Fortunately, or unfortunately, the nominee has already been decided

[ShaneGR]

The dynamic of a Kerry with the GIGANTIC Mo, and three other candidates splitting up the vote (Clark, Edwards, Dean) has handed the nomination to Kerry.

I don't blame anyone, and I can live with Kerry. He's been very aggressive in his bring it on, call me a liberal mother ****** (Cuz if liberal means balancing budgets and taking care of EVERYONE, bring it on)!!! And I am intrigued by the thought of John Kerry surrounded by firefighters, teachers, textile workers, steel workers, catholics, police unions, and everyone else who lives within 25 miles of a major city.

I can live with Kerry. He has benifited by this many candidates, but I respect him for fighting so hard. 1 month ago, would you have predicted a Kerry blowout?

[JohnKleeb]

1. Nah it aint over

A month ago? a Kerry blowout lol no way. He was my second choice then as always though, Ive always liked the man. This thing isnt over though trust me.

[jpgray]

3. You speak for me on this one--still a ways to go (nt)

[JohnKleeb]

7. yeah jp its true

Hell yeah he does have some nice MO but it could change.

[bearfartinthewoods]

61. it's his to lose...but it's not over yet

[MercutioATC]

2. One word. Convention. All we have to do is deny him enough delegates

to clinch the nomination.

Then, anything goes...

You say you want a revolution??

[ShaneGR]

6. REALITY

He's won 7 of 9 primaries, he's going to win Michigan and Washington this weekend, and he'll finish strong in the southern primaries next week.

IT'S OVER, our separate campaigns are splitting the vote while he gobbles up all the voters who are just paying attention.

Over, done with, finish. He'll have the necessary delegates no later than March 2

[MercutioATC]

10. Possibly. If not, I don't like his chances in a brokered convention...

We'll see what happens...

[ShaneGR]

12. There isn't going to be a brokered convention

He's 20 points ahead in:

Michigan
Ohio
California
New York
Florida

He's 5 pts up or better in:
Wisconsin
VA
TN


It's over.

[JohnKleeb]

13. dude its nice news but dont give up, this thing is far from over

[ShaneGR]

15. Over, finished, done, ended, complete

REALITY.

[JohnKleeb]

16. if you say so

:shrug:

[ShaneGR]

18. I can live with it

But I'm a realist, not a dreamer. There comes a time when everyone must view the situation and recognize the inevitable.

That being said, I think the party would benefit by at least stretching it out until March 2nd with a 2 man race. Purely for media reasons, keep the Democratic Party at the top of the hour.

[MercutioATC]

20. Seems I heard the same words used about another candidate a month ago...

Hell, you may be right, but I've heard it before...


...and I'll do what I can to keep it from happening...

[ShaneGR]

21. But no other candidate had one 7 of 9, 11 of 13....

After tomorrow.

[MercutioATC]

25. ...and that's still only about 20% of the electorate...a LONG way to go...

I find it funny that some folks are so willing to trust polls and trends now when they didn't a few weeks ago (because the current numbers support their candidate). I've been 100% Dean from the beginning. When he was the frontrunner, I repeatedly said that the electorate was fickle. I'll say the same think when Kerry's the frontrunner.

Just watch what happens to this party if he DOES gain the nomination....

[JohnKleeb]

22. It does seem more likely day by day

I dont know. I think youre right though.

[ModerateMiddle]

45. You're probably right

there certainly is a lot to be said for everything that you've pointed out. I think basically, everyone else is hoping against hope that Kerry will make a major faux pas before Super Tuesday.

I would be pleased though, if all of the candidates remain in the race until Florida votes on Mar 9. It keeps the "anti-Bush" publicity front and center, and that's a good thing.

[mmonk]

47. Kerry has the big mo

but it's still too early to say it's over. His leads in Wisconsin, Virginia, and Tennessee are too close to say that yet. If he sweeps though, the handwriting is on the wall.

[no name no slogan]

54. Polls are nice, but don't mean jack

after all, Dean was supposed to have IA and NH wrapped up, right? And we know how those turned out.

This thing is going all the way to Cali, at least. DON'T GIVE UP!

[MAlibdem]

46. A brokered convention

Would be REALLY undemocratic, but hey...the ends trumph the means i guess.

[tinanator]

44. one can only wonder

how old you have to be to make such proclamtions, based on years of experience, presumably? *cough*

[arewethereyet]

49. thats why there are super delegates

to avoid surprizes and contention at the convention. darn, am I the next Johnny Cochran ?

