Latest

Lobby

Search

Options

Help

Login

Kerry's decision to drop out of the race was a smart move by him

Printer-friendly format

Email this thread to a friend

Bookmark this thread

This topic is archived.

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:02 PM
Original message

Kerry's decision to drop out of the race was a smart move by him

Not only would it be devastating for him, personally, to end up placing behind Edwards, but I think it would be bad for him career-wise to have a poor finish of any kind in the primaries.

Let's face it. John Kerry didn't have a chance of winning the Primaries in '08 and he knew it. Losing would be one thing, but getting trounced would be another. Plus, all the heavyweights are in it this time, all of them sensing that 2008 is the year for a Democrat to take over the WH.

Still, there's a chance we'll blow it again in 2008. Considering what happened in 2004, in an election we thought we could never lose, anything is possible. So, if by some chance we blow it in 2008, that leaves Kerry to come back with a vengeance in 2012 as a fresh face. Time does wonders and people forget. Kerry could adopt a whole new campaign persona by then. I'm sure Kerry's hoping we win in '08, but in the event that we don't, look out for him to go for it again in 2012.

We just better win in 2008. That's all I've gotta say.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:05 PM
Response to Original message

1. He is out of the race. When will you stop attacking him!

God forbid that the man is really interested by what happens in this country!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. How the heck is that an attack??

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 07:12 PM by mtnsnake

If one of the Kerryites posted this same exact thing, with such a positive outlook on his drop-out move, the damn thing would have 50 votes for greatest page by now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. What is the point of your post? Tell us that we should not support him in 2012

I do not know for you, but the only reason I hope not to support him in 12 is because WE NEED A DEM IN 08, not the opposite.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tellurian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #4

6. Mass, you've over reacting...doncha think? nm

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #6

8. She couldn't have even read it. If anything, it's more optimistic for Kerry's future

than anything else.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

AtomicKitten

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #6

10. you don't own a franchise

held solely by the JK fan club at DU
you can't talk about him
you can't even think about him
cease and desist immediately!
this matter is being referred to legal counsel

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:06 PM
Response to Original message

2. BTW, there is a reasaon to win in 08. This is because this country cannot

take 4 more years of that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tellurian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:13 PM
Response to Original message

5. Yes, I agree, he did the right thing..

I'm sure his family is content, he chose to remain a Senator.
Isn't his senate seat up for grabs next year?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #5

7. Sure. Who knows,may be the GOP will find somebody who can

make a respectable score. Right now, this does not seem very likely.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:25 PM
Response to Original message

9. Kerry not running was a smart move.

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 07:26 PM by Kerry2008

But mtnsnake you missed the boat on why. It had nothing to do with his chances of winning, it had everything to do with standing up on the issue of Iraq. Kerry knew we needed more leaders now standing up, and going at this issue full force. He's more equiped to deal with this tough issue in the Senate, instead of on the campaign trail where he'd have the political chains of Presidential politics.

If you listened to John Kerry's Senate floor speech where he announced he wasn't running, how much of that speech was about him not running? Three minutes maybe? The rest of the speech was talking about Iraq.

Kerry knows the issue of Iraq is where his leadership is most needed, and in the Senate. Not another run for the White House.

And I doubt Kerry is thinking about 2012. I'm not so sure even if we lost, and I hope we don't lose, Kerry would run in 2012! John knows he can be a great leader, and is a great leader, in the Senate. And his impact can and will be felt in that chamber of Congress for years to come.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #9

11. Yes, it was, but with all due respect, 008, let's be realistic about the rest

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 07:31 PM by mtnsnake

of what you posted.

His non-chance of winning had tons to do with his decision not to run. The fact that he'll be there for us to fight in the Senate full time is just a bonus for us that comes as a result of his not running.

If Kerry had/has aspirations to be President, there is nothing wrong with him thinking ahead, either, in the event that things don't go as planned for us in 2008.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #11

17. Kerry wouldn't have considered running....

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:01 PM by Kerry2008

If he didn't think it was even worth trying. He had great donors and an established war chest, and the biggest e-mail list out there besides the DNC.

