Kerry in '08? Kerry-bashers?

[Yollam]

I'm just testing a theory here...

[iconoclastic cat]

1. I question the biases in the poll response options.

[blm]

65. Should read:FOR or AGAINST anti-corruption and open government

.

[smoogatz]

2. What's the theory?

[Yollam]

3. The theory is that people who are opposed to a Kerry run...

...even vehemently opposed, as I am, are not "Kerry bashers" or haters, as some would say. In fact I think fairly highly of him - as a senator.

As a presidential candidate, not so hot.


I kinda think most people who oppose a second Kerry run feel the same - that he can contribute the most in the Senate.

[smoogatz]

4. Let him run. I think it's highly unlikely he'd win the nom this time

around, though--and that's most likely a good thing. I'm more worried about Hillary taking a run; even though she's unlikely to be the nominee, she'd be in a powerful position tovie for the running-mate slot because she'll have raised huge sacksful of cash. With her negatives, I'm not sure having her on the ticket would be helpful.

[robinlynne]

5. There's another reason some of us don't want him. not about his campaign,

but because he conceded instead of fighting.

[JanusAscending]

10. You do manage to get around all of the Kerry threads,

don't you!!????? Get over it!

[zulchzulu]

14. Ah yes, this old tired chestnut...gee, what does Conyers think? Hmmm....

"Fighting for Every Voter"

A few more words about an issue that is of the utmost importance to me. As political candidates, we spend considerable time and effort every election cycle fighting for votes...

A few more words about an issue that is of the utmost importance to me.

As political candidates, we spend considerable time and effort every election cycle fighting for votes. After the election, whether won or lost, many candidates leave the irregularities of the election behind. But we owe the voters more than that. When voters are disenfrachised, we owe it to them to seek justice and expose the truth. That is why I have been so proud of the Kerry-Edwards campaign's ongoing involvement in the investigation and litigation of what went wrong in Ohio. I wrote to the candidates recently to ask that they continue to be involved in this important endeavor.

This is not about the past. It is about figuring out what went wrong and why -- and then getting the next election right, not for the Democratic Party, but for all of the voters.

- John Conyers

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000213.htm

I always find that whenever I post this quote and blog entry from Conyers, the person who accuses wrongly that Kerry gave up never seems to respond. Funny how that works...

[JanusAscending]

20. GREAT "Gotcha" Brother !

So on target! Love it, and will use it too!

[robinlynne]

69. would you like me to respond?

just tired of it. don't believe you'd listen. there is an election tomorrow and a lot of work to do.
glad to respond after that if you'd like.

[blm]

70. You FIGHT with legal evidence - NO ONE would fight without it - NO ONE.

.

[robinlynne]

72. I think we have to agree to disagree on this one.

We saw many courageous people stand up and fight. There is a post today with photos of the great people who stood up in 2004, including congresspeople and senators.
there is another post today calling for kerry to stand up now clearly behind jfks article, because it is the only thing that would counter the right's number one successful argument: your own candidate doesn't care. you are "conspiracy theorists".
How about that as something we can agree upon. Can we somehow ask kerry to stand up now while this article can still be disseminated and say "everyone needs to read this. I stand behind the facts presented in this article". no criticism here. This issue is important. And he has the power to help bring this issue to the forefront, which is what we need.
tell you what, if you guys can get Kerry to stand up about the 2004 election, I will personally work my butt off again to get him elected again.

[blm]

73. Name ONE Democratic candidate type who would continue with NO EVIDENCE

in hand to make the LEGAL CASE to continue.

And Kerry does care - he wants to work on the BANNING of electronic voting machines state by state.

[robinlynne]

76. here are some who OFFICIALLY challenged the last 2 elections.

ok. this is getting boring. A few who DID stand up and challenge elections officially , just now:

Al Gore
barbara boxer
The entire black caucus (20 or so)

and in the past, without legal "proof"
gandhi,
every single resister in the second world war
martin luther king
every one of us who marches against every war.

Noone has legal proof of anything within 12 hours. But you challenge. Then you gather the evidence.
And that evidence is still sitting in ohio, provisional ballots are still uncounted. come on. they're about to shred those ballots. Then there will really be no proof.

[blm]

77. You believe Gore would've challenged if he were 130000 votes behind

and was perceived to have lost popular vote by 3 million? No one who knows Gore would believe he would have continued without the popular vote and the close numbers.