[incapsulated]

4. If either Clark or Edwards take both southern states

You've got a horserace.

Even if it's a split, who knows what will happen Super Tuesday. It certainly looks good for Kerry, but it's still a little early to give a concession speech.

[ShaneGR]

8. My prediction, Clark and Edwards split the vote in TN and VA

Kerry wins both.

[incapsulated]

11. We will see

He hasn't won a southern state yet, has he? Clark is climbing up is butt in TN and who knows how solid the polls on VA are.

[ShaneGR]

17. Clark & Edwards split the moderates

Kerry gobbles up the hardcare partisans who weren't paying attention. I DO NOT BLAME ANYONE FOR THIS. But this is the way it is. It's over.

[ModerateMiddle]

48. No, but he had a respectable

30% in SC. And a decent showing in OK as well. Edwards did very well in MO, and Clark did well in the Southwest states. If either Edwards or Clark wins both southern states on Feb 10, then this could get interesting. But it sure looks as if Edwards has conceded TN and Clark has conceded VA. So long as the two of them only really compete in Southern states, they're not credible nationally.

[krkaufman]

30. and Edwards drops out...

... leaving Clark to take on Kerry... at which point Clark's advantages become widely published.

Clark in November.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[countmyvote4real]

14. I agree, but hypocrites make for good politicians.

Go figure.

Oh well. AHBB.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

9. A month ago I assumed Dean would be the nominee

The media had all but crowned him the winner over the past year.

No, I sure would not have predicted a Kerry blowout a month ago. But he was my first choice, so I'm very happy with it.

Kerry will make a great President!

[DjTj]

19. Don't give up yet sgr2...

...I'm spending my whole weekend trying to fight the Mo' down here in Virginia.

It may be hopeless, but I'm going down fighting!

Together, we can change America!

[ShaneGR]

23. Good luck, but it looks like my Ohio campaign is hopeless

I really was hoping for a Kerry Edwards showdown on Super Tuesday. But he's going to win too many states before-hand, and the media momentum is too much. Maybe I'm just too much of a pragmatist.

One thing I do know, I SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW HE DOESN'T PICK EDWARDS AS HIS VP.

[JohnKleeb]

27. many of us in the Kerry camp would be delighted to have Senator Edwards as

Veep. He really should consider him. Even when I supported DK fully, I was thinkin that Kerry-Edwards was a good ticket, but if he doesnt choose him, maybe John will be the Attorney General who is not John Ashcroft, I personally want Edwards as VP if Kerry is the nom because hes a good man and he can help out a lot, and it will give him experience so after a president kerry's 2nd term, he can run for pres on his own with experience. Elliot Spitizer, a Kerry endorser is my pick for AG. Dont give up please though. Still got a long way to go.

[Zhade]

34. An honest, non-flame question: how do you go from DK to Kerry?

I'm not asking to be difficult - I truly am curious. I support DK, and do not trust Kerry for one second. I'm interested in your viewpoint on the differences between the two (i.e. one voted for the IWR, one did not).

[ShaneGR]

36. Most don't base their vote on the IWR

Mostly because a lot of people think that Congress was lied to about the imminent danger WMD issue.

[MercutioATC]

39. How does being lied to excuse giving Congressional approval for

a Republican President who's surrounded with a bunch of stormtroopers to wage war at his discretion?

Jesus, Bush is a REPUBLICAN, for chrissakes! Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft and the rest are SCARY people. Who in their right mind would TRUST them?????

[Zhade]

52. First off, is your name JohnKleeb?

No? Then allow him to speak for himself, please.

And that swill about Congress being lied to doesn't wash. Even I knew it was bullshit before the IWR vote. If people like myself knew, then they knew. Period.

The IWR is about both accountability and culpability. Kerry and some of the other candidates voted to enable b*sh's obvious desire to go to war. PNAC was known about for years before the IWR vote.

(EDITED: for grammatical correctness.)

[ShaneGR]

74. I'll speak when I want to

And I tend to speak to people, not down to them.

[JohnKleeb]

24. Where in VA are you?

I think Edwards will do best in the rural areas here to be honest. I think he has a good shot of winning the state.

[MercutioATC]

26. Change America HOW???

If you get your way, in 2005 we'll have a Republican Congress (no change) and a President who voted FOR the IWR, NCLB and the Patriot Act. THAT'S a change????