John Kerry knew what battles to fight. This battle on Iraq is one he wants to fight. It's a powerful debate for him because he sees the situation in Iraq morphing into a lot of the same things he saw back when he was in Vietnam and when he came home.

So no, I think you're wrong. And thats being realistic. Kerry himself said 9 out of 10 of his big donors were telling him to run. His team wanted him to run. More importantly up until right before he announced he wasn't, everyone including himself (listen to his tone before he announced, he sounded all but in) thought he was going to run.

His trip to Iraq and meeting Brian Freeman, in my opinion, changed all that. Not whether or not he saw himself overcoming polls a year out before they even mattered.

Iraq's outcome is very important to Senator Kerry. I'm sure it was tough to hang up the Presidential boots, but he knew it was the right thing to do. He now has a big chance in the Senate of being a lead voice on the issue of Iraq, and helping to bring this tragic and messy war to an end.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #17

20. So you're saying that he wouldn't have run, even if he was polling first?

I find that hard to believe. If he was polling above anyone else, there is no way he'd have dropped out of the running, IMO.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #20

23. You are missing the point.

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:18 PM by Kerry2008

First off, "what if" statements aren't reality.

Senator Kerry wasn't polling first. We all know it. But that alone would not persuade Kerry not to run. Kerry has a history of being a fighter, and he's had some pretty tough battles under his belt with Weld and then Dean--at one point double digits behind him.

If Kerry would have been polling first he probably would have announced months ago...Again your statement is "What if" and not reality based.

When it started to sound like Kerry was running he said himself he wasn't looking at polls, he wasn't looking at who else was in the race, he was looking at what was best for his interests and the countries interests. Personally, I'm glad he didn't run. At least now he can remove the chains of Presidential politics, and throw some heavy punches without worrying about media backlash of campaigning for President.

Kerry ran because he wanted to stand up, and be a key leader on ending this war. Sure, you can do that and run for President. But now he doesn't have to worry about what to say, and how to say it to wow voters. He has the sure thing in Senate, knew he would probably be re-elected. And had the opportunity to stand up now, and be the leader we all know he is. Nothing to do with polls, or whether Obama or Hillary were running. If you don't think so, tough. You are wrong. If polls were the measuring stick for candidates deciding to get in or out, Vilsack and Dodd would have never announced.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #23

24. I'm not missing your point. You & I are simply disagreeing

that his place in the polls had something or nothing to do with him not running.

I say it had something, in fact a lot, to do with his decision, and you say it had nothing to do with it.

Agree to disagree.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #24

26. Being as Kerry said his decision wouldn't play to the polls.

I usually believe the person in questions statement when they are a good and honest man.

He was double digits behind Dean, didn't mean he dropped out. At one point with Weld a lot of people felt it was hopeless, but he came back and won. Kerry doesn't listen to polls.

Want my proof? Study his past history, and read any given interview he gave when he was considering running again in 2008. Case closed.

No need to agree to disagree, you want Kerry's decision to be something it wasn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #26

28. Oh boy

No need to agree to disagree, you want Kerry's decision to be something it wasn't

Umm, I think that statement applies to yourself as well. You're the one who wants it to be something it's not. Anything else is just being U*N*R*E*A*L*I*S*T*I*C.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #28

29. Your rebuttal was expected.

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:34 PM by Kerry2008

You've done what you always do here on DU: When someone addresses you with valid points you don't address them and instead pick out something to make a 'smart' comment about to sort of change the subject.

My statement remains. Kerry's history in the past with his last run for President and his re-election campaign against Weld show a history of a man with disregard to polls, and a man willing to listen to his gut. Plus Kerry's own statements before he announced, he said he wouldn't look at polls and again make decisions from his gut.

You can ignore my arguements, but the facts still remain: your case for Kerry not running for President based on polls is weak and lacking at best.

Unrealistic? You refuse to look at Kerry's past, and his own statements. I'm being very realistic.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #29

33. and you've done what you always do

which is to take that place high up on your pedestal like no one else can do and claim that your opinion is the ONLY opinion that counts. In every case, you've tried to turn the simplest things into long, drawn-out tedious arguments that go NO WHERE. All you're interested in is the last word, and since I'm not interested in wasting anymore time on NOTHING with you, then you can simply have it....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #33

35. I didn't present opinion.

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:52 PM by Kerry2008

I laid out why I thought you were wrong about Kerry not running based on polls, and you ignored it like you always do when backed into a corner. And I simply asked you to address my points, and once again you haven't. Instead you accuse me of things, and let out a personal attack.