Ever try comparing apples with apples and instead of oranges?

You still don't name ONE PERSON who would try to make a LEGAL CASE with NO LEGAL EVIDENCE. There is no evidence in rigged machines - they're programmed to not leave any traces of rigging.

You named some who challenged other aspects of the vote, but not the rigged machines where the numbers were.

[robinlynne]

78. challenge the election. period. "I challenge these results".

yes Gore did. No his situation was not different. same fradulent people pulling the same fraudulent game.
they pulled it with the elections, with the war, with the tax cuts.
and it will happen again next year and in 2008. This is what we have to deal with. We are not dealing with gentlemen here, or law abiding citizens. we are dealing with fascism, or people with fascist tendencies if you want it said politely.
Bargaining with them does not work. Those days are over.

[blm]

81. Gore had the MATH WITH HIM. Big difference. You're REACHING to claim

he would have acted differently given the exact same MATH circumstances.

[robinlynne]

79. They all DID challenge the election legally. not would, DID.

[blm]

80. They didn't have to make a LEGAL CASE to continue - Kerry needed to.

If they HAD to make the legal case that day to continue, what legal evidence did they have?

[robinlynne]

82. I forgot the brave green presidential candidate in 2004.

And I think the libertarian candidate filed a legal challenge in 2004 too, didn't he?

It is still in court. Shame they don't have enough name recognition to get the public's attention. And the one argument upon which the republican party keeps winning is: You couldn't have won the election anyway, so it is not worth trying. It had to be done by the candidate who "had something to gain". Unwittingly, because I know you are well-intentioned, you are helping them with this way of thinking. Maybe he would have lost in court. That is a possibility. Maybe not. Is that worse in any way, than the consequences we are all facing right now because of not challenging the election? This is going to happen again in 2008, only much much worse this time because we now have HAVA. If we use your way of thinking, we automatically lose. You are not going to get the nunbers you want or wanted with rigged machines. You must stnad up and challenge a fraudulent election. really. The republicans are not playing by the same rules you are playing by.

[blm]

83. none of them had to make a LEGAL CASE to continue a challenge to the

machine count.

And the 2 legal cases in Ohio they are in now covering other areas show Kerry is still actively involved with them.

[robinlynne]

84. simply not true.

[heartofthesiskiyou]

8. second that emotion

I am a little offended about the basher thingy but it's OK, I understand. Resonably speaking he can't be the guy.

I wonder what a separte poll would indicate on both the two I would like, Gore or Feingold, (that' not counting Edwards of course as I just think he's a sleeper dark horse, and so electable without the extreme lefty lable)

[wisteria]

19. Then you miss out on a great opportunity to elect a great President.

Luckily, the majority of people I met up with are not so opposed to another kerry run. As a matter of fact, I get a lot of comments saying they like him a lot.

[Yollam]

28. I like him a lot, but I don't want him as the democratic candidate.

I like Dennis Kucinich even more, but I don't want him as our candidate, because I *KNOW* he would lose. I want someone that's far enough left to be worth a damn, but mainstream enough to win. Kerry seemed like he was close enough, but he blew his shot. Time to give someone else a chance.


Funny nobody ever suggests Boxer. I'd vote for her in a split second.

[blm]

85. Kerry is the furthest left we ever put up and got over 59 million votes

And that doesn't count the votes Bush stole from him. That beat the previous highmark by almost 10 million votes.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[Mass]

50. For me, the non-bashing answer is the last one.

Kerry has enough charisma to have won more votes than any other democrats. The rest is something pushed by Hillary's supporters and carried with pleasure by Kerry haters.

[Yollam]

53. For the record, I think Kerry is still way more viable than Hillary.

I just don't think he's the safest bet this time out...

[Mass]

55. I have no problem with this. I have issues with derogatory comments

coming directly from the MSM.

[Alpharetta]

61. retracted

no comment

[Clovis Sangrail]

6. I don't think Kerry lacks charisma

but I do think his campaign was inept

I'll gladly support him again if he wins the D primary, though based on his past campaign performance I wouldn't expect him to win. :(

[sandnsea]

7. Because people are always honest and truthful

And readily admit the number of times they've screamed skull & bones, and wooden, and lurch, and ghoul. And somehow think everybody else is just too stupid to notice and remember when they did it. This place today, gads. Maybe Dennis Kucinich was right and there really is some sort of machine in space shooting brain-washing rays down at the US because there is just no explanation for the kind of stupid that is permeating this country.

