What would make me look twice at Kerry.

[frustrated_lefty]

To be clear, I am a Dean supporter. I dis-like Kerry, I don't like his votes, I don't like his skipping votes, I don't like what I perceive to be his waffling and fence sitting and waving with the wind. I could go on in this vein, because I really actively dislike him. But I won't.

I've been asking myself, recently, what would Kerry have to do to earn my vote. There still is no answer to that. I know that angers many of you, but I just can't bring myself to vote for the man. I won't vote for Bush. But I can't vote for Kerry. My voice, in this election, has no value.

But, I am thinking. What could Kerry do to turn a diehard Deanie around? I think a start could be made by thanking Howard Dean for revitalizing the party and by promising to place the Dean issues on the table and offering to fight for them. Not just empty promises, but solid policy platforms which reflect what the Deaniacs have been asking for. Universal healthcare, withdrawal from Iraq, elimination of the Bush tax cuts (even the middle class ones). Sex education and child care for those who need it.

That's my attempt at an honest answer, that's what Kerry would have to do to get a second glance and it's a stretch then. But that might cut it.

[RedDawnRising]

1. If Dean drops out, please consider supporting Dennis

Thank you

[Guaranteed]

19. Kooch would get a lot of support from Dean folks.

Dean supporters appreciate integrity.

[Straight Shooter]

2. Don't hold your breath.

There's a lot more making up to Dean that kerry needs to do besides just putting his issues on the table and offering to fight for them. I don't want words, anyway, I want genuine action and results.

Keep supporting Dean. Sometimes the reward is not in front of us, but it's still there.

[frustrated_lefty]

5. Dean still receives my money and admiration. :)

Here and in the workplace I see a growing divide among democrats which can only spell success for Bush in November.

So, I ask, how can we get together? Maybe my ideas are stupid, please feel free to trash them. If dems are going to put up a fight, we have to have a notion of what our people want, and the only way we can have that is if we talk.

And, if you check my post, I didn't say that would win me over to Kerry. It would earn a second glance. Anyone deserves a second chance. Kerry pushes the line, but his supporters are faithful and invigorated. They, at the very least, deserve to have their voices heard. In my opinion, at least.

edited for a typo

[For PaisAn]

3. But....

then he wouldn't be Kerry. He is what he is. Any attempt to appear otherwise would be a farce. I don't like him either. He is a waffling, duplicitous opportunist. And he can't undo his votes. Yes, he's better than Bush but I'm have a difficult time considering having to vote for him. It is a dilemma.

[idlisambar]

4. I am close to where you are...

I don't think I can vote for Kerry, but if it comes down to it I can vote against Bush, and it's what we have to do I guess. We'll just have to wait a few more years to get another chance at real reform.

[MasonJar]

6. I cannot believe what I am reading here. You must not truly

understand the disaster facing our country. We have a president who is subservient to the PNAC and the Christian Right. He will not allow stem cell research; this research is being done in other countries, but not here. The born-agains would not like it. Bush is destroying the environment with greedy delight. He is too stupid to realize that the ice caps are melting at an alarming rate. Three Nobel economists say that his policies on the economy are bull---t; one even went further and delared Shrub to be the worst president this country has ever had. He has insulted every ally we have. The world hates him and by extension all of us in the US (and with good reason.) We have a president who believes in pre-emptive war. In 3 years he has attacked two countries, maimed and murdered both American soldiers, members of the international press, 1000's of Iraqi citizens, including small children whose heads were blown off. Our economy is in shambles. He has managed to get rid of a substantial surplus and accrue a devastating deficit in only 2 1/2 years. Bush is probably the least educated man ever to graduate from Yale and Harvard; those two revered institutions must be cringing with embarrassment. His curiosity can be placed on the back of a nat. He is easily bored and immeasurably boring. He is as dumb as last year's leftovers. He is responsible for not warning the airlines about a possible hi-jacking of commercial airlines. He has proceeded to use 9/11 as a political tool ever since he let it happen. I literally could go on all night, but I think that I have made my point. He and his cronies are being investigated by everyone (and rightfully so.) Please do not cancel my vote by giving this loser your vote. I do not think under the present circumstances that we can afford to NOT vote for whomever the party chooses.
In relation to John Kerry I know he is a very valued proponent of the environment; his record on the environment is so strong that he received a 96% rating on his votes for the environment, He worked very hard on the KYoto Treaty which I am sure know Stump refused to back. I know that he has a very liberal voting record. Kerry went to Viet Nam and fought valiantly and then came home disillusioned by what he saw there and joined the protest against the was. There is much more.

[frustrated_lefty]

7. MasonJar,

I think I understand exactly what is at stake here. I've been communicating with european scientists, and we're planning to move my family out of the US.

What you seem to be doing is portraying a picture where our ONLY two choices are Bush or Kerry. I'm taking the third option for now.

Before you go back to pointing out what a nasty human being I am, please recall I started this thread asking how we could come together.

[idlisambar]

14. Yes, Bush is bad.

Bush is probably the worst president since Harding, or possibly ever, but as bad as he is it doesn't mean Kerry deserves our vote.

