So, about that 2008 race

Just a quick note before things start to really get going on that race. We are all going to start, sooner or later, to pick a candidate among those who are running. We won't always like or understand each other's choices. But that's okay. That's what makes it interesting.

I was wondering if we could have some ground rules in here, so that we minimize any potential hurt feelings among what has been a nice group of people. I have no yet chosen a candidate, though I am leaning toward someone at this point. Goodie for me. However, that doesn't mean that I want to shut out talk on other people or cram my eventual choice down the throats of others. (Hey, some of us in here are big loudmouths who make a lot of noise. Okay, maybe it's just me, but I don't want to overpower a debate or make someone feel as if I don't respect their opinion on a candidate. We have all spent too much time together for that to happen.)

I still have the same concern about the issues that I have had since, ahm, I think forever, with the horrible addition of worrying constantly about the Iraq War. There are other, highly knowledgeable people in this group who also have well-formed opinions about the issues and I want to hear about them, particularly if they are leaning toward another candidate. That's healthy discussion and could lead to healthy debate. (And the delightful prospect of having those great arguments in here that are actually about something rather than about personalities and stuff.

Anyway, I think we should talk about this and see if we can figure out a way to talk about this going forward and maybe establish some ground rules or something so that we minimize the possible hurt feelings. This group has been incredibly wonderful to have around. I respect and admire the people in here and I would like to make sure that that atmosphere stays going forward into '08. So, any ideas on this, cuz the storms are coming.

Oh, and btw, I will absolutely back the nominee of the Democratic Party in '08. That is a given, no matter what. I am a lifelong Democrat, I will back the nominee of the Party in '08. Absolutely. No matter who the Dem is, no matter what feelings I have about them, I know they will be 5 times better than any Repub.

I'm taking a break from presidential politics. I don't have a favorite among those who have declared; I sympathize completely with the cartoon that says, "Is it too early to hate all of the candidates?" I'll support the 2008 Dem nominee, but I'm not interested in backing anyone in the primary (unless Al Gore runs), because I'm deeply unimpressed so far. So I'm just going to stay out of any discussions of it.

To me, the Kerry group is about John Kerry. If he endorses someone, I want to hear about it. Or if it seems clear that a particular candidate would be good or bad for JK's agenda, I'll be curious to hear the analysis. Otherwise, I don't care if people who come here to talk about JK also like Obama or Clinton or Edwards. I guess if people feel that this forum is the appropriate place to talk about people other than JK, even when there's no connection to JK, I'll just skip those threads. (ETA: If the whole group decides one person is good, then I'll get curious to see why that consensus emerged, but I'm not going to get into the trenches.)

ETA: It occurs to me that people who like Clinton or Obama might be hurt by what could be seen as bashing, when we complain about them sniping at JK. I don't know if we need any guidelines to prevent arguments. My gut feeling is that we don't need any restrictions on whether/how we complain about other candidates insulting JK, though, because he's the one we're here to support.

Senator Kerry, why bring it into this forum. This is the JK forum after all. Actually, I would rather not hear about other candidate here.

I also agree with Tay Tay that this is a group of nice, very intelligent people and it is one of the few places on DU where I have seen substantive discussions on policy issues.

I think most of us are here for the issues as well as the personality/character of John Kerry. Although most of us likely agreed on many issues with Kerry's positions before we knew much about Senator Kerry, it is also he likely has influenced our positions on many of the issues. This happened because he has consistently made an effort to explain the reasons behind his positions.

I find it fascinating that he has spoken of a book on Iraq that explains the underlying factors in their culture and religion that impact the situation today. His list of books on the environment is equally interesting. I got "Collapse" which deals with factors that cause civilizations to fail. Having visited places, like Egypt, and wondered how they could have lost the position they had and not really gotten answers from the tour quids, this is fascinating. Following Kerry now is like a combination adult education class and a call to activism led by a charismatic trusted leader.