[MercutioATC]

9. Other: No Kerry...

...because Kerry's one of the old-guard-say-whatever-will-get-you-elected-out-of-touch politicians that needs to be replaced by new, fresh Democrats.

[zulchzulu]

11. I challenge anyone on the streets with grassroots efforts: I'm with Kerry

Support your candidate. Get off your ass. Take it to the street and prove that your candidate is the one. I'll be out there for Kerry with the many that are for him.

See you there.

[wisteria]

22. Me too, IMO, No one and I mean no one measures up to Kerry. n/t

[upi402]

12. nothing against him

just time for real change

[Solo_in_MD]

13. Nothing against him, but IMO you only get one shot these days

so he would be a loser.

[zulchzulu]

15. Of course you remember Nixon and Reagan's run for the President...

Both tried once...and lost. This would actually be different than Kerry, who actually ran and won...if you've been paying attention.

So if you think that Nixon or Reagan ran and didn't win the first time, then of course they never ran again to become President... or....um....

[Yollam]

18. It would be hypocritical of me to claim he "won" Ohio.

Although I agree there was fraud in Ohio, Bush still won the popular vote by more than 2 million votes, and I have always objected to the electoral college. It was part of what pissed me off about 2000 - Gore won the popular vote then. I have always and will always believe that the electoral college should be abolished and the presidency decided by a straight national tally, not by who wins how many states. Then they would have to fight for every vote and not focus all their energy on "swing" states to the detriment of the rest of us.

Whether or not Kerry won Ohio, he lost the US while running against the worst sitting president since Ulysses Grant, and that should be a sobering thought.

[zulchzulu]

21. On the other hand...

Kerry came the closest to beating a sitting wartime president.....ever....

He also got more votes than any Democrat.....ever....

He also got a lot more votes than Gore got in the South...

We can talk numbers anyday. If the fraud didn't happen in Ohio, Kerry would have won both the Electoral and popular votes.

[wisteria]

25. I agree with you on all accounts. n/t

[Yollam]

26. Assuming fraud swung the election in Ohio...

...that only counts for a couple hundred thousand votes.

Kerry lost by about 3 million votes. Ohio could have gotten him the electoral college, but nowhere near winning the popular vote. Had he won Ohio, he would have assumed the presidency having lost the popular vote by the widest margin ever.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/


But of course there are those who believe Diebold & ES&S scammed millions more votes nationwide. I can't comment on that because it can't be proven or disproven, BECAUSE THE DAMN MACHINES HAVE NO PAPER TRAIL AND ARE UNVERIFIABLE. (But that's a separate issue.)

[wisteria]

29. By the widest margin ever?

I don't think so, but Kerry seemed to be neck and neck with Bush during the election and even ahead in the exit polls until late evening. I doubt many people would have objected to him becoming President based on the electoral college votes.

I get it popular votes=Gore. My guess is you are a Gore supporter and you sadly know very little about Kerry.

[Yollam]

32. Please enlighten me...

Which president won the electoral college and lost the popular vote by more than 2.5 million votes? Not Clinton, he won a plurality in 1992 and plurality with a near majority in 1996.

[wisteria]

41. The burden of proof is on you. You stated something as fact that

I have never seen before and offered no links. I disagreed and made a point that I thought the popular vote would not have mattered in Kerry's case. If you assume Kerry's loss of the popular vote was not because he was disliked, but because people thought Bush would protect their security, then the undecided voters that made up the swing vote may have been apprehensive about a President Kerry, but not angry. Kerry would have been able to prove himself once in office.
And, if you go with the theory of a stolen election, then Kerry actually would have won the popular vote based on the exit polls and documented tampered with votes across the country. Read Robert Kennedy Jr's article in the Rolling Stone magazine. Kennedy is no crazy guy. He is not so much trying to call the election for Kerry as he trying to bring much needed attention to unfair elections.

[Yollam]

43. I can state unequivocally...

...that if Kerry had won by a squeaker in Ohio, he would have still taken office while losing the popular vote by a record margin. There have only been a 4 cases where a president won the electoral vote and lost the popular vote: John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison & POS Bush, and none of them lost the popular vote by anywhere near 1 million votes. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 by about 500K votes, and that was a record at the time.

