Capital Gang criticizing Front Loaded Primaries

[Leilani]

Panel commenting that none of the states after Iowa & New Hampshire have had a real campaign. Candidates used to spend 30 days in Wisconsin. Also saying Terry McAwful wanted this & he got it.
This situation is what really bothers me. I don't think any of it really mattered after the 1st 2 contests, & that means nothing we did, or could have done really mattered.

Wes Clark, for instance, not known by most people, didn't have a chance to get voters acquainted with him. I read that Edwards is only known by about 60% of Wisconsin voters, so what chance does he have?

I guess I'm still feeling frustrated by this primary season, & I'm not blaming Kerry, because he won fair & square. But I don't think this system was fair & square to the other candidates & their supporters.

Anyone feeling the same way? Am I the only Clark supporter who hasn't happily jumped on the Kerry bandwagon?

[NashVegas]

1. You're Not Alone

And if the results showing for Nevada reflect actual votes, I feel safe in saying the party fucked itself.

[King of New Orleans]

4. results from NV represent delegates

to the state convention, not votes

[NashVegas]

46. kk

thanks

[Momof1]

2. I agree

And in April when my primary finally gets here, I am still going to vote for Clark. Will I vote for Kerry in November--of course I will. But I feel like my primary vote is the only voice I have, and I am going to vote what is in my heart. And if Clark does well when he isn't even running anymore, maybe Kerry will look very closely at him for VP.

[BootinUp]

3. You haven't seen my

numerous complaints? I am extremely NOT happy with the coronation primary. It pretty much depressed me for 3 days.

Glad to hear its being discussed/criticized. If Kerry looses there is going to be a shit storm of criticism unleashed I assure you.

I will vote for Clark on March 2. But will fight for the nominee after the convention.

Now I am hoping for a VP spot for Wes :toast:

[Leilani]

6. I'm also hoping for a Veep spot

but I feel we Clark supporters need to hang together, so maybe we will have some influence. Instead I see Clark people dispersing, & that bothers me.

I have read here at DU that a Wes Clark website is being started...I hope so, & I hope we all join it. Unfortunately, some people seem to be very fickle with their allegiances.

I don't agree with the Dean people on everything, but I admire their steadfast loyalty.

[BootinUp]

12. I agree Leilani

I hope we can stick together. We all had a great connection and energy and we need to hold on to it. Right now I am signed up in two Clark groups and I still check the CCN blog.

United for Clark yahoo group has 421 members

and 69 members in Wes Clarks Army at MSN.

And many of the grassroots groups are trying to keep in touch. So lets see what happens.

[Leilani]

16. Thanks Jim

I am going to go & join the groups at Yahoo & MSN.

You're right about our energy & connection, & I really want it to continue. Most of us really believed that Wes Clark could make a huge difference, & change the same old, same old, & I fear we are not seeing that hope here anymore.

I checked out the Kerry blog, & there are loads of Clarkies checking in over there, but Kerry never really had a big grassroots movement.
So their blog stinks, & I think it's the wrong place for Clarkies to go.

[BootinUp]

19. The MSN group has a meeting

Tomorrow at 8pm check it out:

http://groups.msn.com/WesClarksArmy

[Crunchy Frog]

51. Jim, can you tell me

where the new Clark Yahoo group is? I've already signed with the MSN group, even though I havn't said anything there yet. You can PM me with the information if you want to. Thanks.

[Crunchy Frog]

49. I don't necessarily see the Clark people dispersing

Many of them here are moving to the Kerry camp, but are still choosing to maintain their identities as Clark Democrats. I'm not seeing that as disloyalty, and I think many of them are committed to remaining involved in grassroots political activism that is based on the values that Clark has brought to the forefront of political discourse.

It is possible to be for Kerry and still be a Clark Democrat. after all, Clark is.:)

Anyway, it really does look like Clark intends to retain a very active role in Democratic party politics. I think he has the potential to help bring about some really important fundamental changes, and that we have the opportunity to participate in that.

I am definitely planning on remaining active as a Clark Democrat. I have never been politically involved before, and Clark gave me a reason to be. Our own Colorado group is planning on remaining cohesive and active. So is my mother's group in Syracuse NY.