Kerry's voting record on the environment is great, but the problem is that he is an unabashed believer in corporate globalization in the style of Clinton. I fear that Kerry's faith in corporate power does more harm in the long run to the environment than whatever tinkering Kerry might be able to do on the edges here at home.

For me it doesn't matter how liberal you are on various side issues, if you don't understand the big picture on this you are missing 90% of the game. Kucinich is the only one in this race who really gets it, while Dean and Edwards have begun to get it, but not Kerry. If I vote for Kerry it will be for the other 10% that I do like, besides there is at least the hope that Kerry will come around or at least buy a little time -- I think his intentions are basically good.

[George_Bonanza]

17. How is Dean so different from Kerry?

Look, there is virtually no real difference between Edwards, Dean, and Kerry. If you're a Kucinich person, I can fully comprehend why you would be hesitant to support more moderate candidates like the three mentioned. But I think it's pretty over-dramatic for Dean supporters to act like it's a choice between Reagan (Kerry) and FDR (Dean).

Don't like NAFTA? Fine. Vote Kucinich. Or Edwards, although I'm not quite sure how anti-NAFTA he is. But for Dean supporters to call on Kerry for his support for NAFTA is extremely hypocritical and blind.

Tell me, what difference do you see:

From DeanForAmerica.com

"But NAFTA is here to stay — our economies have become deeply integrated. So Governor Dean believes that we need to negotiate a “New Deal” with Mexico. For instance, to help generate increased economic growth in Mexico, the US and Canada could establish a large development fund to build needed infrastructure, fund education programs etc. In exchange, Mexico would agree on a set of enforceable labor rights and environmental standards. Once Governor Dean believes that we have a real plan in place that will generate Mexican economic growth, reaching an immigration accord that addresses legalization and the flow of future migrants will become much less problematic. If there are jobs and opportunities in Mexico, pressure to come to the US in search of work will diminish naturally."

"Unfortunately, President Bush is squandering this important opportunity. He is trying to export NAFTA to the rest of the hemisphere. Once again, the President and his administration have prioritized protecting intellectual property rights, capital, and the interests of investors over the interests of workers. The current version of the agreement fails to include the type of tough labor and environmental provisions that Governor Dean favors. Therefore, Governor Dean opposes the FTAA."

"I supported NAFTA, I supported the WTO." (courtesy of http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Howard_Dean_Free_Trade.htm)

From JohnKerry.com

"Review Existing Trade Agreements. John Kerry will also order an immediate 120 day review of all existing trade agreements to ensure that our trade partners are living up to their labor and environment obligations and that trade agreements are enforceable and are balanced for America’s workers. He will consider necessary steps if they are not. And John Kerry will not sign any new trade agreements until the review is complete and its recommendations put in place. He believes all new trade agreements must have strong labor and environmental standards."

"The important thing is, I would not support the Free Trade of the Americas Act or the Central American Free Trade Act until they have stronger standards in them. If they sent them to my desk, I'd veto them.... I am as strongly committed as Kucinich is to worker rights, but it would be disastrous to just cancel NAFTA and withdraw from the WTO." (courtesy of http://www.issues2000.org/2004/John_Kerry_Free_Trade.htm)

Anybody who sees an unforgiveable difference between Dean and Kerry are either purposely playing dumb, or do not belong in political debates.

[idlisambar]

23. The difference in the statements

Dean -- These trade agreements are causing some real problems, this is what I would like to do about it...

Kerry -- I'll have to think about it...

The (almost) unforgivable difference is that Kerry is just paying lip-service to the problems posed by corporate globalization. You're right that Kucinich is a lot better than Dean, Kerry, or Edwards on this issue, but I am afraid that under Kerry there will not even be a debate.

Frankly, I find Dean's proposed solution inadequate, but Dean at least seems to understand that there is a problem without having to form a committee.

And NAFTA is only one piece, Dean has generally been more aggressive than Kerry in pointing out the problems posed by unchecked corporate power, surely you recognize this. Remember when he said he would like to break up the major media outlets on Hardball, and then when he proposed "re-regulation" to curb corporate abuses a few months back in Houston. Dean also seems to "get" the broader picture that in the drive for "efficiencies" that corporations offer we lose our sense of community and a little bit of our soul. If Kerry ever expressed such sentiments let me know.

You say I should support Kucinich because I agree with him on NAFTA? I suspect that at least half of the DU, including me, agrees with Kucinich more than any other candidate, but it is not just about who has the best views it is also about who has a chance to

a. get elected
b. effectively push an agenda/make a difference if elected

All things considered, I saw Dean as the best shot at some real reform. Now that Kerry is the guy, I'm not sure what to do next.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. I'm pretty clear nothing can change it for you with Kerry

While I don't favor Dean and hate his current pitiful campaign wherein he squanders his own lead while he is the frontrunner, loses one state and long before any scream, begins addressing his crowd that night from the perspective of a losing candidate, I could and did empathise with his disappointment and the disappointment of his supporters. I could, up until two weeks ago be objective in my assessments and give him the benefit of the doubt. I COULD give him a chance.