[wisteria]

74. Add President John F. Kennedy to your list! He lost the popular vote too!

1960 Nixon (R) with 34,108,157 popular votes or <49.3%> of the popular vote and 219 electoral votes lost to Kennedy (D) with 34,049,976 popular votes or <49.2%> of the popular vote and 303 electoral votes.

http://www.agh-attorneys.com/3_camo_ch_6_president.htm

Elections where the Electoral College "winner" had fewer popular votes than the "loser."

1876: Tilden (D) with 4,287,670 popular votes or <50.9 %> of the popular vote and 184 electoral votes lost to Hayes (R) who had 4,035,924 popular votes or <47%> but 185 electoral votes.

1888: Cleveland (D) with 5,540,365 popular votes or <49.3%> of the popular vote and 168 electoral votes lost to Harrison: (R) who had 5,445,269 popular votes or <47.8%> but 233 electoral votes.

1960 Nixon (R) with 34,108,157 popular votes or <49.3%> of the popular vote and 219 electoral votes lost to Kennedy (D) with 34,049,976 popular votes or <49.2%> of the popular vote and 303 electoral votes.

2000 Gore (D) with 50,158,094 popular votes or <48.64%> of the popular vote and 267 electoral votes lost to Bush (R) with 49,820,518 popular votes or <48.31%> of the popular vote and 271 electoral votes.

Besides, as I have said before 2004 was unique and many votes were made out of fear and security issues. The war was also a major factor. You ignore all the good of Kerry's campaign just to emphasize some negatives. he energized a lot of young voters and the party registered and had the biggest voter turn our in years. The fact that kerry is still popular and well respected says a lot about the man and his chances for another run.

[wisteria]

23. Did you know that most of our greatest presidents won because

of the electoral college? Also, it is more likely that Kerry won Ohio than your assumption that Bush was the worst sitting President since Grant in 2004. Bush scored high marks on the security and war issues and that is what he ran on and won on. People trusted him because they were told he would keep they safe.
I like your comparison to Grant though, it truly does fit now in 2006.

[Solo_in_MD]

45. Nixon was indeed the last one who ran as a nominated candidate and failed

And again I emphasize that I have nothing against Kerry, it is my perception that these days (its been 30 years since Nixon) you only get one shot.

This part of the Kerry topic has been beat to death in other threads and I do not think consensus is possible.

[zulchzulu]

49. Are you against him running in the primaries?

I'm not asking that you would not vote for him in the primaries...but rather do you think there should be some kind of rule that if you run for President and lose that you should not run again?

Of course, that would also indicate that anyone who ran for President in the primaries would have to be taken to the same undemocratic task...

[Solo_in_MD]

71. No formal rule, more a pragmatic observation

Fundamentally, regaining the White House is a big deal. Given my perception that with the electorate you get one shot, so all things being more or less equal, I would rather support someone who I think can win. I am not willing to sacrifice everything for that though. Given a choice between a DINO and Kerry, it would be Kerry.

Like I said, its not like I don't think Kerry would be a good president, just think that since he had his shot, he won't be elected.

[janx]

16. He should run again if he is so inclined...

but 2008 is too soon. It's very unlikely he'd get nominated.

[Mass]

51. Who created this rule? It is amazing how Democrats spend so much

time inventing rules.

Probably DC strategists who are afraid experienced candidates may not need them that much!!

[wisteria]

17. Kerry has charisma, the media got it wrong, and besides he has

the smarts and the leadership qualities to make a great President.

[JanusAscending]

24. I have a theory too!!

If, as so many of you say "you like him and have nothing against him,..but " why even bother to keep bringing him up?? I'm a firm believer in the old adage "if you have nothing nice to say about a person, say nothing at all"! Especially when it involves a GREAT Democratic Senator. So... if this isn't "Kerry bashing" per se, lets just not talk about someone, whom you all seem to know nothing about!! OK??? Just talk about who YOU want to work for next time!! Thank you, DC

[wisteria]

27. Good points. I try real hard to not to comment on

other people's posts on their candidates. I will read them for interesting information, but I try not to go negative unless Senator Kerry is misrepresented or attacked for some unfounded reason.

[JanusAscending]

36. Thank you Darlin'!!

Wish many more on DU would adopt this practice! It would make it a lot more pleasant around here, plus we wouldn't come off to "freepers" as being a DIVIDED party !