I think at some stage, the Clark and the Dean people might be able to form some sort of alliance for grassroots politics, and to fundamentally change the way things are done. I think both Dean and Clark have helped to awaken something very powerful and new in American politics.

[MidwestMomma]

5. You're not the only Clark supporter who hasn't decided what to do

Our caucus in Kansas is March 13th. I share your frustration.

[greatauntoftriplets]

7. I also am extremely unhappy.

The Illinois primary is not until March 16. Clark dropped out more than a month before I could vote for him. Because I will not jump on the Kerry coronation bandwagon, I will vote for Kucinich next month.

I am left with little choice -- again.

[texasmom]

8. I'm with you.

I can accept reality. Kerry will be the nominee. I don't agree with the front-loaded primary, nor do I think it is the best way for us to choose a nominee--this year or any year. I think it effectively disenfranchised the vast majority of Democratic voters in our very own selection process. I'm glad it's being discussed; it needs to change.

I also feel like you re: Kerry. I definitely haven't jumped on the that bandwagon--or any other bandwagon. I'm not really sad or bitter, either. What has happened is political reality, though it was unexpected. I need to learn more about Kerry so I can discuss his positions and record in an educated way with people who won't know who to vote for in the fall. I will definitely vote for him, but I don't have any desire to rush to a Kerry meet-up.

Things need to change though, and the best, most productive thing I can do is to work for change--in the primary system for 2008, but most immediately I will work to get paper trails for voting machines. We really need to fight for this.

For what it's worth, I'm definitely voting for Clark on March 9.

[janx]

9. It's horrible. But then Clark had the additional handicap

of starting much later than the other candidates, too.

Front loading these primaries and expecting everyone to quickly decide on a candidate is a very stupid move, in my opinion. Most people are voting on name recognition and haven't gotten to know the candidates' positions. They're voting for Kerry because they know Kerry won somewhere else before.

If Kerry loses to Bush, all hell will break loose in the Democratic party.

[david_vincent]

15. Think so?

I hope you're right, but it seems to me that the party
is so estranged, fragmented, and scared that nothing
at all will happen if the Democratic nominee loses. That's
why other parties are not only a necessity but a reality.
The DNC is afraid that if "all hell breaks loose" then
a significant number of people will leave for Greener
pastures.
The paucity of real democracy in our process is shameful
and dismaying. That said, some of the blame (certainly not
all) can be attributed to the media, whose so-called
journalists are increasingly uninterested in reporting news
when they have the option of influencing it.

[MidwestMomma]

20. Journalists are the kingmakers now

They gave up being objective to pursue the glory. It's as if they got tired of the thankless job of reporting the news and decided it was more rewarding to create it.

Just my jaded opinion.

[Strelnikov_]

35. "A Protest Song Is One You Don't Hear On The Radio"

Phil Ochs

[DancingBear]

40. Wow - someobody else besides me knows Phil Ochs!

"When I'm Gone" is one of the most beautiful and powerful songs ever written.

[raysr]

44. Phil Ochs

"praise the lord, and pass the ammunition, and we'll all be free!" more Ochs-http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/102-9264852-7148933

[krkaufman]

37. I'm not so sure

> The DNC is afraid that if "all hell breaks loose" then
> a significant number of people will leave for Greener
> pastures.

Except I'm not so sure the DNC is afraid at all. I think they feel that there is no chance of a third party starting up, and so don't think there would be any blowback from rigging the primary process like they have.

[Cocoa]

10. the whores used to hate the electoral college

that was back when they thought it would favor Gore. Now you don't hear so much talk about how bad the electoral college is.

[cryofan]

25. you betcha

I remember that, too.

But the media used to be a little more liberal, at least for a whole. They used to talk about public financing of campaigns and even free air time.

[cornermouse]

11. You're not the only one.

Will I vote for Kerry in November? Yes, but very reluctantly.
Am I happy about it or the way the primary process was cut short? No.
There's something very wrong with a process that declares a final winner with less than 1/4 of the needed votes.

[krkaufman]

13. The Nation: Primary Predicament

I'd posted this previously. Good perspective on McAuliffe's new, improved nomination process...

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20020121&s=nichols

comment | Posted January 3, 2002
Primary Predicament
by John Nichols

'Gist: Outsider/grassroots/low-budget campaigns are fxxxed.