You called me unrealistic. I'm being realistic, you are not. Unrealistic is ignoring the facts some one presents to you, and instead lashing out at them.

Kerry doesn't look at polls. He didn't against Governor Dean or Weld. He's said countless times in interviews, leading up to his annoucement, he wouldn't look at polls to make his decision. I'm asking you to address what we know about Kerry's past and not focusing on polls, and address his statements leading up to his announcement he wasn't running about not focusing on polls.

This is what I think of your baseless and reality voided attacks: :boring:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #35

39. Nice try

For someone who runs around accusing so many people of this and that, you only need to look into a mirror to see who it is that takes someone's legitimate post and makes feeble attempt after feeble attempt at drawing someone into a bottomless pit of empty back and forth NOTHINGS.

Once again you've succeeded in wasting someone's time by twisting and turning words into utter fiction.

BTW, the likes of you could never in your wildest dreams back me into any corner. Some people can, BUT NOT YOU. All you can do is WASTE TIME BECAUSE YOU TALK ABOUT ZIPPO. You are only interested in going back and forth and trying to get the best of someone with empty rhetoric. One of these days you'll actually succeed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LittleClarkie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #28

41. The thing is, I see his evidence to the contrary,

but your opinion is based more on speculation. Kerry has indeed been dead last before. By your logic, it would have been smart for him to drop out in 2004. But he didn't, and ended up with the nomination.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #41

43. Yes, I am just speculating

As for him coming from behind in 2004, I don't think the same thing could happen this time. Back then he was one of the fresh faces. This time, he's not, and all indications say that a fresh face is wanted for 2008. At lest that's the way I've been reading into it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LittleClarkie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #43

44. I will conceed that things like the botched joke and such played a part

but I do think that there were things he wanted to accomplish now and running for president would have gotten in the way. Things like fighting for an end to the war. I would move that from "gravy" to part of the main course. I think alot of things played a part. So while it might have been smart for the reasons you give, I don't think such considerations were his only reasons, or even his main ones.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #44

46. I think what you and TayTay are saying is valid

as to Kerry wanting to concentrate on fighting against the war and how running for the presidnecy might not allow him to be as effective in doing so.

Just the same, I still think his position in the polls had something to do with his decision not to run....as did the reasons you and TayTay laid out. Maybe you're more right about this than I am. Anyway, more often than not, it's a combination of things, not just one thing or the other.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #46

54. mtnsnake, I don't think the polls played a part in it.

The effects of the botched joke and the negativity probably did. And the lack of people willing to throw him something to float on with people like Hillary Clinton attacking him over nothing probably didn't leave a good taste in his mouth.

Of course Iraq wasn't the sole issue Senator Kerry didn't run. Other elements came into play, I just don't think polls were one of them. His record shows otherwise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TayTay

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #11

18. Ah, yes there is.

He made a promise to the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to take care of business in the US Senate for this state. He is running for re-election to the Senate. He needs to commit to that. The people of Mass do want him to take care of and be a voice for their views on the national level. They also want him to take care of the interests of Massachusetts.

I like John Kerry. I think he would have been an outstanding President. I think he is a great Senator. But, he has passed on a try for '08. Ah, had he gone for this it would have meant a possible 4 years out of a 6 year term running for President. You can't go before the Mass electorate again and say, okay, I might run again for national office in 5 years. Sorry, but no. (I understand that you never say never, but, geez, this is a sitting US Senator. Ah, even Massachusetts needs 2 full time Senators to take care of it's interests in the Congress.)

I would not talk about '12 again. Period. I want Sen. Kerry to continue his work, continue to work on Iraq and getting our troops out and to continue his life-long advocacy for the environment and so forth. But, he is asking for re-election as a Senator from Massachusetts. That is a full time commitment.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #18

22. If he had been polling at #1, do you really think he wouln't have gone for the nod?

I think the polls had a lot to do with his decision, and I'm giving him credit for his choice not to run because of it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TayTay

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #22

25. I think he was polling at 5-6% in 2003

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:22 PM by TayTay

and kept at it. I don't know about supposing, but that's what he actually did when the numbers were low the last time.