I think we should be able to agree to disagree on the 2008 candidate - knowing that we all will likely have a favorite at some point who we all know is not our first choice. Although both will occur, we would likely be better off:
- Trying to avoid the candidate fights that don't involve Kerry out of here. (Yes, I do see my post speaking of the Hillary/Obama sniping. After reading this, I'm not sure it added anything to this group.)
- Avoid proselytizing. Once someone really becomes excited with someone else, there will be a tendency to bring it here. While it might be interesting months from now to have a thread that lets everyone explain their choice or non-choice, we have to keep in mind that Kerry is the only thing we all have in common.
- We need to make sure that everyone remains comfortable, while retaining the ability to defend Kerry at least here. More importantly, we need to have each others backs, no matter who we end up supporting. I really trust the sincerity of everyone in this group and no matter who they support in the future, I am certain it will be in good faith. I think that may be because of the way we all supported Kerry - at a time when it was not the popular thing to do. We can all name people (or rodents and snakes) playing political games, but no one here is that.

Tay, although I have said that I can't support one candidate, I know that if she is the nominee, one of the people asking people to vote for her will be Senator Kerry. He will very likely make an excellent case for why she is head and shoulders better than the Republican. He will be able to do this because her goals will likely be more consistent with his than any Republican. His effort will likely be more whole hearted than that of many Clintonistas in 2004 because he really will be doing it out of love of country, not political expediency - and he will be compelling.

I haven't really picked a candidate yet, although I have to say I'm sort of leaning too, but only in the sense that I haven't seen any strong disqualifiers against that one person yet, where I do with all the others. Which means that in the interests of peace and harmony I would probably keep my opinions of those others, at least their disqualifiers, out of this forum as much as I can - this is the John Kerry forum, after all.

I'm not as good a Democrat as you. There is at least one candidate who, if the party is so screwed up as to nominate that person, I would have to seriously re-consider my commitment to the party. Well, I already am re-considering it, after the treatment they've given Kerry. They had solid gold - absolute solid gold - in Kerry, in terms of his positions and his policies to make this country and the world a better place - and they blew it. A party or politician that doesn't respect John Kerry, does not respect my values either. What to do about that, in a two-party system, is another question, that I'll admit I haven't figured out yet.

Anyway, it's good to have this conversation now.

I guess to sum up my druthers, it would be to keep discussion in this forum to supporting JK's (and THK's) efforts, and leave the presidential circus out of here. If one of the candidates disses Kerry or acknowledges Kerry (or his work), we certainly should discuss that here if someone wants to.

I have an obligation to fulfill though for another three years, so I can't in good conscious just toss over the party.

are the same as yours.
I am trying hard to stay neutral in the primaries as long as possible (with the exception of my adamant opposition to one person, an antipathy that is so strong that my primary vote is inclined to be a strategic one, for whichever candidate has the best chance of defeating that person). Right now at least, I'm trying to keep myself informed, and also uncommitted. I consider myself a journalist or anthropologist studying what has become for me an alien species: the American voter.

I agree that Kerry is solid gold, not only in terms of positions and policies, but also in terms of integrity and depth of character generally, and also in his potential to be a truly fine president. I also have been shaken by the course of events over the last 2 or 3 years, and I have to say I've never been more disappointed in my fellow Dems than I have been the last 6 months. To me, the lack of understanding of or appreciation for what we lost in November 2004 is one more sign of the sickness of our country, and, I'm afraid I need to add, my own party. I really do believe that our country has lost its way.
If I'm committed to anything right now, it's to making sure that Sen. Kerry gets the credit for his efforts, now, then, and in the future, that he deserves. I always say that I'm against litmus tests. However, I have to admit that treatment of Sen. Kerry has become for me a litmus test against which I test individual candidates, and the health of my party and my country. Until people really come to understand, and publicly acknowledge, what a treasure JK is and what a good president he would have made, and until the Dem candidates have the generosity of spirit and just plain sense of justice to give Kerry credit ,both for his 2004 run (and for the difficult obstacles that he had to face, and for the fact that it will be much easier for the Dem candidate in 2008) and for what he's doing now, I honestly don't have a lot of political hope for my party or my country. In some really fundamental sense, I remain heartbroken by everything that's transpired from November 2004 onward.