[madfloridian]

14. It disallows the grassroots element. Exactly what it is doing.

SNIP..."What McAuliffe is doing represents a continuation of the shift of influence inside the Democratic Party from volunteer-driven, precinct-based grassroots politics to a cadre of consultants, hacks and Washington insiders," says Mike Dolan, the veteran organizer who ran voter-registration campaigns for the California Democratic Party before serving as national field director for MTV's "Rock the Vote" initiative. "This whole process of reshaping the party to exclude people at home from the equation has been going on for years, but this really is the most serious change we've seen. And it's an incredibly disturbing shift. It will increase the power of the consultants and the fundraisers. But it will also make it a lot harder to build the enthusiasm and volunteer base a candidate needs to win in November." END SNIP...

[Leilani]

17. You're exactly right

& that's why I admire the Dean people for hanging together, & that's what I want the Clark people to do.

But honestly, what can we do to change the system? I am so frustrated, because it has been taken out of our hands, & we are powerless.

[BootinUp]

18. I hate it, but what can we do?

I am open for suggestions. Do we do a huge petition of some kind or what.

[janx]

22. There's only one organization I can think of that would have

the heft to help with something like this, and that's moveon.org.

[Leilani]

24. Do you think Moveon.org

would help us out?

[janx]

28. I don't know because I don't know if they are allied with

DLC, DNC, etc.

But it was the first thing that came to mind.

[BootinUp]

26. I don't know if they are big enough

They are just on-line. I think we need move-on plus grassrooters from every state. Oh dear what a problem. If we loose this year then I guess we won't have to worry cause then they would probably change it. :shrug:

[janx]

30. Right, but you have to start somewhere. And they have one

heck of a list.

[Leilani]

23. Do you think it would make any difference?

I'd be happy to sign. Do we work as a Clark group, or get all Dems unhappy with this system?

I'd really like a Clark group to get together & tell Kerry we want Wes in an important role in his administration, in return for our support.

I also think we could start a movement of all non Kerry supporters to nprotest the front loaded system, & ask for an assurance that it will change in 2008.

[BootinUp]

29. I don't know but lets keep this

kicked for a few days and get some ideas.

[Leilani]

33. Right, let's keep this around

& see how many people we can get together.

[MidwestMomma]

36. Just throwing out idea

If, as it appears, the Dean and Clark and Kucinich and Sharpton grassroot supporters do not find that the nominee in the upcoming elections represent their concerns then, those supporters should come together in a helluva organization that would:

1) Help to insure the election of the Democratic nominee
2) Hold said nominee's feet to the fire to represent the issues important to all of us.

We really do need an anti-Democratic establishment organization and I think we have the breeding ground for it here. We know we can raise the money, we know we have the passion. Just think, if we can help elect the Democratic nominee to the White House--you know we can--then we should be able to organize a group that will be heard by the DNC.

Maybe I'm just whistling in the dark but I have a lot of frustrated passion just dyin' to put to a good use. thanks for listening.

[BootinUp]

39. Your preachin to the choir as far as I'm concerned

Just catchin a bite to eat. But lets see if we can draw in these other grassrooters into the conversation over the next week.

:toast:

[Leilani]

42. I'm with you Momma

I agree there are a lot of frustrated people out there. And now that we have the internet & some grass roots experience, I think we could put a group together.

But I also hope all Clark supporters join an online group, so we can try to keep together. I don't know if it would work, nbut if there are enough of us, we could be a voice to make sure Wes gets a place in the Kerry administration, if he wins.

The groups are at yahoo & msn.

[janx]

60. Moveon is not associated with any specific candidate.

And I'm sure a lot of people are not very happy with this front-loaded primary setup.

[madfloridian]

21. More....this is really awful. I was really not aware.

SNIP..."A serious state-by-state fight for the party nod can force the eventual nominee to build grassroots networks in key states that withstand the media assaults of the fall; just think how things would have gone if Al Gore had developed better on-the-ground operations in states with solid labor bases, like Missouri, West Virginia and Ohio--any one of which could have provided the Electoral College votes needed to render Florida's recount inconsequential. Instead of recognizing the advantage Democrats gain when they tend the grassroots, however, former candidate Brown says McAuliffe appears to be steering the party toward a model that mirrors Republican approaches. "The process is evolving and it's changing so that it will be even harder to tell Democrats from Republicans," Brown says. "This means the Democrats will be defined more than ever by money and the centralized, Washington-based establishment that trades in money. The trajectory the party is on is not toward greater democracy, not toward more involvement at the grassroots. Rather, the trajectory will make it harder for the local to influence the national. A historic democratic influence on the process is being wiped out, and with it will go a lot of energy Democratic nominees have been able to rely on in the past."

