If John Kerry wants to run in 2008...

[The Backlash Cometh]

Talking to the resident Liberal in the family, it occurred to me that the only way that Kerry can run without troubling opposition from members of his own party is if he proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he was robbed in the last election. The R.L. said that the reason he felt it would be best that Kerry step out of the race is because he had full support of the Democrats and still didn't manage to pull it off in 2004. I asked him what if Kerry could prove that there was election fraud and he was robbed of the presidency? The R.L. didn't respond.

He didn't respond because he only works with tangibles and he hasn't seen enough info on the MSM to convince him. There's no point in telling him what the blogs are saying on the subject, because he knows if it doesn't get into the MSM, it won't make a difference on the average person nor will we build the numbers that will translate to wins at the election box.

So, is Kerry working on this angle, or is it something he walked away from, thinking he would make up the momentum on the Senate floor with other issues of Democratic interest?

[paineinthearse]

1. He hasn't walked

About 5 weeks ago he enjoined another Green/Libertarian lawsuit. I believe he is quietly working this through legal channels.

[candy]

2. There is no way that Kerry will run again.

[The Backlash Cometh]

17. What makes you think that?

His outreach to voters seems to be growing.

[MoonRiver]

26. His outreach may be growing, but his support is not.

IF Kerry finally takes a stand on Selection II, it's gonna really piss me off. He should have done this BEFORE the theft was a done deal. :mad:

[politicasista]

30. Show us the proof

Get over the primaries. :mad:

[MoonRiver]

37. Proof of WHAT?

And I don't tolerate anybody telling me to get over election theft. Why don't YOU get over the fact that John Kerry threw this thing.

[Goldeneye]

3. I'm convinced

by TH Kerry's comments about the election and America not being a "banana republic" that they know what happened. We know he has lawyers working in Ohio. And we know how he handled the bcci investigation: slow and meticulous. I can't help but believe he is working on it. But, I guess time will tell.

[politicasista]

4. Nobody wants him to run again.

It's all about Hillary, Clark, or some other DU favorite. It's just sad because we will never know what kind of president Kerry could have been. It's unfair and unfortunate, but I guess that's the way the Dems operate. :nopity:

[Goldeneye]

7. Its not up to DUers who wins

and I'm not convinced that DUers are representative of democrats in general. Everyone I've talked to outside of DU liked Kerry. My parents believe he was a good candidate and would vote for him again. My grandparents feel the same way. Most of my college friends happily voted for Kerry. These people would have voted for whoever the dem candidate was, but I think Kerry does still have a great deal of support and if he proves there was fraud it can only help him.

:-) :hi: hey politicasista

[politicasista]

9. Hey Goldeneye

Excuse my thread. It's been a tough week.:hi:

[MeDeMax]

15. I will work on John's campaign when he runs again...

Kerry is a great leader with a judicious mix of politics and real public service in his life/career, that a majority of our country & I can get behind.

I am confident he will run again, he won't let is down.

[globalvillage]

10. Nobody?

There are a lot of people who still support Sen Kerry. We are not all ready to give up on him.
There will have to be a shift in the MSM for any Dem to win the presidency, but I think it will happen. There will also have to be transparency so we're not cheated out of another election at the ballot box. Voter disenfranchisement was rampant in '04. We need to work on these things between now and 2008. Election reform and media accountability is critical.
Exit polls prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Sen Kerry won. For the MSM to report what many of us know to be true, though, is going to be a challenge. Hell, they hardly reported the second aniversary of the Iraq war. Remember Columbine? It happened again last week, and it was barely a blip. Until the RW media moguls are stopped, we're screwed.
We are going to have to find a way to fix what's wrong with this country if any Dem has a chance, not just Sen Kerry.
For now, Sen Kerry will focus on getting Dems into office in 2006, but he will remain visible. When the Bushdom falls, people will know the truth.
John Kerry is not finished yet.

[politicasista]

11. Hi globalvillage

:hi:

[globalvillage]

12. Hey back at ya.

Lovely day for a debate, isn't it?
:pals:

[politicasista]

14. I will say.

Happy Easter to you. :party:

[The Backlash Cometh]

18. I think Kerry can pull the rabbit out of the hat IF

he definitively finds evidence of election fraud. I like Clark, however. And I wouldn't mind Hillary if I could only be convinced she isn't old guard Dem in a dress.

[Goldeneye]

20. I would take either of those candidates.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

24. I didn't know that anyone was still playing the

"John Kerry, starring as Kojak/Columbo/Monk/Sherlock Holmes, working behind the scenes to put right what once went wrong" teevee show.

I thought it had long since been cancelled due to reality.

[Goldeneye]

29. Reality?

The reality is we have no idea what Kerry's doing. But if he knows they are stealing elections, its in his best interest to prove they're stealing them and get the election system fixed.

[ginnyinWI]

5. I believe your R.L is right on that

I think it is the only way that enough people will get behind him a second time. I do believe he won the election, but enough have to believe it to make a difference. And I do agree that he is working on it.