Sure, I'll vote, and, in the presidential race, I'm likely to vote for the Dem. nominee, whoever it is (except for candidate X: that would be pushing it, even for me, a second generation rabid Democrat). But I've so far declined all requests for financial support and volunteer work for Dem presidential candidates. I'll be busy working for things I truly believe in: that is, various general causes, , and, above all, for Sen. Kerry's reelection to the senate

This is the Kerry group, and we're all big supporters of Senator Kerry. We may have disagreements about whom should be the 08' nominee, but I really enjoy coming here and talking to other Kerrycrats about the fine Senator from MA! I sincerely hope this race won't get in the way of that type of discussion, as I've come to respect so many of you for your fire and passion.

We're bonded by the Senator, and we all know we'd rather have him in the WH or running for WH!! But he's made his decision, and he's moved on. I hope this group can continue to unite around John, and not focus so much on 2008 until the time comes to support the nominee!!

BTW, neither one of my top two candidates are running yet. So if Clark or Gore doesn't enter, that means none of my top three candidates (Kerry, Gore& Clark) will be in this race. Sigh!!

Especially this early.

Even if JK were in it, I wouldn't want to be involved this early.

But I have no objection to people discussing other candidates. I think it makes sense to compare candidates to Kerry's agenda or our own agenda.

Mostly, I think this is a great group of people who have created a home here for two years. So like any home that has diferences of opinions, we should make sure that we debate respectfully and we leave personalities out of it. And we should always accept that others do have an emotional reaction (good or bad) to candidates that essentially fits into their own schematic of things.

Isn't that why we all ended up in the Kerry forum?

Kerry fulfilled our own individual schematics (views) of life. And even when we disagreed with Kerry or others here on some issues, we've always been able to leave the anger aside because for the most part, we all recognised we were working with more things alike than different. (Actually, that's what bothers me about the primaries thus far! The choices are mostly talking the same game. Yet we have an overcrowded field. And it's sucking up the money like a vacuum gone hay-wire. I just think these long primaries are a waste of time and money and there should be a law against it.)

But in terms of feelings in this forum...Groundrules to suggest:

1. Accept everyone's choice.
2. Don't attack the person. Think about what the person is posting and maybe give yourself a time away from posting before you reply to a person's post if you feel the original post was harsh. By the same token, you could say, "This is how I read what you wrote. (blah, blah, blah)...Did you intend for it to sound that way?"
3. Proof read your own posts to see if they sound harsh or beligerant before posting.
4. Offer support or rebuttal for your candadate's or other candidates positions as they equate to Kerry's goals.
5. Still joke or laugh in here so that it doesn't become all-primary driven 24/7.

I don't know...that's all I can think of for now.

I think that the deep support that everyone here has for JK goes beyond the political. I think it says something about who and how we are, and how we think, judge issues and people, etc. Maybe I am naive about it (a reminder that I was not around, not here and not anywhere else similar in the previous primary season), but I just cannot imagine things getting nasty here, even if we end up supporting different candidates. To start with, the support would be less than enthusiastic, the enthusiasm being reserved for what unfortunately cannot be :cry:, and therefore likely to engender less passion. Moreover as others have already mentioned, most if not all of us will probably end up supporting whoever is endorsed by Kerry, assuming he does endorse somebody eventually. Not necessarily because we blindly follow his lead, but because of the well deserved trust we put in him. I have my own mild preference at this point, I already mentioned it several times, but I will definitely give anybody else a very attentive look, especially if HE gets Kerry's endorsement. This being said, I would personally and maybe selfishly be sorry if the ground rules will be such that discussion related to the whole election process will be limited only to what directly or indirectly is Kerry related, and if other discussions will be frowned upon. I very seldom post anywhere else. I do some reading when I have the time, partly to keep informed, but mostly for entertainment (masochistic entertainment at times). There are some people whose ideas are worth reading in the other DU forums, but most of the posts I am sorry to say are at best silly. Which is definitely not the case in this forum. This is the kind of "natural selection" through our understanding of JK that I was alluding to at the beginning. Even the silliness here is worth reading, because is smart and truly amusing silliness. I do hope I do not sound too.... I am not even sure what word to use here, something bad :-), arrogant maybe, because I am not. But I think that the average IQ in this group is a pretty good one, not to mention the knowledge and the heart. I hope that OT discussion will continue to be allowed, if not I will surely abide by the rules, but I will also surely miss the interaction. As I said, terribly selfish of me :blush:.