[Crunchy Frog]

56. If that happens, the Democratic party

will become truly marginalized, and will cease having any real political influence at all. We will effectively become a one party state.

Our party cannot win by trying to become a clone of the Republicans. Our strength is in the power of the grassroots, and the involvement of ordinary people who see the party as truly representing their interests. If we lose that, even more people will simply give up on the political process, and that means that the Republicans win.

I've already decided that if we lose in November I'm moving on to Greener pastures and not coming back to the Democratic party until or unless it gets a clue.

I will never stop voting, but I've decided that if I'm going to belong to a party that can't win elections, at least it will be a party that actually stands for something, and has a platform that I can actually for the most part agree with, also one in which the voices of ordinary people are heard instead of things being dictated by a huge, impersonal political machine.

[Strelnikov_]

27. Read It And Weep

"With little public notice and no serious debate inside the party, Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe and his allies have hatched a plan to radically alter the schedule and character of the 2004 Democratic presidential nominating process. If the changes McAuliffe proposes are implemented--as is expected at a January 17-19 meeting of the full DNC--the role of grassroots Democrats in the nomination of their party's challenger to George W. Bush will be dramatically reduced, as will the likelihood that the Democratic nominee will run the sort of populist, people-power campaign that might actually pose a threat to Bush's re-election."

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020121&s=nichols

Note the article was written in Dec. 2001.

Most telling quote:

"That bodes well for the best-known candidates with the strongest fundraising networks, like former Vice President Al Gore and Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, and also for well-heeled senators like Massachusetts' John Kerry and North Carolina's John Edwards. But low-budget, issue-driven campaigns, like those imagined by Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio or outgoing Vermont Governor Howard Dean, will be even more difficult to mount."

[texasmom]

34. Wow.

"With little public notice and no serious debate inside the party..." What a shame.

How prophetic of John Nichols. He completely nailed it. (

[madfloridian]

67. What McAuliffe wants......

looks like McAuliffe gets.
SNIP..."McAuliffe makes no secret of his desire to have Democrats mirror the Republicans' compressed nominating schedule-- which helped front-runner Bush dispatch the more appealing John McCain in 2000. He wants his party's 2004 nominee identified by early March. Then, the nominee-in-waiting can get down to the business of fundraising and organizing a fall campaign without having to march in Chicago's St. Patrick's Day parade, visit Wisconsin's dairy farms or jostle for a position on the stage of Ohio's union halls....."

In other words don't worry about the rank and file.

[DU GrovelBot]

31. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

RUN C:\GROVELBOT.EXE
 
This week is our first quarter 2004 fund drive.
Please take a moment to donate to DU. Thank you
for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Rooktoven]

47. I'd be more inclined to re-up my membership if

the command was:
#!/bin/bash
/usr/local/bin/grovelbot

[krkaufman]

32. Awareness in Wisconsin

> Wes Clark, for instance, not known by most people, didn't
> have a chance to get voters acquainted with him. I read
> that Edwards is only known by about 60% of Wisconsin voters,
> so what chance does he have?

Excellent observations and question; though Edwards is now up to about 90% awareness among Wisconsin voters (going off the ARG poll numbers from 2/12). Kucinich and Sharpton remain totally screwed.

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/wi

[Adjoran]

38. It was a myopic idea

with the single advantage that picking a nominee earlier would give our candidate more time to campaign vs Bush. The disadvantages are several, principle among them overemphasing the already overhyped early contests, preventing grassroots movements from developing, and not giving the party enough time to test the leaders.

For example, take the Kerry allegations. SUPPOSE they had been true and the story broke when it did, with only Kerry able to raise enough money to go on, and some attractive candidates already out. Those remaining would have had to scramble for cash, it would be utter chaos. A longer schedule stretches out the time frame to allow us to recover from potential disasters.