[ShaneGR]

28. You basically just proved my point

Still attacking the other candidates who are below Kerry in every poll. We split ourselves up.

By the way, Edwards will campaign in every southern race (All of the southern Senate races, House races, etc.) And he will make a BIG difference. To illustrate my point further, do you think Howard Dean could have campaigned for Ines Tennenbaum in her Senate Race in South Carolina?

We're ripping ourselves apart over nothing.

[MercutioATC]

29. I disagree. It's NOT for nothing, it's for the direction of the party.

Do we want the insiders and their business-as-usual-save-my-political-ass votes or do we want to change things?

Remember the piece of legislation that has the potential to make all of us "traitors"? Kerry and Edwards supported it.

Remember the resolution that gave Bush Congressional approval to wage war at his discretion? Kerry and Edwards supported it.

Remember the legislation that took funds away from the schools that needed it most? Kerry and Edwards voted for it.

THAT'S what I don't want to continue. If we DO let it keep happening, we might as well just give up, because we're no longer advocating the principles we're supposed to be defending.

[ShaneGR]

31. The VAST majority of us just want to get rid of Bush

Vote records and candidate bashes mean nothing, direction means nothing, geting rid of Bush means everything. We'll worry about everything else later.

[MercutioATC]

35. I think who we select IS an issue. I'm ABB, but I aspire to more.

Vote records mean everything. Direction means everything.

I've seen what happens when we "worry about everything else later"...nothing.

What's the party going to do in 2008 with millions of Dems that are, once again, tired of politics as usual, even supposing Kerry wins the election in November? We're headed down a dangerous road here, one we know (from experience) to be unproductive.

That's my issue...I'm looking farther forward than the next 12 months...

[Zhade]

55. That is dangerously shortsighted thinking.

"Vote records and candidate bashes mean nothing, direction means nothing..."

So we should just give up our principles to back a candidate who enabled b*sh to commit his worst acts, all in the hopes that we can fix it later?

I've got news for you: go with a candidate who represents the status quo of neoliberalistic slash-and-burn corporatism, and things will not change.

[Zhade]

53. Very well-said. My thoughts exactly.

Kerry isn't anti-Establishment, he IS the Establishment.

[Zhade]

38. MercutioATC has a valid point.

Kerry will go even further in the "war on terrorism", per his own declarations.

A Kerry presidency simply continues the corporate interests' drive for dominance. Just look at his contributors - Goldman Sachs, Time Warner , RAYTHEON, even News Corp., for crying out loud! They didn't even give money to b*sh, whose genocidal policies they back with FAUX News, but they give money to Kerry? What's up with THAT?

I'll tell you what's up - the elite are hedging their bets. They want it so that no matter who wins, they remain in the catbird seat.

[Zhade]

32. Yes, the corporate media and monied elite have indeed decided.

Too bad it's not the candidate who actually has our best interests at heart, or isn't a Bush-enabler.

[ShaneGR]

33. Voters still vote, and they aren't "Controlled"

I reject that conspiracy theory.

[incapsulated]

37. Voters may vote but the process has changed

Terry McAuliffe deliberately front-loaded the primaries so he could have a "winner" by March, he has said as much. They want it to be just like the Republican's primaries. They think this will make them more competitive, even though our last two winning nominees came out of long, bruising primaries.

Before, voters had a chance to take a breath and get over media hype and "momentum" long enough to take a second look at all the candidates, not just "who's hot and electable after two primaries".

It also helped to build new grassroots support and organization in time for the fall. Democrats will never have the cash on hand that the rethugs do, we desperately need the volunteer and grassroots to mount an effective campaign. This sort of primary does just the opposite, it crushes the grassroots in favor of the DC insiders and hacks.

So, basically, 80% of the voters are being told that their choice is meaningless, if all goes according to plan, of course.

This isn't the Democratic Party as I've known it, and I don't like where it's going.

[Old and In the Way]

42. I don't get it.

Your vote for your candidate is reasoned and prudent.

But 40%+ of the voters who voted for Kerry are duped and manipulated by the media?

Perhaps, just maybe, they really liked Kerry as their choice?

I find it sad that supporters of candidates who are getting little or no traction automatically assume that the one who is winning has dumb supporters. Maybe you ought to look at your own candidate a little more objectively and try to figure out why he doesn't measure up in the eyes of the majority of voters? Or maybe look at your opinions more critically and try to understand what you are missing in your selection preference criteria.