I also don't think it helps when some, "monday morning quarterback" others chances of winning.

That said. I have no preferences at this time deeming it way to early and suspect that I will just sit out this entire election process for 08 concentrating instead on local candidates in my area. I have no enthusiasm for anyone running and I don't like the media's role in pushing certain candidates on us and presenting them as either the next coming and others as being so experienced.I don't care for all the money involved and I truly resent money being the prerequisite to winning the presidency. I will keep my money in my pocket this time and let the whole process play out without me. In the end, I will vote for a Democrat.

However, a good point has been brought up. Why should we be discussing other candidates in the JK forum if he hasn't endorsed them and they have no association with JK?

As usual, great post, Tay Tay. I am finally entering the "acceptance stage" that JK will not be our Presidential candidate in 2008 and starting to lean towards supporting a particular candidate, though, in my typical lurker fashion, not yet ready to advocate for HIM (OK, so now you know it's NOT Hillary). My first reaction upon hearing that JK was not running was to sit this one out, but then I thought "what would JK do?". He's been inspiring me to dust myself off and get back into the fight whether I like it or not since he went back to work after the '04 election as committed and stronger than ever. As you noted, the issues we all so passionately care about still exist and cry out for our involvement. Even though other candidates will never inspire us as JK does, I think he would expect that we all stay engaged in the political process, support whoever we each think is the best candidate and continue fighting for change.

I know I've been a bit uncomfortable when leaning towards a candidate that some were bashing here. Right now, I remain uncommitted to any particular candidate. I'm waiting for one of them to impress me. This may take several forays up to NH to hear them speak in person. I might ask for one exception to be made to the rule, for she-who-shall-not-be-named. Do we all pretty much loathe her? If she is the eventual nominee (dear Gawd, please no...), I would hope any bashing of her would halt at that time.

And yes, no matter who the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him/her. Even if I have to don a gas mask before entering the polling place to do so. This country can't take another rethug in the WH, not after all the damage * has done.

who I can not, and will not vote for, even in the general election. Just can't do it. She and the people she surrounds herself with are just too ethically and morally challenged, and (IMO) her nomination would damage the Democratic party for a very long time. (Gee, who could I possibly be talking about?) If this candidate is our party's nominee, I will simply refrain from voting for president in the general for the first since I have been eligible to vote.

I appreciate what you're saying though Tay, and I promise to be good. No hard feeling with anyone who does decide to support the candidate who I cannot. I don't have a favorite yet, and probably won't for several months to come. (Although if Gore decides to enter the race, that would change things completely. I would work my ass off to see him (re)elected.)

I agree Tay, it's a good idear to bring this up now.

(I agree, Tay, that we need to stay civil here--it's our main claim to fame at DU.)

But also, outside of our own forum, we can extend this. Those of us who are identified as Kerrycrats by our avatars and/or sig lines will promote a spirit of unity by speaking well about other politicians candidates when we see things we like. It shows that it is possible to like and appreciate the actions and words of others besides your own personal favorite. That's a lot better than bashing what we don't like; we can be a positive force and good role models. Just like JK has inspired us to be by his example.