The best idea is the only schedule, but rotate states' dates, so one time they are early, then late, then in the middle, etc. That way no state (except NH, who won't be blasted from first because they practically invented the presidential primary) will have an unfair amount of influence over time.

[dansolo]

41. There were almost no debates

It was rediculous that there were a whole bunch of debates before Iowa, but very few since. After Iowa and New Hampshire, this primary was media driven.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

43. I'm mad as hell too......

For the DNC to exclude 85-90% of it's voter base then EXPECT us all to fall in line and do as they say is a slap in the face. And make no mistake about it they do EXPECT our votes in November for the candidate they choose long before most of us even got to vote. They may as well have sent us all a letter saying "sit down, shut up and do as we say". I for one do not respond well to that. I wonder how Terry Mac and the DNC would react if thousands of pissed off Democrats showed up at the convention in Boston to address their irritation with his "front loaded" primary?

[Crunchy Frog]

58. Also, the debates that they did have

were total crap. They were all run by the corporate media, most of which actually has an agenda of keeping Bush in office. The formats were the absolute worst possible for the actual discussion of real issues, and there was almost no true debate between the candidates. For the most part, the moderators were rude and hostile to the candidates, often actually interrupting them or arguing with them. The distribution of questions and time to the different candidates was blatantly unfair. Most of the questions asked were utter crap, and did not allow the candidates the opportunity to really present their positions to the American people.

I also think that they were scheduled in such a way that they would be watched by as few people as possible, then most of what people saw was select clips, and the pundits extremely twisted and biased interpretations.

I can't even believe that they let FAUX moderate 2 of the debates. It's like they want the Republicans to choose our candidates for us.

Whatever happened to the times when the debates were moderated by the League of Women Voters? This is another area of the primary process where fundamental reform is needed.

[Crunchy Frog]

45. I completely agree with you

about front loaded primaries. Iowa and NH are not really strongly representative of the rest of the country, and often go for candidates that are unelectable in general elections. I'm not saying that will be the case with Kerry, I just don't know. I do think it's very significant that Clinton didn't win either.

For these reasons, I think it's a terrible system for choosing the Dem candidate. In fact, I never understood why who has the first primaries doesn't change on a regular basis to give more areas of the country a chance to truly participate in the selection process.

Overall, I think the current primary system is very flawed, and that front loading it magnifies those flaws.

I also think that media consolidation has had a terrible impact on the Democratic process, and has magnified other flaws in the system. I don't care what anyone else says, the media was extremely unfair and biased against Clark. They pretty much pick and choose who gets the coverage and who doesn't, and whether the tone of the coverage is positive or negative. I just think that is too much power, especially as the media becomes more and more monolithic.

I'm not going to continue being bitter, but I have decided that as a progressive, media reform should be one of our absolute top priorities. You simply cannot have a democracy with what amounts to a totalitarian type media.

As a fellow Clark supporter, I'm not going to jump on any bandwagon. I don't at all begrudge Kerry his wins, and I'm even glad about them since Wes is solidly in his camp, but I choose to no longer have an emotional stake in the process. It is very liberating to be able to watch the primaries with a sense of detachment.

I will get on the Kerry bandwagon once his is the nominee, but I need an emotional vacation right now, after giving my heart and soul to Clark.

I would strongly urge you to not feel any pressure to get on any bandwagon until the nomination is decided. Kerry is doing just fine without me and probably will do just fine without you too. I would take the time right now to restock on emotional energy so that you can give it to Kerry when he really will need it. During the general election.

[susanna]

48. Kerry was always my personal Plan B

Actually, he was my original Plan A until I got a chance to listen to Clark. From that point on, Clark was my guy.

That said, this front-loaded primary season has been absolutely awful. I've talked to several Democrats in my area (MI) who are angry at what happened. They mentioned that they never felt that their vote was weighted the way it used to be in the "normal" season. Michigan has a LOT of votes, and none of the candidates got to campaign here because TN and VA were coming up and required the face time. Michigan voters were NOT happy.

I personally think McAuliffe needs to be replaced. I do not see what positive he has done for the DNC. Every time I see him (talk shows, etc.), he lets himself be run over by the RWers. He does not impress me at all.