[Critters2]

30. I won't support anyone in the primaries who voted for the IWR

I don't care what the shape of his face is. The IWR was unconstitutional, and I can't feel good supporting someone for president who doesn't know or respect the Constitution. Won't even consider it.

[wisteria]

33. So that leave a Governor, Feingold, or Gore.

So you would vote for Feingold. Gore and any other Governor running never were in a position where they had to make that difficult decision to vote for the IWR or not.

It is a shame you would not be willing to vote for a candidate that passionately explained that he regretted his vote and has been working so hard to bring our troops home.

[Critters2]

35. Yep--Feingold, Gore or a governor

Anyone can claim to regret an action. Having the balls not to take that action in the first place is more impressive.

Feingold, probably.

[Yollam]

37. If only he had regretted his IWR vote BEFORE the election...

And I personally believe it was a vote of political expediency in the first place. Like many other democrats, he went along with the war hysteria of the moment and gambled on it being a quick, easy, successful war, and lost.


But the IWR vote, as wrong as it was, I can forgive. Such an inept campaign, however? Nope.

[Critters2]

39. I can't forgive either thing

I won't support him in the primaries, and am not sure I would vote for him in the Generals a second time.

[Yollam]

40. In an absolute and personal sense, I don't forgive it.

But at the ballot box, we sometimes have to swallow a bitter pill or two.

[wisteria]

42. I personally do not think his campaign was inept.

He was up against a lot of opposition and was running against fear. Bin laden's appearance and the media did him no favors at all. He turned it around though when he did an excellent job in the debates- winning all three hands down. He turned a lot of people around after that and he was under a lot of pressure to get it right and he did. I think, with a little more time he would have won more people over.The more you get to know him the more devoted you become to him. He truly is a great person.

[Clovis Sangrail]

48. right...

his campaign's response to the swiftboat thing was sheer genius :eyes:

[johnaries]

31. I'd love to see a Gore/Kerry ticket. The Sweet Revenge ticket.

Gore for 8 years with Kerry as VP, and then Kerry for 8. Can you imagine what we could accomplish in those 16 years?

[NoPasaran]

38. Not a Kerry fan

But if through some gruesome turn of events he became the nominee I would vote for him. But Mary Beth Cahill should seek alternative employment in the fast food industry.

[Yollam]

44. Yes, she should be manager with Bob Shrum Asst Mgr. of burger flipping.

Kerry might have had a better chance with another staff.

[kitticup]

46. I voted for Kerry...

I think America will be very lucky to have someone like Kerry as president. The thing with Kerry is no matter how bad it gets, he's the type to roll up his sleeves and get things done without getting self righteous about things and hindering progress. Kerry is someone who believes in America, our system of government and the law and work within that system to make things change, as he always has. I also believe that he would do everything humanly possible (even if it was unpopular) to end the war in Iraq. Kerry helped stop the war in Vietnam, and the illegally funded contra war. For those of you, who cite the IWR: 1) It wasn't meant to be a vote for war at least that is how the president, the sponsors of the bill (Lieberman, Edwards, etc) and Bush's foreign policy advisors presented it; 2) Kerry spoke with the permanent members of the UN Security Council, who all stated that they would support America once the WMDs were found meaning like Gulf War I this should have been a true multinational effort had the Bush administration acted in good faith; 3) remember that the whole point of the IWR was to get inspectors in to find the WMDs; and finally, Kerry made one assumption that was wrong he assumed that W would heed his father's advisors and treat war as something that must be treated seriously.


He put the terrorists back when he closed the BCCI. I love his idea to have a summit with representatives of the world's greatest religions. Note that Islam, Christianity and Judaism have a common roots.

Kerry was a supporter of true public financing not the abomination that is the McCain-Feingold Act.

Most important of all, Kerry has always been about open government.

[LittleClarkie]

47. Could I have him as Attorney General or something if he can't make prez?

If he doesn't get the nom, that's what I'll be pushing for.

[Yollam]

52. I think he'd make a great Secretary of State.

I also think he'd make a good VP nominee, although his pride might not allow for that.

He might also think about Senate Majority Leader. And then he might think about another run for President in '12 or '16. He's still young. I am not opposed to him ever running again. I'm just not ready to gamble on him in the present situation.

I do think he would make a good president if elected. It's just that he'd have almost as hard a time as Hillary getting elected at this point, IMO.

