Kerry is right: experience matters...in the Senate.

[AP]

You don't get any special privileges for being a three-term senator prior to getting elected president. However, three-term senators get lots of privileges on their committees. And Kerry sits on the two most powerful committees in the senate, two that regulate EVERY business in America, between the two (which is why he's getting so much $$$).

In fact, I suspect Kerry wouldn't accept the VP nod if offered. He'd have way more power putting his experience to use on those committees.

In fact, Democrats would probably be better off if Edwards gets VP and Kerry stays exactly where he is, racking up experience.

Discuss.

[sandnsea]

1. With all respect AP

That was a dumb argument when certain other people made it and it's a dumb argument now. :-)

[AP]

12. Kerry isn't going to win if he's on the top of the ticket.

That's the bottom line.

And preserving his seniority in the senate is a good idea.

[rumguy]

2. sounds like pure uncut kook shit to me

[mb7588a]

3. You don't need experience to be President?

Curious how I inferred that from your post.

[DebJ]

14. executive experience, not legislative experience Go Dean

[maxr4clark]

4. Experience matters

when you're trying to replace an incumbent. I don't see why anyone would risk our precious country, in the bad shape it is in today, to a guy who has only been doing service to his country for the past six years.

[Bryan]

5. I think AP has a good point

...about losing Kerry's seniority in the Senate. However, I think congressional experience is of great value to a President (the job, of course, depending so heavily on getting Congress to vote your way).

In fact, this is one reason why I've been leaning towards Kerry; if, insh'allah, we do get the White House back, massaging legislation through Congress is going to be a vital skill, especially if we make no significant gains in the House or Senate. Kerry is not exactly an LBJ-level mogul in this area, but he has spent two decades learning the fine art of horse trading at Ted Kennedy's elbow, and that experience wouldn't hurt.

[DieboldMustDie]

6. I doubt Kerry would be interested the vice-presidency...

though, at the moment, that doesn't look like a likely scenario anyway. If he does leave the Senate, it seems probable that Mitt Romney would name a Republican to replace him.

[maxr4clark]

17. It's a step up in his profession, and a step closer to President.

He'd take it, if he isn't the nominee.

[DjTj]

7. Hi AP!

Haven't seen you around in a while.

So how about those South Carolina results!

I'm going on the road in Virginia tomorrow, and I'll see what I can do.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

8. Maybe after his two terms he'll run for Senate again.

Didn't John Quincy Adams go into the House after he was President?

[AP]

13. Two terms of what?

[DebJ]

15. Kerry would be 68 years old though, and he is loaded in money

[quaker bill]

9. Lets just keep him there

Suits me. If we get a better President as well, then no one will be proposing a war for him to support. Sounds like a great plan to me.

[hobbes159]

10. What about the Republican that will take Kerry's place in the Senate?

Massachusetts has a Republican governor (Romney) -- he gets to appoint Kerry's replacement if he wins -- along with all the Dems retiring from the Senate this year, it could make things difficult...

[dogman]

11. Is time experience?

His voting record doesn't look like he has been there that much. Mostly it seems he's been there to support Bush's agenda or not there to stop it.

[Snivi Yllom]

16. Kerry's experience matters all right

read this:
AP Exclusive: Kerry Blocked Law, Drew Cash
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=269640