No guesswork involved. That was what he did. I think this time, he didn't want to run. This is a different year. Times have changed, as they always do. I think that the nastiness of last fall and the fall-out from pronoun-gate showed that. I think that if a person runs for President they have to want it more than anything else in their lives. They have to wake up wanting it, go to sleep wanting it, think about it 24/7 and be relentless. After last fall's event, I saw no evidence of that. People who don't want it real, real, real bad, can't run. The shitstorms are not worth it. That mental armor that gets you through the shitstorms has to be there. It simply does. I didn't see it on Kerry anymore. I honestly think he believes that he can do more for his state and his country as a Senator in this cycle. I also bet that this is a deep relief. If that is true, then it means the 'want it real bad' was not in place. No one can run for President without this. It is as necessary as money.

That, for me, was the ballgame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cadmium

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #11

19. Kerry was not running so he actually could not drop out. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #19

21. Let's not get technical or anything. lol

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cadmium

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #21

30. Ha Like basketball-It would be an interesting playoff

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:52 PM by cadmium

the people who arent running (incl undeclared) vs the people who are.

Democratic League
Clark, B.Clinton, Feingold, Gore and Kerry on one team vs Biden, H. Clinton, Edwards, Obama, and Richardson on the other
(too bad Bill Bradley retired)

Republic League
Allen, J.Bush, Gingrich, Hagel, and Schwartznegger vs Brownback, Giuliani, Hunter, McCain, and Romney

Then the winning team from each league plays for the championship.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Silence Dogood

(215 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #19

36. I'm beginning to think he couldn't get funding.

After the botched joke fiasco, the heavy hitters were too frightened to back a damaged candidate. Leaving a tremendous void in the bankrolling field. Competitors quickly filled that void with firm commitments from corporate backers. Kerry isolated himself from the mainstream and suffered the worst for it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #36

38. That's complete hogwash!

Campaign aides and allies of Senators Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) seized on the announcement and began dialing the 150 or so Kerry loyalists who had raised millions for his 2004 Presidential bid. "Everybody had their lists of Kerry people, and they were calling immediately," says John Roos, chief executive of Palo Alto (Calif.) law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and a Kerry fund-raiser who now supports Obama.

Kerry's loss has primarily been Obama's gain. The newcomer has secured commitments from 27 of the 41 former Kerry backers who have thus far declared allegiance to a new candidate, says a Kerry fund-raiser who is not aligned with either Clinton or Obama. Clinton has nabbed the other 14. None of the backers has yet joined any of the other Democratic hopefuls. "Senator Kerry told people that they ought to follow their own conscience," says Jay Dunn, national finance director for Kerry's political action committee.

Pinning down fund-raisers early is one sign of a campaign's viability. Obama's success has surprised some, given his relative inexperience and Clinton's deep ties to the Democratic Party.

Clinton's Senate campaign has $14 million on hand, which the senator is free to transfer to her Presidential campaign; Obama has only about $755,000. Clinton and Obama set up Presidential exploratory committees in January, but they don't have to disclose contributions until they formally enter the race.

A spokesman for Clinton says fund-raising has been strong at all levels. An Obama spokesman says the senator is grateful for the support he's received.

Although most fund-raisers stuck with Kerry until January, they had been courted by Clinton and Obama for months. Mark Gorenberg, a venture capitalist at Hummer Winblad Venture Partners in San Francisco and Kerry's 2004 California fund-raising chair, met with both contenders in January and chose Obama. "I found him to be extremely charismatic, a natural leader in the same sort of way that John Kennedy was or Bill Clinton was," Gorenberg says. David Geffen and his DreamWorks partners Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg will hold a Beverly Hills soir�e for Obama on Feb. 20. Billionaire financier George Soros has endorsed the Illinois senator.