In that spirit, I'm going to really, really try not to jump on any Dem-bashing bandwagons, as fun as it might be. A healthy debate of the issues, yes, but not personal attacks. I'll limit it to alternately laughing at or yelling at them in the privacy of my own TV room!

I think. I hope. We're all adults (or young adults). Let's just try to remember that we all came here for pretty much the same reason and we have that in common at least.

Doesn't matter who anybody picks for a candidate. Seems to me the important thing is to hammer away at them on the war. Do not let this off the front burner for one second. Biden has actually moved up in my eyes because he appears to be working on ending the war as soon as possible. I think it's way too early for the campaign too, but there's one person to thank for that, Miss Inevitable. Seems to me we either get involved, or concede her candidacy and more importantly, HER PLATFORM. I can't imagine anything more discouraging to the American people than a platform of health care some day, maybe, but we'll end those violent video games right away! We need real progress right now, we can't wait any longer.

As of now I am not for anyone and especially will never be for a certain person who in my view will only lead to more of the same in DC.

As for the primaries I would only cast a vote for one other person and he so far he is not in the race or should we say circus. I will however write in JK and that is my gut and heart vote.

I, like many others here am very upset at the Democratic party right now. I think Dean has done a super job at the DNC and really has tried to bring the party back to the people. I think that the DC insiders are doing nothing but harm.

I will vote in the general and it will be a gut and heart vote. I am not a ABBR type voter, the candidate has to bring the people to the table and not just the politics. So, depending on who ends up in the Democrat's ticket and I will consider what JK has to say, I would still cast a vote and that vote could also be a write-in.

As far as conversation on the JK forum, I will probably stay out of it and if I do choose to join in, it will only be to point out facts about a certain candidate.

It is still early and I had not even chose JK yet at this time in the cycle. I think what stands out in all the Kerrycrats is that we are not bandwagon jumpers and that we truly dig deep to find the right candidate for such an important position.

I use to think the office of the president use to mean a lot, I no longer think that way. I think the last 2 decades+ has been more about who to put in there to be controlled by the powers of the insiders on both sides of the aisle. The office has been diminished and to me that is very sad for the country.

The presidency has become the best candidate in photo-ops. The position is no more than that of a stand-in for those really controlling things behind the scenes.

I really like your comment.

"I use to think the office of the president use to mean a lot, I no longer think that way. I think the last 2 decades+ has been more about who to put in there to be controlled by the powers of the insiders on both sides of the aisle. The office has been diminished and to me that is very sad for the country."

You may also have friends or activists who say to you 'get over it.' Even without a personal investment in the greatness of a Kerry presidency, people who don't learn our recent history of disunity, voting meltdown, and candidate misinformation, are doomed to repeat the history and loss. Yet I fall on deaf ears, frustrated with lack of interest in Kerry, or doing it better this next time.

Some automatically think 2008 is a Dem cycle. Just like the landslide Kerry was to have won against a wartime incumbent, during an orange alert campaign of fear, all by his lonesome, plus a few good friends. What is any different this time, when the media is still fawning over McCain, America's mayor, and the mittens. To all you citizens of the Bay State who think Mitt laughable, think moderate seeming, pretty family, who looks good in a sweater. The fanatical right still vote as directed.

Bush and Cheney may have negatives, but we haven't come near to burying Norquist or tax and spend liberal.

Will we as a party behave like a national campaign is hard to win, despite positions. And frankly, the only one I don't trust is Hillary, who Robert Parry nailed so correctly yesterday. We were so busy defending the Clintons, we missed all that we really lost during those terms to endless compromise, and not the goood kind.

In New York, we are being forced to get involved a long way before we'd like. Luckily, I have election reform as immediately needy, before we elect anyone.

We'll be respectful on this forum, given our namesake, and probable lack of investment in anyone as much as Kerry.

I expect JK will be somewhat involved in races other than his own, so that's something to remember.