Maybe you've got it wrong and everyone else has it right?

[incapsulated]

57. I find it sad

That you are so quick on the defense that you missed the entire point of my post.

The primaries have been frontloaded. This was to ensure a swift nomination of a candidate. It also, by logic, solidifies whoever wins the first one or two rounds as nearly unbeatable, where before that was not the case. And this was by design.

It doesn't matter if it was Kerry or Dean or Hamm. It's the process I have a problem with.

"Maybe you ought to look at your own candidate a little more objectively and try to figure out why he doesn't measure up in the eyes of the majority of voters?"

Thanks for the advice, I never thought of that. Why don't you do the same, except try to figure out how a nominee can be declared "inevitable" with less than 20% of the voting done?

[Old and In the Way]

67. Please point me to a post where you raised this concern before

the Iowa caucus. Otherwise, it's sour grapes. The season is too long or too short, too front ended or to back ended. Whatever.

And actually, this set-up should have helped Clark....if his ideas and campaign caught on, he'd have benefited from the structure.

Sorry to case, but you're just crying in your teacup..... :-)

[Zhade]

59. Do they really like that Kerry has enabled b*sh?

Because, quite simply, he has. There is no way to deny this.

[Old and In the Way]

68. Are you a MIHOP/LIHOP believer?

I'll post an answer to your question if you'll be so kind to answer me that.

[texasmom]

50. Yes, it's the strategy

MacAuliffe wanted. He's helping it along, too.

[Old and In the Way]

41. Welcome aboard sgr2! Glad to have you with JK.

I read this thread and I have to chuckle....Kerry is "the people's choice". Ask yourself how a man with no real media support ignites the rank-and-file voter to lead them in this "war"? Because we know the stakes and we have to lead with a warrior. Kerry knows campaigns...he's trained in Massachusetts for 35 years. He's a unique American hero, in the heat of battle and on the side of peace. Flat out, Democrats know Kerry, preceived warts and all. The same cannot be said about Dean, Kucinich, Clark, or Edwards. Democrats won't take chances on getting Eagletoned or Dukkakised this time. He will fight for his election and they won't steal his victory away, either.

Is he the perfect progressive? Is anybody? I'll take his record of 35 years and hold it up to any Democrats running in this election....proudly.

Those that support their candidates should do so quite rightly...the primaries are still on. But I have to wonder why some will resort to Republican smear attacks on our clear favorite and odds-on candidate for President. I am not into personal, unsubstantiated attacks against the other contenders, but I question the true intent of some of the so-called supporters of candidates here; particularly when they persist with the "Kerry's unelectable" campaign while their own favorite have been shut out in every primary and are marshalling 10% or less of the popular votes. Do real Democrats do that? None that I know.

If Kerry is "unelectable", then we might as well have a cornation for Bush now, because no other candidate can beat him.

You are right, though, the primaries will soon be over and I look forward to seeing all Democrats coming together to do the hard work of electing Democrats for President, House, and Senate. I really believe John is going to take it to Bush and the RNC...I think he's going to play a big role in moving 1 or both Houses back into the D column.

We all want to beat Bush in the worst way possible....I think we've already chosen the right man for the right time in our political history. I'm with John...."bring it on"!!!

[ShaneGR]

43. Edwards BETTER be on that ticket

Or else I'll question his judgement

[mlawson]

63. It'll be Gephardt. It's his TURN, after all....

I think this was decided a year ago. We are doomed.

[Zhade]

60. Point out any "Republican smear tactics" Kerry non-supporters have used.

Document them. Because they don't exist.

So what, with Kerry it's now "you're with us or against us"? I know you're not saying this, but the attitude sure seems there.

Don't you DARE question people's intent, or allegience to truth, just because they disagree with you. Don't you DARE suggest people like myself have ulterior motives. My only motivation is to not continue down the path America is taking, be it under Clinton, Bush, or Kerry. The degrees vary, but the same corporate kowtowing exists in all three men.

[Zhade]

56. Your straw man argument holds zero weight.

I can always tell when I've hit close to the mark - the old "conspiracy theory" label gets tossed at the messenger.

Let me give you a quick lesson in how reality works: voters vote...based on information...they mostly receive from network news and mainstream print media.

Get the picture yet? If a preferred candidate is anointed by the press, suddenly you see his numbers go up. Couldn't be cause-and-effect in action, oh no, it's "conspiracy theory".