Kerry's former New York finance director, Hassan Nemazee, was also wooed by both and says he's backing Clinton because "she's readiest to be President on Day One." Other Clinton supporters:Steven Rattner, managing principal of private equity firm Quadrangle Group, and Hollywood legend Elizabeth Taylor. Spielberg also will host a Clinton fund-raiser.

more...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Silence Dogood

(215 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #38

40. Yep, looks like the reason he waited so long to opt out. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Apollo11

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #9

67. Kerry took 3 minutes to say "I'm not running"?

I guess by his standards - that's kinda quick ... ;-)

Sorry - cheap shot ...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

jcrew2001

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:31 PM
Response to Original message

12. Damn

Damn, Barney Frank would have made a great Senator if Kerry had run.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tellurian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #12

13. I doubt Barney has senatorial aspirations..

He seems pretty comfortable right where he is..

When does Kerry's term expire? Is it next year or the year after?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #13

14. 2008.

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 07:46 PM by Mass

And I think you are right for Barney Frank. This would have meant dropping his seniority in the House and his chairmanship.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tellurian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #14

15. Barney's practically and institution in the House..:) nm

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

AtomicKitten

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #15

16. w00t

:)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

jcrew2001

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #13

72. 08

Kerry's term expires in 2008, that is why he could not run for both president and senate and had to decide.

Barney was planning on running for kerry's seat in 2004 - if kerry won that is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

politicasista

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:26 PM
Response to Original message

27. Because it threatens other candidates?

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:38 PM by politicasista

Like Hillary?

We need to support Kerry's efforts in getting out of Iraq, and as a senator, instead of starting unnecessary flamewars.

The ABK spin is unnecessary.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #27

31. You're saying I tried to start an unnecessary flame war? You're out to lunch

This was nothing more than me speculating what could happen down the road for Kerry in terms of possibly running again....and how it related to his decision not to run this time, and I think I'm right. If you don't agree, then just say so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

politicasista

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #31

32. I am not out to lunch. Just wondering

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 08:45 PM by politicasista

why you are so worried about him runnning in 2012. One election at a time. We don't know if there is going to be anything left after 2008. Hopefully we can put a Dem in there, but I would rather see how 08 plays out.

In addition, there are supporters that are now at peace with his decision and you saying that it's a smart move makes it seem like you are glad he's out because he was a serious threat to other candidates and added a lot to the debates, but he is continuing (and will continue) to serve as a senator and hold this criminal administration accountable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #32

37. I'm not at all "worried" about it. I was only speculating out of interest.

You definitely misinterpreted me if you think that I said it was a smart move by him only because I'm "glad he's out" as you say. I said it was a smart move by him to drop out only because I think it was a smart move by him, period, both politically and personally. He had too much to lose by running in the primaries this time with little chance to win. Unlike 2003, where he was a fresh face and could come from behind to catch Dean, I didn't see something like that happening this time. I still think he could come back in 2012 if by some unfortunate circumstance we don't win in 2008.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #31

34. Kerry's quest for President is over.

End of story, book closed.

Your speculation about 2012 is just speculating. Not in touch with fact or reality. If Kerry was going to run for President again he would have in 2008, but that train has left the station. He's got other things to work on.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

karynnj

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #31

65. Let's get real

This is at least the fouth time in the last 2 days you have gone out of your way to knock Kerry. Don't pretend innocence - you know precisely what you are doing.

The fact is that you and your annoying cohorts are primarily doing this to hurt Kerry supporters. The fact is we are proud to have supported a very good man and statesman. We are proud of that and we will continue to support him because of who he is. It is more satisfying to support someone you can believe in than to support someone just because they can win.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #65

66. It's driving you nuts that you can't get me to say anything bad about Kerry HERE

in this thread, which is totally sincere. That should be obvious to anyone who knows how to read.

I've seen you do it a million times...going into threads, playing the goody-goody 2-shoes type, while you make cagey attempts at getting the OP'er off the subject and into a back-door flame. And then you have the gall to make like it's all the other guy's fault. Your as obvious as night and day.

