend with the loony Swifties. Under the best of circumstances, running for President is no picnic. Senator Kerry had a particularly tough time of it last time around and he's been working like a madman this year to help Democrats and to champion the causes we believe in. Next year is going to be a big battle year and John Kerry will be front and center. If he wants to run, I'll support him, but I would certainly understand if he said, "NO freaking way!"

[JoZbean]

100. No.

His time has come and gone.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

103. Way I See It, He WON in 04 and IS the President, So

You are asking if he should be re-elected. I say yeah, every President has the honor to run for a second term, and I think President Kerry is doing ok in his First term so far :)

(yes, same thing I posted in GD, but since this is a duplicate thread, I should be entitled to a duplicate post :P )

[calimary]

166. Welcome to DU, OPERATIONMINDCRIME and JoZbean!

Glad you're weighing in!

PLEASE help us get RID OF these bastards!!!!

And don't forget to Visualize IMPEACHMENT...

[Lefty48197]

104. No - Opportunity comes once in a lifetime. Do not miss your chance...

M&M.

[Bjornsdotter]

105. No n/t

[Vinca]

106. If he hadn't folded like a cheap tent after the election, I might say yes.

Sadly, I say no.

[xyboymil]

107. No-he STILL trys to have it both ways on too many issues.

He wants to look moderate when he really isnt.

And I still see only flashes of a spine with him.

No Thanks.

[Noisy Democrat]

110. Examples please? n/t

[lynne]

109. NO

But it doesn't really matter because the DNC won't take the chance of ever putting him on a presidential ticket again.

[Citizen Kang]

111. NO FREAKIN WAY!

There are too many others who would be more attractive candidates to voters...

I had to hold my nose to vote for him in 2004, I WILL NOT do it again.

[DaveinMD]

113. No

Nothing against Kerry. But if he couldn't beat Bush this time, he isn't going to beat another candidate. We need Mark Warner or General Clark. I'm not sure which one.

[Clarkie1]

114. Whether he "deserves a second chance" is not the question.

In other words, I don't think he'd bring anything new to the table. I'd like to see individuals in the primary that enhance the debate and bring something new. Kerry? Most primary voters will feel been there, done, that. Time to move on and hear from new people running, or give people who ran in 08' but didn't get the nod a second look (with the exception of Dean, who is Party Chair and will not be running).

And Lieberman. Please no Lieberman run again. Been there done that, too.

I'm even O.K. with Edwards being back in the mix, give him a second listening to if he wants to try again, but not Kerry.

Kerry will not be the 08' nominee. I know that nothing is for certain, but I'd be willing be a VERY large sum on that statement.

[LittleClarkie]

119. Please sir, could I have Secretary of State then?

Or perhaps a nice Attorney General position, maybe?

I agree with one thing. It's not a matter of earning or deserving. Or at least being "allowed" to run again is not a matter of earning or deserving. Anyone can run.

If he runs and wins, he deserved it. If he doesn't, he did not.

[LSdemocrat]

115. No

[WLKjr]

116. He had his chance to grow a set, and the balls never dropped

I wanted to see the Kerry "How do you ask a soldier to be the last one to die." person, and he never quite came to that point, although he did try.

[incapsulated]

117. I don't know anyone named "Kery" but...

That other guy, Kerry, well... the voters will decide during the primaries, if he runs, if he "deserves" another shot, eh?

[snowbear]

120. "Kristian Kery" ... he's a Hollywood stunt man!

Seriously. I looked him up on Google.. http://eliteleague.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/duh!.gif

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1445682/

[incapsulated]

122. Ok, then I take it back...

Kery really doesn't deserve a shot at the nomination.

:D

[arewenotdemo]

123. notachance

[windbreeze]

125. NO

he had his chance...end of story..
windbreeze

[wisteria]

126. Yes, but this whole thread is nothing but a joke. The next election

is 2006 and it appears a majority of so called dems would rather go negative on one of their own rather than support all of his efforts on behalf of other candidates. Some of which you Kerry bashers might even support. The only thing I can think of is there is a full moon tonight and it must be making some of you crazy. Great progressive you are downing one of your own- really productive and forward thinking.

[mtnsnake]

127. NOO00000ooooooo....!! NEVER AGAIN!

[Mme. Defarge]

129. If this means that help is still on the way ...

it's kinda late.

[wisteria]

130. Ha Ha. n/t

[wisteria]

131. Kerry, if he wants too! n/t

[flaminbats]

132. after observing all this hostility, hell no!

I still believe Kerry ran a better campaign than Gore, and would now be our President if nominated in 2000. But if so many Democrats passionately hate Kerry after 2004, I fear our party would be destroyed in a civil war. :thumbsdown:

[karynnj]

145. Keep in mind, DU isn't representative of all Democrats

Earlier this week there was a thread on who people voted for in 2004 in the primaries - Kerry was 5th with under 14 percent of the vote. Dean, Clark, Kuchinich and Edwards all beat him.