We HAVE to get a greater majority in the Senate. To me, the GOP has become the Party of Congressional Irrelevance. How many times did Bill Frist use his power to shift power to the executive branch? And that's just one example. A Democratic Senate with some teeth might actually be the best thing for this country.

We will try to stay out of the Hillary steamroller as long as possible, and for all the difficulties we are having at 49 Senators, we need the Senate. Chairs are good for the direction and publicity, but all else is difficult.

Our own state legislature is called the most dysfunctional in the country, with its three man in a room-Gov., Assembly and Senate leaders. Very difficult to change the self-serving status quo.

Here I go and start up a thread and then my internet connection goes away. I did not plan this this way. Sigh! My regular internet access is not going through today and, as anyone who has tried to call me on my cell phone at night knows, I have terrible cell coverage on the Sprint card. (1 1/2 paltry bars.)

I had no intention of not responding to what was put up here, but I may not be able to respond to anything until I get the cable back. Ah, again, I never would have posted this if I had known I would have coveragus-interruptus. Sigh! (It took 15 minutes for me to get this one post up. Sigh!)

Ahm,.... to be continued?

OR you can prevent a flogging by bringing us dark chocolate the next time we meet up!

This was a necessary, and timely thread, but I have to admit it left me incredibly depressed.
One thought cheered me up, though: Congress gets back to work tomorrow. That means REAL news and something truly useful to read and think about. Just in the nick of time for me.

I was thinking of my own words in here about candidates not named Kerry. I don't think I was at my best in making those comments. I am interested in seeing some of the other candidates through the eyes of sane people who have opinions I respect. That is the start of a real dialogue. I am only a faint leaner on someone right now, which really doesn't count. But, I think there are people who will choose over the course of the next several months and I want to make sure that they know I won't jump all over them because I have a personal grievance against someone. (I don't want to do that anymore. I want to take my own advice and 'get over myself.')

Funny, but I wasn't thinking about Her. I had in mind a Him that I had been rather rude about. Same principle though.

I know that we have a good group in here and that we all get along and I think we can continue to as we explore the issues and candidates of '08. But you know, sometimes I just up and say 'I love you' to my kids or husband, and they do the same to me. We know we all love each other, but sometimes, it's still nice to hear the words. Sometimes, it's a good thing to just say that and to remember that we mean it.

This is indeed primarily a John Kerry Forum about John Kerry. But let's face it -- it's a hell of a lot more than that. We were lost souls looking for friends post November '04 when the cool thing to do was to bash the former nominee who didn't quite make it across the finish line. All of us saw something special in him that simply would not die the day after the election. So we came together for some solace, and it grew from there.

I guess I'm willing to take some risks -- I would like to continue to discuss '08 news with folks here, because you're my best blogger friends. I don't want to go on bloody kos or the main boards of DU to talk honestly and openly about what's going on -- I want to talk to you people. Because there's a lot of smart and insightful people here and you've all taught me a thing or two over these last couple of years. I suppose the only rule we should impose on ourselves is the same standard we asked from others criticizing Kerry -- stick to the facts and back it up with links. Opinions should be based only on facts, or if it's just based on a "feeling", be frank about it. I think that will help us learn more about the candidates if we have that standard in here. Sometimes I think I'm leaning toward one or two candidates, and then other times I just don't know. Criticism of them won't get under my skin one bit. I've only met John Kerry once, but when he's bashed incessantly, it feels personal -- like it's happening to a family member -- and it hurts right in the pit of my stomach. I don't think it'll be that way for any of these other candidates; therefore, fire away.

John Kerry himself said he wants to get involved in '08. He already has said some things either directly (criticizing the environmental bill that was sponsored by some candidates) or indirectly (those close to the Kerry campaign setting the record straight on some '04 history as it relates to '08). Mostly he's concentrating on Senate business, but if something regarding '08 comes up that he has something to say about, he HAS said something. Eventually, he will endorse someone -- and I want to warn everyone here -- this is the same guy who endorsed Jim Webb, a man who said John Kerry's loyalty to his country should be questioned because of his 1971 testimony. And guess what? He was right, and the Senate is in Democratic hands as a result. So I say be ready for anything from him, and in the meantime, there's nothing wrong with getting educated on these candidates together. It wouldn't be the same without y'all.