But hell, I've been wrong before. If the dems decide to nominate him, I'll be 100% behind him, praying that he comes out swinging and doesn't let up this time.

[Adelante]

56. Oh God, I would love that

If he does not turn out to be the nominee, (of course, I hope for my personal choice over yours), John Kerry would be the greatest AG ever.

[Mass]

54. The good news is that he does not let people indifferent.

It is amazing how somebody who "has no chance to win", "does not have any charisma", "does not relate to people", ... gets so many threads against him.

He certainly worries some people somewhere (I wonder where? Probably from the same Dems that were so afraid he would win that they did what they could for him not to win in 04).

[Adelante]

57. In the GE?

Dems surely wanted Kerry to win in 2004. If you mean the primaries, not so much for many, which is as should be expected. However, I am curious about why the upsurge in Kerry-bashing currently, as well. I conclude it's become a concerted case of early weeding; 2000 v. 2004. If you can push out one you are left with the other. I suspect this will pass, though. As soon as everybody is running for real, this will be sorted out the same way as ever or will prove to have been an unnecessary waste of everybody's time. Meanwhile, Kerry supporters know how to fight.

[Mass]

60. Not that sure for some. While Clark did an outstanding job

supporting Kerry (Dean too), I remember some Democrats who were less than enthusiastic in the media and were criticizing Kerry all the time for nothing.

[Adelante]

75. Ah, cross purposes

I thought you were talking about DU Dems. Sorry I misunderstood.

[paparush]

58. Kerry Voted for the F#cking War...his position is lethaly undermined

by this fact!

Until he gets on prime time national television (maybe as a guest judge for 'Murkin Idol) and screams, "George Bush and his administration are a clear and present danger to life on this planet." , Kerry will not have my support.

[Minnesota Libra]

59. My favorite is Gore/?? but if Kerry gets the nomination I'll no doubt....

....plug my nose and hold my breath and vote for him anyway.

[TayTay]

62. Gee, too bad for the folks who don't like him

There is nothing you can do to stop him from running, should he choose to do so. He has supporters, money and the will to endure the race.

That's all it takes and no amount of negativity can stop that. Kerry has been raising a ton of money for candidates from coast to coast, still has that enormous e-mail list that can generate hundreds of thousands of dollars for individual candidates and he iswilling to use it to help get a Democratic Congress.

It is irrelevent to me how many people don't want him to run. I just keep sending him money and encouraging him to run. I hope other people do the same for their preferred candidates.

[derby378]

63. If you want him to run, best of luck to the 2008 campaign, but...

...and I say this with all sincerity, because I worked my butt off for Kerry in 2004...

...the man has to want to win. He has to develop a deep, insatiable hunger for the Oval Office. In the current political climate, it would be impossible for a "reluctant candidate" in the mold of George Washington to win; George W. Bush is possessed with nothing short of naked ambition, and it's going to take someone with a huge amount of drive to defeat his intended successor in 2008.

[TayTay]

64. I would say that turning around right after a campaign

and being willing to do it again is indicative of a will to both run and win. Running for President is an endurance event and that goes for your whole family and just about everyone you ever knew. Kerry's daughters were called baby-killers by RWers to their face. They still want their Dad to run. Teresa was basically called a spacey rich be-yatch by just about every press person extant and she still wants her husband to run. It goes on down the list.

Not only does Kerry want it, but his family, who endured all the shitstorms of '04 want him to run. I think that shows a strong desire to win not just by Kerry but by the key people whom he still wants around him in '08. (And you gotta believe that a lot of people from '04 will not be invited back. Especially not the 'fair weather fans' who were just in it to be with the front-runner.)

[Yollam]

66. If he shows the will to overcome his baggage...

...he will win "detractors" like me back to his corner, and I will be behind him more strongly than ever if he gets the nomination. Detractors like me are just a part of the gauntlet he'll have to run, and hardly the worst of it. There will definitely be another round of Swift Boat BS. Let's hope he's ready this time.

[TayTay]

68. That, my friend, is why we still have elections

All candidates have to prove themselves over the course of a very grueling schedule. They have to deal with reality and that includes political baggage and any flaws in their own personalities and strategies.

This is the same for all candidates. In a sense, the process works because it does weed out the people who aren't really serious. In the end, this grind does produced people who really do 'want it.' There are many things worng with the process, but that much is right with it.

[LSK]

67. you missed an option: "I like Kerry but I want to see who else runs"