[politicasista]

6. I do too.

Excuse the last thread Ginny. :hi:

[TayTay]

8. Again, this is silly

He can run again if he wants to. He has a base of support that exceeds what he had in 2007. (You know, before the primaries.) He has money and he has supporters with money who have stuck with him. He can, therefore, run if he wishes to run.

Should he do so there will be people who (heavens) want another candidate to get the nomination. They will move heaven and earth, as supporters of political candidates are known to do, in an effort to get their candidate money, votes and primary wins. It will be a fight. Usually, this is what happens when more than one candidate contests for a political prize. As I do not anticipate the Democrats outlawing multiple candidates in their Presidential primaries, I anticipate that it will be OK for the Senator from Massachusetts to run if he wants to.

Should he get more people to vote for him in the primaries (and if he raises enough money to pay staff in the long months before any primary votes are actually cast) he might win. But he might not. It all depends on events that are a long time in the future. But he is legally entitled to run, unless some Democrats succeed in outlawing the practice. (How else do people propose to stop him anyway?)

[The Backlash Cometh]

21. No one is questioning if he can run. Of course he can.

That's what primaries are all about. But the issue is, can he be a front runner without troubling opposition from others?

[TayTay]

27. No, he cannot

There will always be opposition. It is impossible to get two Democrats to agree on what to have for lunch, never mind who should be the Nominee for President of the United States. That's why we have primaries. This is hardly a perfect system, but it beats the old machine system of choosing Dem Nominees. (Of course there is always the Democratic Presidential Boxing Match, run like Olympic boxing rounds are run, but I don't think people would really go for it. Sounds too Republican to me.)

[The Backlash Cometh]

33. I AM talking about the primaries.

Where else would he be up against opposition from other Dems?

[Mass]

35. Basically everybody who runs will get opposition !

Hillary, Edwards, Biden, Feingold, Warner, Richardson, Clark, (or whoever will run) will get opposition from one side or another for one reason or another.

It is difficult to know the feelings that Democrats will have against one candidate or another in two years (who knows what will happen in two years), or even if any of those I listed will actually be candidate (though they seem the more likely right now), but we can take as a give that all of them, if they run, will have their supporters and their opponents.

[The Backlash Cometh]

41. Well, excuse me for defining the parameters of that opposition

in Kerry's case. Was it too micro-managed?

[mikelewis]

13. I hope he does run...

I think he'd do a great job. He won my support, not because he wasn't Bush but because he has all the qualities I look for in a candidate. I believe the election was stolen so in my mind, he won once, he can do it again.

[jedr]

16. as the Terri Schiavo thing unwinds, there is a tipping point to be

to be taken advantage of.... Let Kerry show some leadership at this point ( as John Mc Cain has done several times in the past) If he does; 2008 could be in his grasp

[tabasco]

19. IF John Kerry wants to run in 2008 ...

he better come out and state in no uncertain terms that the Iraq war is illegal and immoral. Of course, he won't do that, so he is not a viable candidate for 2008.

[Mass]

36. No, you wont support him, which is different!!

[tabasco]

38. Where did I say I would not support him ?

IMO, he is not a viable candidate because of his support for the Iraq war. The war will continue to be the biggest issue in 2008.

[Mass]

39. Thanks for the "in my opinion".

[tabasco]

40. You're welcome.

Was it not clear in my previous post that it was my opinion?

Do you preface everything you write on this board with "IMO?"

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

22. He can run if he wants to. HOWEVER,

he will NOT be getting MY vote again.

[Goldeneye]

23. in the primaries? or not ever?

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

25. NOT EVER

NOT EVER
NOT EVER
NOT EVER
NOT EVER
NOT EVER
NOT EVER

[Goldeneye]

28. why not?

I'm not telling you who to vote for, and I'm actually more alligned with the green party, but I would rather vote for a democrat than have 4 more years of a republican.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

31. Because when he conceded without a fight he

betrayed his country as certainly as *bush did.

[Goldeneye]

42. You're entitled to your opinion,

but conceding an election that it appears you lost by 3.5 million votes is a little different than taking us into an illegal war, siphoning of taxes to your corporate friends, dismantling democracy in America, flying saudi's out of America after 9-11, spreading propaganda, trying to dismantle SS, alienating us from the rest of the world, creating record deficits and an economy on the edge. God, I could go on and on, and it seems extreme to claim John Kerry betrayed Americans. He let us down, maybe, but he didn't betray us. But maybe thats just my opinion too. Tough call. Regardless, if Kerry is the candidate and you don't vote for him, I hope its a vote against the corporate influences that plague our democratic leaders rather than a vote against Kerry's betrayal of America.

[Liberty Belle]

32. The only way I'd support Kerry again would be if

he proved fraud in a court of law and took down the BushCo administration through impeachment.

Otherwise, his walking away on election night and failing to launch a prompt, vigorous public fight against those who stole the election demonstrates a failure in leadership.

However many other good things he may accomplish in Congress, I can't trust him again as our presidential candidate.

[The Backlash Cometh]

34. This seems to be the prevailing thought.

He'd have to have a stellar performance in the Senate to turn things around without the voter fraud angle.