EXACTLY what I tried to say above. And I was really moved by your "lost souls looking for friends", it so perfectly describes how I felt, and how I came across this forum. It took me a long while to start posting every now and then, but just reading you guys was an almost daily pleasure and a much needed solace. Thanks all!

Not for 2008 -- I have very strong leanings, yes, and they'll probably be my final decision. But they're not etched in stone and there are a couple of things that could up-end them. As several have said, if Gore were to backtrack on what he's said and enter the race, that would be one of these things. Another would be a major turnaround on an issue that is important to me. I've probably decided, but it's early, and things could happen.

What I have decided on is that I won't proselytize, shill, or hijack this forum to use as a promotional platform for this individual, or anyone else running. As I see it, the only legitimate use of this forum as relating to 2008 contenders is if one of them brings up JK or some idea that is without any doubt his. That seems perfectly all right, because it is relevant to the forum. It would be irrelevant (and, frankly, obnoxious) to shill for 2008ers in here. I wouldn't want to read it here, so I won't do it here. There is also a very distinct possibility that I will have a job on a 2008er's campaign later this spring; if that materializes, I'll disclose it, but after that, you won't hear a word about it unless it becomes relevant to the forum.

As for "her" -- well, we all must vote what our conscience and our feelings tell us to vote. I do not think I can vote for "her" if she is the nominee. I really don't. If that is the situation that we are placed in, then I'll just do my thing (third party or write-in) without advocating to everyone else, but I hope that it never moves beyond a hypothetical, and I'll work to that end.

Being primarily a Kerry blog with a group of writers who were all primarily hoping for another JK run, the question has come up about discussing the other candidates and backing someone as a group or each of us choosing. I've pretty much stressed that I felt it was worthwhile for everyone to discuss all of the candidates as openly and candidly as possible and if need be, agree to disagree on who we prefer.

I think it's a tough call for all of us, either here or on the Dem Daily. I'm not ready to make any choices personally and think it will be a while before I do. I may hold out until JK makes his call.

Been in lurk mode that last couple of weeks, but this thread was very informative and offered up some good points.

I am not one that attacks Democrats just to promote others, but I am for ground rules when the "actual" 2008 primary season starts.

The cool thing about us is that we are very civil. :) Every candidate that we choose to support will have pros and cons, despite what the blogsphere says about electing the "perfect" candidate, rather than the best candidate/president. If possible, I think we could still discuss them without falling out or feelings getting hurt.

Since I posted the last 08 comment, I have promised not to venture into 08 threads, because like many of you all have said, there are far more serious issues facing America right now than a premature horse race circus, but sometimes it falls on deaf ears because Bush is so bad, really bad that people just want to count the days, minutes, and hours until January 2009.

As for candidates, I have a preference for one, and a wish list for two others :shrug:, but I don't know if I can vote for "her" if "she" is the nominee. The way she stabbed her own colleague in the back does not sit well with me, and though polls are meaningless right now, it's hopeful that people are finally seeing "her" and "them" for who they are. I like "him" but the country is a mess and we don't need another dynasty. Hint...

The last thing I am still mad at is all these so-called know-it-alls who say that Bush was supposedly "beatable" and that 04 should have been a cakewalk. If this "exciting," "talented," "diverse," "formidable" field thought that Bush was beatable, then why (with the exception of two) didn't they run in 2004? I guess they wanted to leave their own hanging out to dry cause they know that Bush was a wartime president and can't run again an 08 will be easy for them. That is what I don't like.

I too used to think that the presidency meant a lot, but not anymore. People don't care about the issues. It's just a popularity contest aka American Political Idol.