This thread was not started as a means of bashing Kerry. Anyone who knows me knows I don't beat around the bush. If I want to bash a politician, criticize them, or question them, I just go ahead and do it. If anything, this thread was more complimentary to him than anything. Everyone knew that, but you and a couple others just couldn't stand it that I was discussing Kerry's decision without bashing him in this thread, so you tried to do your best to say things that would cause me to say something bad about him. Notice I didn't take the bait, and it's making you koo-koo that you can't get me to criticize Kerry here in this thread. I think you just dwell on people criticizing John Kerry. In fact I know you do, not that you'd ever admit it. After watching you storm in here in a thread that had nothing to do with criticizing Kerry, it's easy to see that you're just not happy unless someone is bashing Kerry so you can defend him.

Don't worry, though. You'll have plenty of opportunities to do so, as there will be other threads that really do criticize the senator. This isn't one of them, no matter how hard you try to make it that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tellurian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #66

68. Excellent characterization, mtnsnake,

We all supported Sen Kerry when he ran in 04'. AK made a valid point of some of his supporters claiming ownership of opinions regarding Sen Kerry. As I said in a previous lengthy post regarding this issue. They defended him to the point of disgust-- ad nauseum. They alienated more people than generating Kerry support. A good analogy is, having a housekeeper that answers the doorbell when guests arrive. She is rude and contentious to them the minute she opens the door. How many guests would feel welcome in that house. How long would they want to stay in your company. First impressions are important and for continued open dialog with potential supporters is key to growing a huge following. There was never a followup on that aspect or a thought of entertaining a change of strategy. Fortuitously, Sen Kerry ended the torment by opting not to run.

And thanks for the above post putting that poster in her place. This is your thread, therefore, your house.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #68

69. Thank you

And thanks for the above post putting that poster in her place

In a thread like this, it shouldn't have even had to come to that. But all too often, certain posters jump in...and instead of attacking the post, they attack the poster. In this case, neither should've been attacked, just debated. Most posters did just that, but a couple of them just couldn't resist trying to make it something it was not....just so they could get their "defend him at all costs" fix satisified. Posters like them would no doubt be a lot happier if I had simply bashed their man, which is something I didn't do here. It's funny...praising Kerry here makes them madder than when I've criticized him in other threads for his campaign. Figure that. lol

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tellurian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #69

70. You're entirely, welcome-

And you make a good point.

Then throw Nurse Ratchett into the mix and you get WAA-WAA WEE-WAA! :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:22 PM
Response to Original message

42. I disagree. I feel kerry could have done very well once the "real" race

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 09:32 PM by wisteria

began and the policy issues and the debates were addressed. Maybe, it was all to soon after the last elections. Wounds haven't healed and Kerry has taken a lot of unfair heat for Bush and the lackadaisical Democratic party. The Repubs kept laying it on thick because he was still challenging Bush. And many democrats didn't appreciate his efforts. Something or someone of prestige,conviction and stature is still missing from this race. The people in Iowa mentioned it in a Washington times piece from last weekend. I believe that something could of been Senator Kerry. He would have added the seriousness necessary to run for the highest office in America and he would of challenged the others to not just sound good, but to actually provide something of substance behind all the rhetoric.
No doubt in my mind what so ever that there was a huge effort to take him out of the running before the primaries even began because there was concern about how well he might actually do. Up until he was sabotaged with the missing "pronoun" he was gaining momentum and people were giving him a second look.
As for 2008, well good luck to all those running, however IMO, none compare to Senator Kerry and where he could have taken this country. One of them should win it though, I would think so anyway.
As for 2012, that is way to far out there to speculate on. Personally, I would be happy to support another run by the senator,it doesn't even have to be 2012, but that doesn't mean he would even consider it if he is accomplishing enough in the senate to achieve his goals. Maybe he has had his fill of the bullsh*t and the disrespect he gets for all his efforts on our behalf.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #42

45. Maybe he has had his fill. Only he knows that.

And maybe you're right that he would've done better this time than I'm thinking he would have. Regardless, I still think it was a good move for him not to try again this time for the reasons I already stated AND for some of the reasons other posters have stated. I also think he could be a player again in 2012, but only if things don't work out for us this coming election. Time does a lot of things...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

AtomicKitten

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:41 PM
Response to Original message

47. poor mtnsnake

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #47

49. yeah

Here I am all innocent and everything.

At least tonight I am, anyhow.