(Edited for grammar)

[BootinUp]

50. Apparently, McAuliffe will leave that position Feb 2005

Don't let the door hit ya in the @ss Terry!

[susanna]

55. In complete agreement...

I just don't see that he has done anything to help the Democratic Party. In a less forgiving mode, the "hack" label would come up.
Oh look! It just did! ;-)

[Crunchy Frog]

59. I just hope he doesn't get replaced

with someone who is just as bad, or even worse.

As things stand now, I will never, ever give any money to the DNC. I would actually like to see it get completely supplanted by something like Moveon.org. Right now, they are the only national Democratic organization that I would even consider giving any money to.

[Leilani]

52. Thanks to Everyone Joining the Discussion

I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Although this is not the time, I hope many of us can get together & through a grass roots movement, pressure the Dem Party to change the primary schedule. It will also depend on who is elected in Nov., so who will have control of the party.

[JI7]

53. i asked about this early on

not sure if asked on du or somewhere else. but it was before the whole primary thing even really got started. it was when the news of early primaries came out. terry mcauliffe wanting a candidate early on was something always known. i remember asking if this was a good idea. but nobody really made much of it.probably because there weren't really any candidates or big supporters so nobody seemed to care much. i had questions about it. but seeing who i support, so far of course i'm happy with the results, but that doesn't make the process the best. in iowa kerry did well and that had nothing to do with momentum or bandwagon, so it shows he certainly can win based on a real long campaign and on very specific issues. so i have faith in kerry to do well even without the front loaded elections. so i would support a review of the process.

[Leilani]

54. I have nothing against John Kerry

& I will vote for him in Nov. For me, he was the only acceptable alternative to Clark.

And who knows what might have happened with a different schedule?
The Senator might still be mopping up the competition.

My objection is to the schedule being set by McAwful, which has left people feeling left out & has made it harder to unite people.

The party needs to figure out a system with different states alternating position, & although regional primaries have been suggested, that leads to an ad war. I really like retail politics, however more states need to have the same input as Iowa & NH.

[mikehiggins]

57. Clark supposedly has suggested that supporters who wish

to can, of course, support Kerry. He would like it if those people would do so as part of the Clark crew, however. Thus, people like me, for example, would be Clark volunteers who are helping out with the Kerry campaign.

It is very important we maintain a cohesive identity as Clark supporters. Without that kind of organization, Wes has little leverage with which to influence the direction of the campaign in months to come.

[Leilani]

62. That's exactly what I would like to do

Stay as part of the Clark crew, so that Wes retains some sort of power base.

Mike, can you tell me what is the best site to join for a cohesive Clark group; I 've registered at MSN, however I have to wait for an email to join. Also went to Yahoo & there are 291 Clark groups. It seems silly to have so many sites, it dilutes the power.

Please let me know if there is a main group forming; I read that a Wes Clark Society was forming. Was that your post?

Anyway, any info would be greatly appreciated.

[Eurobabe]

66. i am not ready to follow the herd

i want to maintain my Clark identity, but for now i am supporting Kucinich.

maybe at some point i can support Kerry as a Clarkie. but there are two things I don't like about Kerry, the IWR and Patriot Act.

[Taeger]

61. Rotating schedule

I think that states need to sign a treaty regarding a rotating primary schedule. Basically, you would cue states up on weekly schedules over 4 monthts. Each cycle the first primary holders would be bumped to the back. Everyone else would move up a week.

It's really not fair that Iowa and New Hampshire has such an unfair influence on the primaries.

[Mairead]

64. "It's really not fair that Iowa and New Hampshire have such influence"

No, it's not. But people have been saying the same thing for at least 40 years to my certain knowledge...and nothing's been changed. The fact that they are relatively rural, conservative, whitebread states seems like a hint about the Party's real motives and priorities, to me.

[Mairead]

63. "Front-loaded" primaries = high-name-recognition advantage =

establishment-candidate win.

Fixes can be subtle, too, as any casino owner knows.

[Skidmore]

65. I agree that the system has been gamed by

the powers that be in the party. I don't think it benefits anyone to have the candidate selected so early in the process. Now I will support Kerry as a candidate, but I don't like this perpetual campaigning that is occurring. Because everyone is in perpetual campaign mode, nothing meaningful gets done because only the flavor of the week is the focus of attention. I don't want to see this happen again.