Th-th-th-th-th-that's all, folks!

[regnaD kciN]

Well, it is obvious after tonight that our nominee is going to be John Kerry.

Accordingly, although I will still carry out my charge and cast my pledged vote for Howard Dean at County Convention, after this post, I will cease all criticism of Senator Kerry (at least until after 11/2/04) on this board. I will do what I can to assist in the defeat of (P)resident Bush and, should the election still be "in play" ten minutes before polls close in Washington state on election day, Kerry will get my vote.

Having said that, one final series of observations...

Kerry is no doubt the fairly-chosen nominee, but we could and should have done much better. A couple of years ago, it looked like the Democrats had finally tired of the same old Democratic LOSERship Council strategy that had given the Republicans a hammerlock on power for the first time. It looked like we were finally ready to try new ideas, an "outsider" approach, a commitment to fighting for our beliefs, and, possibly, a nominee without the "Washington insider" image that has bedeviled our party for years. Instead, now that the dust has settled, we find ourselves with a choice of the ultimate "Mr. Inside," a "safe" (to the powers that be, at least) candidate guaranteed to make no unseemly waves. This constitutes a colossal failure of nerve, and a missed opportunity that will haunt us for years, if not decades.

How Senator Kerry will do against (P)resident Bush is hard to determine. As I said long ago (back when it was assumed another New Englander would be the nominee), how we do in the general election depends far more on what the public thinks about the incumbent than its impressions of our candidate. If Bush and his handlers can somehow convince the public that the economy is turning around and that there's "light at the end of the tunnel" in Iraq, he will win (and would have done so no matter who our candidate was). If it still seems like were stuck in an economic sinkhole and an Iraqi quagmire, Kerry will have a good chance, and no amount of White House propaganda suggesting that Kerry and "Hanoi Jane" are joined at the hip will make any difference.

However, I'm more worried about what Kerry may do after he winds up in the White House. I've seen no shortage of examples to suggest that Kerry will change his opinions as often as some people change their socks, not to mention that he will turn on his former allies without compunction whenever politically expedient. I suspect that anyone who thinks a Kerry victory will lead to a revival of progressivism is living in a fool's paradise. The best we can hope for is probably four to eight years of "triangulation" a la Bill Clinton, with Kerry "splitting the difference" between the Tom Delays and the Dick Gephardts of each party's "mainstream." And, anyone who thinks that pushing for progressive change will be easier under a President Kerry than under (P)resident Bush should think again -- we'll be treated by both parties as pariahs, and blamed by "mainstream" Democrats for any of Kerry's political stumbles if we "make waves."

In the long run, though, this primary season demonstrates once again a key difference between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans decide on their "core values" and build a platform around them, then figure out an approach to convince the public that their approach is the proper one. Democrats, on the other hand, first take a poll to determine what the public is thinking, then build a platform around the poll results, then try to convince others (and themselves) that the poll-driven platform represents the values they have held all along. The results of this approach, unfortunately, speak for themselves, as we increasingly find ourselves in a world driven by Republican values. As long as we maintain our poll-driven approach, I see no end in sight.

However, that's a debate for another time. Love him or hate him, Kerry is going to be our nominee, so we might as well reconcile ourselves to that. ABB, right? I'll do my part. In the meantime, I'll be in the lounge.

[alcuno]

1. Dr. Dean invented a new medical procedure.

It's called the spinal transplant. This John Kerry is not the John Kerry that we saw many months ago; the one who almost got the boot. As Dean said, "You have the power." I think Kerry understood the message and I'm hopeful.

[regnaD kciN]

2. I hope you're right...

...not only during the election but, God willing, for the next four to eight years after that!

[KoKo]

3. You make excellent points particularly about Dems/Polls. Let's hope that

a new "grassroots" is forming due to Dean/Kucinich's candidacy and that "Move On.org" and the new Progressive Think Tank will be a start for reform of our Party. It's not much, but then we here on DU didn't have a place to get together and discuss what we thought of our party until Selection 2000.

I'm more hopeful than you, not about Kerry, but that we've been given a chance for change and the tools to do it with. We thought that things would be easier that the party had the "wake up call" with Clinton and then Seletion 2000. It's been downhill with our spineless party since then. This whole Primary feels like it was orchestrated and we were puppets.

But, there's still anger out there. I don't think it will go away. And, particularly the anger over Iraq Invasion.

Who would guessed the Democratic Party was in this bad a shape? I would never have thought so. But, looking back at the trail for decades now, one can see what was going on in "hindsight." At least we know, and don't have to count on them or expect that their spines will stiffen. We need major reform, from within. If we have to barge our way in so be it. It's time.