Also, opinion threads like this push that type of feeling - there are two ways to raise the opinion for the candidate you like best - praising him or denigrating his opponents. (Also, there are "big" name anti- Kerry people such as Kos - who whenever Kerry's name is mentioned attacks viciously repeating what ever negatives he can think of.)

[flaminbats]

157. I think DU is more representative of die-hard democratic activists

It still surprises me how much support Clark and Dean get on DU polls, especially when compared to how badly they did in the primaries. But history has demonstrated the Democrats who win in the general election are those who can motivate hardcore activists, without driving away the average primary voter.

[ProudBlue08]

133. I'll say no

I don't think he could pull it off. There are plenty of other candidates out there that could win for us.

Personally, I'm rooting for Clark.

[LSK]

134. Yes, with a different campaign team

He would make a good President.

[IndianaGreen]

135. We may need Kerry to stop Hillary

so I am not about to join those that want Kerry to disappear from view despite my own problems with Kerry.

I hope we have an open and vigorous primary campaign, and I pray that we don't end up with another Hubert Humphrey as the nominee.

[second edition]

149. Good point! n/t

[second edition]

150. Last time I looked this was still a free country and a person is

still allowed to make up their own mind. If Kerry decides to take another shot at it, that is his business. He has every right to run again if he chooses to, as you have every right to either vote for him or against him. My vote? Well I've said it before, but I'll say it again, yes!

[phylla]

136. NO.

He would have been a fine president, but he had his chance and blew it.
Bad campaign decisions were made.

Time for another candidate to have a go at it.
Of course, I favor Wes Clark...

But Mark Warner is my governor and he has been a great one..

I am torn, truly.

Just returned from Wes Clark's WesPAC annual meeting.
So I am pumped up on Clark right now.

[Dr Fate]

137. Who is stopping him? Not me.

....

[Kahuna]

138. Nope! Swift Boat Vets, redux? No thanks. I'll pass on that.

nt

[PATRICK]

142. Whoa

Like everyone else who is a decent American he deserves a chance to EARN another shot. I am not sure I like the nuances of the way this question is phrased- especially challenging us as if we are the moral jury faced with some unmentionable stain.

And what does earning mean? Redress for Gore who won his election and with less forewarning of the all the dirt arrayed against him? For Carter? Mondale? Even Dukakis?

Kerry was buried in the center, turned into a sumphole. I think some candidates might be better, especially for the electric charisma that will decisively burn all the crap away besides overcoming the rigged system.
Above all, no matter who, someone has to come in with a team to burn away the illegality the stacked deck and not submit to his concealment from the American public. We are as far from that as we are from picking the "best" candidate. Way too far.

This has been a messy war with great losses, not a stable cycle of right left center and everyone working for what's best for America.

Let him/her earn it who can. What will WE do? And have we done as well as we should?

[Az_lefty]

147. NO!!! Clark / Boxer or the other way around. n/t

[AZBlue]

148. Personally I'd support him & think he'd make a great Pres, but

I don't think the public will vote for someone who already lost once. Please correct me if I'm wrong but has anyone ever won the very next election after losing the first one? Other than Nixon, and that's certainly a comparision we'd like to avoid, has anyone ever won after losing at any time (he lost in '60 and didn't run again until '68, so it wasn't the very next election)?

[bunny planet]

151. Yes, but I'd still prefer Gore. I'd love Kerry to be his VP.

[deutsey]

152. No...he had his chance

[nolabels]

155. I am not supporting anyone anymore

Color me cynical

[DrDan]

156. nope

will not get my vote

[Stockholm]

158. If not could you pass him on to us

I would love to see a politician of his caliber in my country.

[sampsonblk]

159. No

Had his chance. Muffed it.

[Geek_Girl]

160. Nope

I like Kerry but I just don't think he's a strong enough candidate to take back the White House. But I do like him better than Hillary.

[lessthanjake]

161. If he can win the nomination then yes

But thatll be hard when hes percieved as a loser.

I dont think he should though because he would have to relinquish his senate seat to run for president.

[Bake]

162. Nope. One shot is all we can afford.

Whatever you may say about him conceding the stolen election, the fact is he stopped fighting the day the Swift Boat Liars trashed him, uncontested.

We need a fighter. We need a leader.

Bake

[yourout]

163. Nope...to much baggage.

Good person......lousy candidate.

[elsiesummers]

167. He deserves the opportunity to lose the primary. n/t

[NightOwwl]

169. no/no/no

And for good measure...NO!

[Vadem]

170. NO! He conceded within too short of a time!.....n/t

[salukidem]

171. nope, we need someone fresh

[Blue_In_AK]

172. I already said yes, but I'll say yes again.

[wisteria]

173. Me to! Yes!

[NuttyFluffers]

174. No thanks, still indigestion from last serving.

:hi:

[incapsulated]

175. I like...

Your sig. :D