[incapsulated]

58. So, changing the process

By which we vote in the primaries, is a conspiracy theory now?

Terry's own words are lies?

Please, take it elsewhere.

[Old and In the Way]

62. I know it's difficult for an elitist such as yourself to understand this

but people are able to look at all the candidates and choose which one fits their value systems closest. Does that include perceptions of electibility? Most definitiely.

You are, of course, free to choose whichever candidate matches up closest to your definition of best candidate for President. That's what primaries are for.

But your arrogance in pressuming your opinion and reasoned decision to vote for Candidate X is not transferrable to others to make the same decision for candidate Y is pure conceit and, fankly, anti-democratic.

Perhaps you'd rather live in a society where your vote counts more than than the majority of voters who have different opinions, but I'd suggest that you are the one living in fantasyland....get the picture?

:-)

[bain_sidhe]

64. Excuse me? The majority of voters DIDN'T vote for Kerry

You might want to consider that before you make snide little comments about "fantasyland." And while I accept that most of the Kerry supporters HERE went through the same process I did when deciding on their candidate, I think anybody who refuses to see the bandwagon/media darling/coronation effect in Kerry's rise among the less attentive voters has a fantasyland to call their own.

[Old and In the Way]

69. To clarify, majority in terms of largest vote % of each candidate

I've never said that a frontrunner doesn't enjoy residual effects of his position. But as has been stated in multiple posts here, Kerry was not the benefactor of special media treatment before Iowa. In fact, he was getting almost no attention and that little he was getting was, "What happened to John Kerry?"....not exactly an inspiring message to the primary voters.

But in spite of the media, he ignited with the largest % of democrats and has consistantly won in all parts of the country. I really find the sour grapes posts that Kerry voters are somehow media dupes, when the fact is that they are just as politically active as any other candidate's supporters to be engaged in the process.

It's fine to use the "ignorant people are duped by the corporate media", but that really only applies to the apolitical masses that barely make it to the GE or the Republican rank-and-file who obviously have bought the media meme.

[TheBigDemo]

40. They said they same thing one month ago. . .

but with Dean. How do we know things will not turn again?

James K.

[Nashyra]

51. If anyone was watching C-SPAN

this morning they would be praying that it is not over. The reporter for the CSM came right out and said that the administration would be wrong to go after Kerry about his anti-war message because *'s did NOT serve in Vietnam and they didn't need to because they have 19 years worth of his voting in the senate that will enable them to paint him as soft on defense and intelligence spending. They will have him painted into a northeastern liberal corner. This is what the pundits are saying, as we know pundits are pure BS but even if half of it sticks he will spend more time defending his voting record rather than going after *'s policy's.. Obviously my first choice is Clark, Edwards has less than a full term for them to go after so then the experience factor comes in. Clark has experience, knowledge and has actually performed in the National arena as for as foreign policy goes. You can not make him out to be soft on defense or intelligence, and he does have a degree in economics which what all the idiots were saying about the * in 2000, "he has a degree in business". If you don't like Clark and prefer Edwards tell him to get his foreign policy people out in front, this administration will kill Edwards on the lack of foreign policy experience.

Go Clark

[Leilani]

73. This has been my greatest concern about Kerry

New Time magazine poll, quoted by CNN tonite...don't have link..

has Kerry & Bush tied, Kerry leading on many issues...

but on National Security.. Bush has huge lead over Kerry.

The Repugs will run on National Security, & Clark is the only candidate to better Bush on this issue.

[KoKo]

65. Well.......cheers to you......Giganto Mo has Won.......you ARE thrilled!

:D

[ShaneGR]

66. Lol

Well, thrilled isn't the word. But I'm not upset.

[mot78]

70. I'd rather not say

This Election so far has taught us NOT to trust the conventional wisdom. Kerry was presummed the front-runner until Dean came along. Everyone thought you needed tradtional venues to raise money, but the internet dispelled that. Everyone thought you needed Unions to get votes, which is not true either. And everyone thought Dean was unstoppable, which was proven wrong in Iowa.

If I were Kerry, I would try my hardest to be the exception to the rule. He shouldn't allow himself to suffer the same fate twice.

[onehandle]

71. If nothing else, this should tell us something about DU...

The online community does not reflect America.

In some ways that's bad. Other ways, good.

[ngGale]

72. "The online community...

may have some bad. But, the people online have more info.