http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35224-2004Nov8?language=printer Is Kerry an idiot? Does he not realize that the only reason he got any votes was because they were votes against Bush - not for him? Granted, he may get some support from people while in the Senate as a counter to Bush - but if he gets the democratic nomination for President again in 08... Democrats might as well hand the presidency over to Republicans again. A guy I work with is a bleeding heart liberal - hates the republicans, absolutely despises Bush - yet he voted for Bush. He said he "had to pick the lesser of 2 evils, Kerry wasn't fit to be any kind of leader - much less the President." A black guy at work voted for Nader, he said he couldn't bring himself to vote for either candidate. NOBODY LIKES JOHN KERRY!!!!
As for the possibility of Kerry to come back and try again in '08, he is welcome to. We will see who democrats vote for and choose to be their candidate though. I doubt it will be him in '08 should he choose to run again.
Well.... wow. I don't even know what else to say. What in the hell could somebody see in John Kerry that would make him a good President? The fact that he's a veteran and served his country honorably - because not only has his honor been questioned and not fully answered (all the pages weren't released) but he also threw away his (or maybe somebody else's - he can't remember) medals. **I personally feel it was honorable, simply because he was there - but thats not the point. The fact that he has the courage to say he was against the war in Iraq and Sadam was not a threat and had no weapons of mass destruction? But there happens to be that little bit of documentation were he said the exact opposite of all those things. Is it his unquestionable good looks and charm? I suppose no sarcastic comment is needed here. Could it be his ability to bring people together and be a strong leader? Apparently that isn't true. The only thing he did was bring together people who were anti-Bush, which happened to be about 48% of the country - close, but no cigar. Regardless of wether there were some pro-Kerry people or not, I still believe most of his votes came simply from people wanting someone other than Bush in office - or simply voting for their party (democrats). I'll say this instead, VERY FEW PEOPLE LIKED KERRY!!!!! And if Kerry does decide to run again, and again and again - all the power to him. We'll have 16 straight years of Republican Presidents before people get the hint. I will dread the day I have to wake up and know that Frankenstein is my President.
Go back through my old posts pre-election if you would like answers to your question. The time for debate is over and the time to support our president, Bush, is here.
i agree with cparso, and i think that is pretty much the consensus. kerry comes off as a northeastern liberal with no charm. not a good candidate. to win, the democrats are gonna need a charmer, like a clinton. preferably a southerner/midwesterner. i think we have seen how far a northeastern liberal will get. america just aint buying what the guy is sellin. i try not to care about such things, but even i am anoyed by everything related to boston. i can imagine how the bible belt feels.
I heard someone saying the other day that Kerry has been obsessed with becoming president since he was 14. Anyone that power-hungry who believes it is their destiny to become the leader of the free world is very dangerous and unfit for the position. This reinforces the fact that America made the correct decision last week. The guy just isn't all there.
I don't think there is a chance in hell the Dems nominate him. If they go with an uber-liberal again, its gonna be Hillary/Bill.
here is a couple paragraphs i lifted from an orson scott card (yunno, the mormon guy who wites the ender series books) essay on his site: " Four years from now, the Democrats will almost certainly be choosing between Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. John Edwards will be the "moderate" primarily because he has low negatives, he's cute, he was the vice-presidential candidate this year, and his liberal voting record will have been four years behind him. He'll be remembered as a scrappy campaigner that people generally liked. Hillary Clinton, however, will be the darling of the fanatical left wing of the Democratic Party. These people will not blame themselves for their defeat in 2004. They will want to nominate Hillary for vindication. No matter which of them wins the nomination, the vice-presidential candidate from the Democratic Party will be Barack Obama. The only way he could fail to be the nominee for veep would be if he decided to enter the primaries and ended up as the presidential nominee, which isn't likely, but isn't impossible, either. Barack Obama would be the best candidate for the Democratic Party. Right now I can't think of a Republican -- except perhaps Bill Frist or J.C. Watts -- who could stand a chance of getting my vote if Obama were the Democratic nominee. John Edwards would not get my vote, but he could win the election, if the Republicans choose their nominee from among the usual assortment of wonks and twits -- the Republican primary season has had a sort of freak show aspect to it for many an election cycle. (George W. Bush was the surprising exception; except.) Again, for Frist and Watts, I don't see a proven vote-getter among the Republicans who would be able to hold his own against a Democrat who was able to pose as a centrist. Hillary Clinton, of course, is the candidate that Republicans are dying to face, since she has so many negatives and is so personally obnoxious to so many that she will singlehandedly bring out every conceivable Republican voter. If the Democrats nominate her, it will prove that they have decided to be the permanent minority party. Barack Obama is the only Democrat I have heard speak with maturity and moderation in the past few months. I would like to think the Democrats would have the sense to nominate him instead of Miss Cattle Futures or Mr. Grin. But don't bet on it." from http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-10-31-1.html i like orson scott card. seems like a reasonable guy. thats an article worth reading, in my opinion.