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #49

52. Oh, come on, who are you kidding. You miss all the Kerry threads and

the opportunity to challenge us supporters. Seems DU isn't the same without Kerry around to run. Why not speculate why Bayh decided not to run or why Warner dropped out and why Clark or Gore haven't been to anxious to declare yet, if there intention is to do so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #52

55. How's it going, wisteria.

C'mon now. I'm in one of those rare serious moods I don't get into too often. What can I say. I'll try to do better in the future to be more like my regular self, though. ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #49

53. Innocence and ignorance are two different things.

The simple fact you're already speculating on Kerry's prospects for 2012 is laughable.

One thing is for sure: We must win in 2008!!

Lord help us all if we don't!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

IndianaGreen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:48 PM
Response to Original message

48. I totally disagree! Kerry dropping out has hurt the Democratic Party.

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 09:48 PM by IndianaGreen

As one that was not enthused about Kerry's candidacy in 2004, I have to admit that Kerry has more than redeemed himself for his IWR vote and for the stupid comments he made in 2004 (particularly about Venezuela). Kerry has been at the forefront fighting Bush's power grabs! Kerry filibustered Alito, much to the consternation of Harry Reid. Kerry joined Feingold in a troop withdrawal resolution, while Hillary & Co. were taking the "safe road." In Hillary's defense, she didn't join the asshole Lieberman in defending Bush!

I wish Kerry would have run, not because he would have won (which I don't think he would have), but because his voice needed to be heard!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mtnsnake

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #48

50. According to his ardent supporters here, they think his voice will be heard more than ever

now that he's decided not to run.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

IndianaGreen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #50

51. The fact hat he is not running for President, his voice won't be heard

We need more voices speaking out against the war, not less.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #51

56. Check out this!

www.setadeadline.com

Senator Kerry will still be a force for what is right. He does not intend to fade away. Instead of focusing his energy on a run for president, he has refocused them on bringing our troops home and challenging the other candidates to be true leaders.

I too wish he was running though. I can't help being disappointed and cynical at how all this played out from 2004 till now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

IndianaGreen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #56

62. Signed up for it!

Thanks for the link!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #62

63. Great! Ignore my later post. n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PresidentObama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #51

57. IG, I disagree.

His voice will be heard, and more forcefully now that he's not a candidate for President.

He doesn't have any political chains at all. He can tackle this thing head first, and not worry about any sort of backlash from the media playing Presidential politics.

He'll be an important voice in the Senate on this war, and I think he's going to add a lot of substance and credibility to this debate to end the war!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

IndianaGreen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #57

59. I hope you are right, but you know how the MSM is...

if you are not a player, they just won't report it at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #59

61. There is work in that direction and the use of the blogs to help out.

check this out,

www.setadeadline.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zulchzulu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #48

64. I agree with you

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 10:39 PM by zulchzulu

I don't think Kerry would have done badly at all in the primaries once we got closer to that time. I'm very disappointed that he isn't running; not for his sake, but for the way we tend to attack candidates with gotcha garbage that has no real relevance to what is needed to be President.

In another sense, I'm relieved for him and his family that they don't have to put up with the mainstream media bullshit. They even lied about how he said he wasn't running by saying he was all 'teared up" and couldn't finish sentences because he was crying...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Hippo_Tron

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:11 PM
Response to Original message

58. An election we thought we couldn't lose? Only the naive thought that

2004 was a 50/50 shot at best.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-01-07 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #58

60. I thought 2004 was going to be extremely tough, that is why Clinton,

Edited on Thu Feb-01-07 10:19 PM by wisteria

and Biden didn't enter the 04 race.It is easier to run in an open election than against an incumbent president and a war time one at that. 04 was never going to be easy. I never felt we had it locked up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

blm

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 10:20 AM
Response to Original message

71. BALONEY - EVERYONE AT DNC AND BIGNAME DEMS EXPECTED TO LOSE AFTER 9-11.

.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wisteria

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-02-07 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #71

73. Yep. And that is why some "other" big name Dem's didn't run.

It also explains why they offered Kerry so little genuine support. However, they sure laid on the blame when he lost though didn't they? Hypocrites!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue Apr 30th 2024, 10:17 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate

About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC