Kerry Was Smart To Stay Away

[Dr Ron]

Kerry is taking a lot of heat here for not being in Washington during the challenge of the 2004 election. His absense not the way to judge Kerry's actions on election reform. He has already had a team of lawyers in to investigate, and we will hear more from him in the future. There simply was not enough evidence to prove election fraud sufficient to overturn the election results.

There are many issues to be pursued. Srategically this is best done as something totally separate from the type of challenge conducted in Congress.

Election reform must be pushed as an issue which Democrats, independents, and fair minded Republican can all support, without remaining a Kerry vs. Bush issue. The more election reform can be viewed as a question of who won the 2004 election, the more likely the media can portray it as a Quixotic attempt to overturn the election, and ignore the real issues.

With the 2004 election behind us, Kerry can return in the future and argue for issues such as reasonable waiting time, maintaining a paper trail, and prohibiting election officials from being actively involved in working for one candidate.

While I sympathized with those who protested the election and wished them well, this was a side show which may have done more harm than good, and Kerry was very wise to stay away. For example, from Friday's First Read:

Only time and polling will tell, but we wonder if something happened yesterday beyond Democrats' clear discomfort with the dispute of the results, and with the GOP's arguable overzealousness in rejecting the claims -- that electoral reform moved a notch away from being an issue of concern to the general public, and one step closer to becoming viewed as a partisan Democrat issue touted by liberals and minorities.

[Artemis Bunyon]

1. A partisan Democrat issue touted by liberals and other minorities?

Sounds like the civil rights movement, to me.

[Dr Ron]

4. In a way it does

However, we must look at maximizing our chances for victory, rather than looking at a many year struggle.

There are many reasonable reforms which both Democrats and fair minded Republicans can support now which could make a difference in the next election.

For example, in Michigan both Democrats and Republicans have called for changes to make it easier to vote by mail in upcoming elections (which would alleviate some of the problems of long lines). Such bipartisan cooperation will disapear the more the conservative media can portray voting reform as a left wing idea which is not really necessary.

[nofurylike]

14. whooohoooo!! your words made me jump up, "whooohoooo!!"

thank you thank you thank you, Artemis Bunyon!!!


just passing through briefly, and so glad i did.

i'm writing it down.


peace!!

[Nikepallas]

2. I will respect your right to have that opinion but I have to disagree.

By not doing anything he allowed BUSHCO to walk all over us. If he did had spoken out he could have forced the media to look into the situation at hand instead of ignoring it.

[Dr Ron]

7. Wrong time to speak out

Having Kerry speak out last week would not have provided any more meaningful coverage. Kerry can speak out much more effectively on this once we are beyond the 2004 election.

[GR]

9. How silly....

While the shooting is going on, hide. Then when the shooting stops and everyone has left the battlefield, stand up and show yourself...

[Dr Ron]

15. Wrong battlefield

The point is that this was the wrong battle field to fight this issue.

[GR]

19. Where Exactly Is The Right Battlefield...We Don't Have Either House

or the Presidency or the media or the thinktanks or the money...

Wake up...

[Dr Ron]

24. We can win without either house

Many of the reforms can be made in the states.

For national reforms, there are issues where we can get bipartisan support. That's why we must not have election reform be a Kerry v. Bush issue. If it is, the battle lines are drawn and we lose.

[thoughtanarchist]

53. we have think tanks. we have money.

what we don't have is the MSM or the repetitive shouting.

I think we need to craft simple messages suitable for repetative shouting....and guard against future election fraud with federal standards, with is a very real eventuality considering that we started that ball rolling in earnest last thursday.

The right battlefield for YOU is RIGHT WHERE YOU"RE SITTING NOW.

Don't depend on or blame anyone else. fight dammit.

[thoughtanarchist]

47. Do you REALLY think that if Kerry showed up last thursday that BushCo

would NOT have been able to "walk all over us"?

The media is looking...and more objectively I might add than if Kerry had spearheaded this action.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. Here's Kerry looking presidential in Syria today

Despite the fact that I am po'd at the majority of spineless Dems in Congress, I still think that Kerry did the right thing by going to the ME right now.

Why should he have been in Congress on 01/06? So he could vote against himself or look like a spoil sport? If anyone didn't notice there were a lot of Dems who did not attend on 01/06. Of course, the press will never point attention to that fact, that at least 1/3 of the DEMS in congress did not vote to accept the electoral votes.

[Dr Ron]

16. He can do more by going to the middle east

Hopefully his trip to the middle east will put Kerry in a better position to take on Bush over Iraq as he took on Nixon over Vietnam and Reagan over Iran Contra.

[LittleClarkie]

38. What is he doing in that picture

Was there a caption? Who are the people around him?

That's his "presidential suit" isn't it.

[Dr Ron]

44. More pictures of Kerry on his mideast trip

at the Unofficial Kerry for President Blog (along with a slightly longer version of my post here):

http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/

[GetTheRightVote]

5. I could care less if Kerry returns, the dog will be dead by then,

the vet missed the bus on the way to my house when he took a plane to another country instead of having my back. Kerry deserves everything is his getting from those he failed to protect and unhold during this unbelievablily difficult days we have had without his help. The reality is he is not here in our country where he should be, he ran away from home when we needed him most, hold the country together, he just pulled me more away from the right then ever or even the middle, I am passionate about bringing the right wing down and I know Kerry will not be in the fight with me after his MIA for the election fraud issue. He had my back alright with a knife in it.

:mad:

[GR]

10. I Agree, I Put My Heart , Soul And Pocketbook In The Fray For Him..

he turned his back, like the protestors will turn their backs on Bush at the inaugeral.

Some people don't understand that BushCo is anti-democratic with a strong stench of fascism thrown in...They don't compromise or listen to reason. They only understand one thing...the hardball use of power.

Kerry failed us...and so did every other dem Senator who failed to stand with Barbara Boxer...

[thoughtanarchist]

51. Sorry you feel pained over it...

How do you think HE feels?

Anyway, you cannot do away with the constitution as it is our best defence against the same totalarianism we seem to be resisting today.

It was constitutional procedure, not a lack of will to resist, that foiled Kerry's post election bid to claim office.

I feel much more justified knowing that he's trying to work towards a solution in Iraq.


Why don't you tell us what you think he should have done and WHAT DIFFERENCE IT WOULD HAVE MADE?

Do you think the outcome would have been different?

[KoKo]

6. to quote from you "....a side show." Really? To you? You mean like

"freaks in the side show?" You mean the "Wacko Liberals" and "Left Wing Loonies." (quotes from "Daly Kos's Moulitas and Dennis Hastert, respectively)AND, BTW, since when has electoral reform been a "concern to the general public?" I'm sorry but I haven't seen any concern from the "masses" on this issue.

Here's what stood out to me in your comments:

While I sympathized with those who protested the election and wished them well, this was a side show which may have done more harm than good, and Kerry was very wise to stay away. For example, from Friday's First Read:

Only time and polling will tell, but we wonder if something happened yesterday beyond Democrats' clear discomfort with the dispute of the results, and with the GOP's arguable overzealousness in rejecting the claims -- that electoral reform moved a notch away from being an issue of concern to the general public, and one step closer to becoming viewed as a partisan Democrat issue touted by liberals and minorities.

[Dr Ron]

11. The general public

There hasn't been concern from the masses as so far it has been an issue of being for Kerry or for Bush.

Recall back to 2000. Most people took sides on the judicial question based upon who they supported, not the merits of the argument. This led to conservatives supporting the Supreme Court interfering with what should have been handled at the state level.

There are issues where we can get support. It won't be the biggest issue for most people, but people will go along with reasonable issues like making sure the lines aren't too long, making it easier to vote by mail (which is now getting bipartisan support in Michigan), paper trails, etc.

Should Republicans try to oppose such reasonable issues, then we can question why they don't want fair elections. This argument won't gain traction if seen as an attempt to change the 2004 results.

[KoKo]

21. No one has said it will change the election results. Not one Senator or

House Member on the Democratic side said that in their comments. Only the Republicans made that charge over and over and over.

Are you not aware of the dangers inherent in Electronically voting? Here in NC our Elections Commmision was shown how to hack the Opti-Scan Machines (which have a paper ballot) and the Touch Screens which may or may not have a paper trail.

There's too much evidence building that no matter what we vote on...if it involves a computer code, our votes can be changed. Were the votes changed or not? That's the most important question. FRAUD...

While the issues you mention are important they are only part of the "whole package." To single out FRAUD would be to take the emphasis on the fact that until we know that there wasn't FRAUD we won't know what kind of machines to buy and HAVA money runs out this year, so States are forced to make a decision about which machines to buy, when there is an outstanding issue pending of Vote Manipulation.

To take the emphasis over the Computer Code in these machines for fear of looking "Partisan or Looney" would be exactly what the Republicans are hoping for. After all THEY are the ones trying to shift the emphasis. And, none of them have any plan for changing anything about the way we vote, because to them...its worked out "just fine."

[Dr Ron]

25. It is still Kerry v. Bush

As long as this was done in the context of the 2004 election results, it is very easy for the media to portray it as an attempt to change the election results.

There is also the somewhat valid argument that opponents had that if this wasn't over the 2004 election results, it had no place coming up at this time. No point in having to defend a weak position on this one.

[GR]

8. I'd Describe It Differently...

As spineless....His so-called team of high paid lawyers would have been totally unable to detect electronic fraud...they could be looking right at the computer at which it was occuring and not see it...

And that isn't the point anyway...It's not whether the unknowable, that Kerry couldn't have won anyway even if there was not fraud, is true. It's that there was fraud, whether it can be proven decisive or not...There must be NO FRAUD and the time to take steps is not after it happens and you are in a weak position, but before it happens. Kerry threw away what leverage he and we had. I listened to the republicans debate the challenge and many said "their own candidate" said.....blah blah blah. By not protesting, the democrats and John Kerry sealed their fate.

I will never forget Mike McCurry on Air America right after the election saying that some wanted to fight, including Ron Klain, btw, but that it "would have been a bloodbath."

I might mention that destroying the new deal is a bloodbath too as is killing thousands of innocent civilians and our own fine "war fighters" for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BUT LIES...

Incidentally, your first mistake was even reading "First Read" or "The Note." Go to Atrios, Dailykos, DailyHowler, MyDD, Digby, etc. and stop reading that junk...

[kerrygoddess]

54. Stop reading that junk

"Incidentally, your first mistake was even reading "First Read" or "The Note." Go to Atrios, Dailykos, DailyHowler, MyDD, Digby, etc. and stop reading that junk..."

It's really important to have the perspective of what the MSM is saying about things, whether we agree with them or not. The masses do and if we want to change things than we need to know what they are thinking.

[yurbud]

12. My HOPE is that Kerry is playing the long game

We could have won a tactical victory and lost the war if the right had any basis to question his legitimacy when Kerry got in.

By going after election reform, we might be able to get congress back in time for '06.

If we get either house, Bush and the whole right wing machine is toast (assuming the democrats do their jobs).

[Dr Ron]

13. The Long Game

Kerry is most likely playing the long game.

However, he could not even had won such a tactical victory. If he was here, there is nothing he could have done which would have changed the result. He would only have made it more difficult to fight for electon reform in the future.

Winning at least one house of Congress will make a big difference in the future.

[GR]

18. You Can't Win Anything If The Votes Aren't Cast And Counted Fairly...

case closed...If you think they were, you're exceedingly mistaken...

Here in Kansas, my home state, local House candidate informed me today that one-third of the voting machines she had her workers canvass on election night we UNABLE to furnish their results to here workers. The "memory chips" had to be sent "somewhere" to be converted to totals. That's in Kansas...wake up...

[KoKo]

26. The Voting machines are the problem and disenfranchisement... Did you

work with the Dem Party "on the ground" in this election? If you didn't you wouldn't have seen what we saw. You only know what you read and without any "balance" in the media you are open to the "propaganda."

Those of us who worked in this election..observed and have been working on this since the 2000 Selection might have some insight...ya think??

[Dr Ron]

27. That's not the issue

The issue isn't whether there are problems which need to be fixed, but what the best way is politically to approach the issue.

[KoKo]

31. You haven't addressed why our Party keeps losing when the Mainstream

DNC/DLC have made all the decisions. Their political decisions of "holding back and calculation" have not been sucessful strategies.

Or, if they have been successful strategies we won't know because of "Voting Machine Fraud" and "disenfranchisment."

So which is it?

[Dr Ron]

33. Off the point

This is getter quite off the point of this post, presenting a false dichotomy.

[blondeatlast]

20. I suspect he is.

The rumors are rampant that HE intends to introduce an election reform bill.

Had he gotten involved in 1/6, the press would have crucified him for it. Instead, only short-sighted Dems are.

We're decidedly in the minority.

[impeachthescoundrel]

17. My sentiments exactly

"Should Republicans try to oppose such reasonable issues, then we can question why they don't want fair elections."

[sandnsea]

22. The fight is ahead of us

You know it and I know it. I don't understand alot of things about the election results. But without proof of fraud and a direct connection to Bush, there was no way to overturn the election, especially when nothing pointed to sufficient votes. When the dust settles and some other sensational story takes the place of election integrity, I know who will be there, pushing legislation forward. The same person who has been steering important legislation for over 20 years. My hope for this country still lies with John Kerry.

[zulchzulu]

49. Exactly!

I've watched your posts through the election cycle and now...here we are...

Once this story becomes more relevant for its tragic turn against democracy and when Kerry proves he will do something about it, the entire process will make more sense.

Like you, I still have great hope in John Kerry's mission.

[Still_Loves_John]

23. Exactly

If Kerry is involved with this, it looks like a Kerry vs. Bush thing, and everyone just hunkers down on whichever side they already identify with. We need republican support in order to pass real reform, and the way to get that is by making sure that this doesn't turn into election redux.

[IronLionZion]

28. Sore Loserman 2004

that's why Kerry can't speak out. Someone else had to do it.

I'm glad he went to Iraq which happens to be a war zone and meet with real soldiers. Much better than Bush with his plastic turkey and secret service and only his supporters.

[marcologico]

29. Agree, it was lose-lose for Kerry, but election reform IS a partisan issue

IMO. The GOP wins by suppressing votes, Dems win by turning out voters, that's the way it is, I don't see the harm in admitting it. Republicans aren't going to stand up for fraud if they can help it so making it a partisan issue isn't a bad strategy.

[Dr Ron]

30. If Partisan, it can turn to our advantage

I agree the Republicans use voter suppression at least, and most likely out right fraud, as a tactic rather than this being isolated abuses. However, they can never admit it or campaign on this stand.

For election reform to win, it must be brought up as a bipartisan issue. After all, who can agrue (out loud at least) against fair elections? I bet there are Republicans in Congress who will back measures which are purely seen as a way to ensure fair elections.

However, many will seek a way to oppose such measures. They cannot outright admit they are against fair elections, or they will have to take the heat for that stand. They will try to claim that such measures are just out of disappointment over losing in 2000 and 2004. The closer any attempts at election reform are tied to these measures, the easier it will be for them to make such a case and get political cover for opposing reform.

If a Republican in Congress opposes election reform, we do not want them to be able to escape this issue when up for reelection due to having all the Bush voters back them, seeing this in purely Bush vs. Kerry/Gore terms. We must force them to either support election reform, or be seen as opponents of fair elections.

[Q]

32. Whew...is it any wonder...

...why politicians on both sides can get away with this shit when there so many to enable and excuse their behavior?

I'm just friggin shocked that so many are willing to allow widespread civil rights abuses to happen and then suggest we have to 'shut up' until just the right moment.

This is a great formula for losing more of the base (including Blacks) while the Bushies have their way with our country.

And your statement about 'liberals and minorites' reflects the attitude of too many who don't seem to understand how difficult it was to get those rights in the first place.

[Dr Ron]

34. Not my statement

I was quoting how the media is covering this--it was not my statement.

I never said we should allow civil rights abuses to happen. We just need to be smart in how they are protested, rather than continuing to make it easy for the right wing media to obfuscate the issue, and rather than continuing the circular firing squad, such as in attacing Kerry over this.

[Q]

35. Can you provide a link for those 'quotes'?

Otheriwise it's just your opinion. And I'm not suggesting that you don't have a right to that opinion. But it's getting a bit stale watching 'liberals and minorites' made the scapegoat for Republicans AND Democrats.

You're not talking about 'smart' at all. You're talking about political opportunism and playing it safe. Blacks and Women would still be considered second-class citizens unable to vote or own property if Dems had taken your approach to fighing injustice in the past.

As wrong as you may think it is for some Democrats to want Kerry to stand up for voting rights (civil rights)...it seems just as wrong to many of us for you to suggest that he did the right thing.

[Dr Ron]

43. I stated it was from First Read

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3626796/

I take it you are not acquaited wih First Read. This is NBC New's version of The Note. Both are prepared daily for their news staffs, and posted on line, and are a good way to see how the mainstream media is reading an issue.

I did not say Kerry should not stand up for voting or civil rights. I said doing so on Thursday would have been the wrong way to do so. This is not opportunism or playing it safe. It is about winning rather than acting foolishly, or about attacking Kerry without understanding the circumstances.

[IndianaGreen]

36. "not enough evidence to prove election fraud"

There simply was not enough evidence to prove election fraud sufficient to overturn the election results.

Other than an outright confession by the GOP that they conspired with companies such as Diebold to throw the election to Bush, there is plenty of evidence already that the way the election was conducted in Ohio was more crooked than the first presidential round in the Ukraine.

I am sorry to say that your post is one more of those messages we are getting from the party's "opinion makers" telling us to calm down and proceed as if nothing has happened. We heard the same drivel in 2000 from those that said we must accept the judicial coup that was Bush v. Gore.

Kerry has nothing to say to us of any value. His e-mail to 3 million of his supporters said it all:

Tomorrow, members of Congress will meet to certify the results of the 2004 presidential election. I will not be taking part in a formal protest of the Ohio Electors.

Never again!

[LittleClarkie]

39. Smoke aplenty, but we needed to find the fire

A fire that would have held up in a court of law.

Not curcumstancial evidence, hard evidence.

Is your moniker an indication of how you normally vote? So was your "never again" also a "never before" as well?

[IndianaGreen]

40. The preponderance of the evidence shows that there was voting fraud

You are trying to apply the standard of "beyond reasonable doubt" which only applies in criminal cases.

There is enough smoke to merit a serious investigation, which is what the vote on rejecting the Ohio electors was all about. There is also enough evidence for impaneling a grand jury to hear evidence against Ohio election officials, including Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.

No one ever won a war by being timid!

[Dr Ron]

41. No, that's a different subject

I am not commenting at all as to the standards of evidence here or whether there is enough smoke to merit a serious investigation. The post is about whether Kerry should be faulted for not being in Congess on Thursday. There was not enough evidence for the matter at hand--getting Congress to overturn the election results. Of course there was an extremely high bar to meet here with a Republican controlled Congress. The investigation must proceed without being involved in what would be portrayed as an attempt to change the election results.

We should not be timid, and Ohio (as well as other states) should be looked at. Despite this, Kerry was wise to be away and not get involved in the Congressional dispute over the election returns.

[LittleClarkie]

46. One loses many battles in the process of winning a war

And I doubt that serious investigation has stopped in Ohio. There are still lawsuits being waged aren't there? There are other avenues still to be pursued.

I was trying to look at it from the pov of a procecutor. I would think much of this was criminal, wouldn't you? And to make any of it stick, we need to look at as if it were a court case.

Personally, I don't think anyone was going to agree to leave the case of the Ohio electors open long enough to have the kind of investigation we were going to need.

I keep telling myself that Watergate, BCCI et al took quite the while to come to fruition. And Kerry is still bitching at the Bank of England over BCCI. I love that more than 10 years later, he's still on that case.

[TheEconomist]

37. I agree, but....

... Kerry's political advancement is over. He will never be anything beyond a Senator. Had we ran Lieberman or Clark, we would have won.

[Dr Ron]

42. Who knows

That's hypothetical. It would have been a totally different set of attacks, but they would have still run an attack ad, and still would have had the advantages of incumbency, a friendly media, and a wartime mentality. I doubt anyone else could have done better, but there is no way to know for sure.

Actually, it wouldn't have been a totally different set of attacks. Regardless of who ran, even if Lieberman, they would have been labeled as someone on the far left.

[thoughtanarchist]

50. OK by me.

He's got job security in MA.

B-)

[Calliope1211]

45. Had Kerry been present, it would have been detrimental to the cause

I am a Democrat. I live in Texas. The majority of the people I know and have grown up with are extremely conservative Republicans; many of them worship Bush. I know how they think, how they rationalize, and how they attack and argue.

For this reason, I am very glad that John Kerry did not stand in protest of the Ohio vote. While I understand that it is important that we get as many strong voices in congress as possible to stand up for fair elections, it is even more important that we actually achieve election reform. This will only happen with support from Republicans as well as Democrats. If Kerry were to play a prominent role in seeking election reform right now, Republicans would claim that he- and the entire party- was “whining” or being a “sore loser.” Then the issue would turn into a Bush vs. Kerry debate in congress and the whole effort would fall apart. (Sadly, some Republicans are already trying to frame our efforts as whining over the outcome of the election.) With the election not so far behind us, and Ohio being the state the determined it all, Republicans would close their minds to election reform if they saw John Kerry at the forefront of the effort. They would even spin the issue and use it to further their assertion that Democrats are simply “obstructionists.” Not only would this destroy any hope of achieving election reform, but it would worsen the image of the Democratic party.

I know that by caring about counting every vote, but not publicly rasing his voice in protest, Kerry may appear hypocritical and cowardly. This is not the case. Kerry is a fighter. But he is wisely stepping aside right now so as not to prevent congress from making progress on this important issue.

It is vital to our democracy that we have fair elections. This is not a partisan issue; it is an American issue. Since the 15th amendment gave them the right to vote, many African Americans have been killed for that right. American soldiers are dying in Iraq so that Iraqis can have fair elections. We cannot afford to squander our chance at election reform just because we want Kerry to join the struggle.

John Kerry is not thinking of what is best for him, but of what is best for his country and his party. I still have faith in him and I look forward to supporting him as he fights for other issues in the senate.

[thoughtanarchist]

48. Excellent insight. And I agree 100%

While we had a home team (thanks B. Boxer) plucking the strings JFK was working the frets.

because you can't play a banjo very well with one hand.

Kerry was (and is) doing to most good he can with his time and effort.

:toast:

[InvisibleBallots]

52. Yeah, if he had said something, he might have looked foolish

as opposed to the intelligent, savvy, loser that he is.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

55. Thank God, somebody agrees with me!

I think Kerry's response was perfect. Kerry will fight for election reform. That election challenge only fueled the self-righteous arrogance of Tom DeLay and his cronies. The Repubs look like level-headed martyrs, while those well-intentioned, but foolish Dems who voted for the challenge end up looking like, well, fools.

[kerrygoddess]

56. We needed someone to make the challenge and open up the debate

It did not have to be Kerry, and it was the right thing to do. Now we need to continue to stay on top of those who said they would work to change the inequities in our voting system.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

58. Indeed. The Repubs have proven that they don't gave a crap

about real election reform, but we must continue the fight.

[Bouncy Ball]

57. I liked seeing the pictures of him there

and of course he was cheered. Probably cheered greatly. The guys in uniform know a real fellow vet when they see one.