You, on the other hand have no commitment to even being OPEN to Kerry's finer points. THe only point of posts such as this is to GLEAN more negative comments.

Let's tell the truth. Vote how you want but dont even pretend there is any possibility that you will be objective. YOu've already told me enough to confirm that it isn't possible.

[frustrated_lefty]

11. NSMA....

what can I say, when I believe in a person, I go balls to the walls. Yes, Dean has my support.

I don't like Kerry. His supporters, really mostly you, have made me just bite down and ty and find good stuff. I don't like Kerry, your commitment makes me keep looking.

I want a reason for faith and I'm sorry Kerry doesn't shoot that into me at face value.

You're assuming I'm out to slaughter Kerry. Did you notice I NEVER touched the intern story? Neither one way nor another. Now what is possible?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

12. It's a start and it's appreciated

I too wouldn't go for the propaganda smears on Dean. I appreciate his record in his state, but I also think credit IS due to Kerry for MUCH of the information we know about the Bush's. Parry wrote the stories but if nobody in the congress had pursued them, they would NOT have gotten to the point that they did.

99.9% of Kerry's career HAS been on the supportive side of progressive policies be it wages or the environment.

There IS something in there for everyone. If you can ONLY give him your vote then focus your energy on the senate or congress to get HIM more votes to work with once he evicts Bush.

[JohnKleeb]

13. NSMA I got a book that tells everyones ratings from and other stuff too

social
economic
foreign
liberalism/conservatism
Senator Kerry's records were even mroe liberal than Ted Kennedy.
Hes 95% liberal on economics
82% on social policy
73% on foreign
Really F-lefty take a look at his record, he may seem like hes nothing but hes really a good guy. Try to see the good in all people, I have a hard time with Dean because I feel hes too moderate for me and his rhetoric confuses me, but I did try to find good in him, and would give my vote if hes the one.

[Guaranteed]

20. Kerry abandoned us in our darkest hour.

Some people aren't so willing to forget that.

It doesn't matter what a candidate's "finer points" are if they're too cowardly to stick up for what's right when things get hairy. A person's character is defined by what they do in the toughest of times.

Kerry's just not someone we can count on. He's not a leader. That's the objective truth. And that's why you know we won't change- because we value integrity.

The Democratic Party is finished. Their lack of courage will only serve their slow assimilation into the conservative mainstream. No worry, though- the vacuum on the left side of the spectrum will ultimately lead to the rise of another party with more solid principles. And, who knows? Maybe Howard Dean will lead it.

It's beautiful, the cycle of death and rebirth- reminds me of "Hamlet." It gives me hope.

[zoeyfong]

21. Hear, hear!

[RafterMan]

9. Don't try until the nomination

Wait for the pain of losing your candidate to subside (Clark supporter here). But try this out. Even if you donate to/campaign for a third-party candidate in the general election, give the Democrat until election day to win your vote.

Just because of the special awfulness of George W. Bush, don't swear you won't vote for the nominee until the absolute last minute.

That's all I'm asking.

[MurikanDemocrat]

10. Then your expectations are unrealistic

You are saying that what would turn you around is that if Kerry would adopt Dean's policies.

Let me explain something to you. The losers in the nomination process do not get to call the shots. Dean is not entitled to a voice in Kerry's policies, platform, or agenda.

And Kerry does have policies on the issues you have mentioned.

[frustrated_lefty]

15. In the interest of honest discussion

I would posit that the nominee needs to deal with the fact that the party is fractured.

And, yes, Kerry has policies on the issues I mentioned, but, from my view, he's wrong on gay marriage (I say as a straight dad of 4). Kerry could show balls here, but he's waffling.

I would further posit Kerry needs to stand up for something. If he doesn't. people like me are just sitting home in November. Yes, I am an evil critter from beyond, but, no, I'm not voting unless I vote FOR something.

[MurikanDemocrat]

16. Points noted and appreciated

For the record, I don't think the Gov't has any business screwing with the Constitution on the gay marriage issue. Equal Rights are Equal Rights. Period.

But I part with you on your other points. It's not true that Kerry does not stand for anything. Kerry has an exemplary 35 year record and history that proves otherwise, as well as a comprehesive platform now that he is running on.

Nor do I agree that the Democratic Party is fractured. It may seem so here in GD Primary, but in the real world it is not.

[zoeyfong]

22. You are right; it's all about winning, which is why i hope kerry loses.

Politicians like kerry only understand winning and losing, which is why i cannot in good conscience vote for him. He has already failed the most critical test a president will ever face - the question of whether to commit america to war. And the worst thing about this failure is that it does not appear to have been merely an honest but horrible mistake, rather it appears to have been a cold political calculation. A man like this and a party that would nominate him should not be rewarded with winning the presidency.

[eridani]

18. What would do it for me

An explicit and public disavowal of the following two policies. Namely proceeding with trade policies that are deliberately aimed at screwing US workers and the rest of the world, and countering that with military domination and direct conquest of a resource base.(Bolded)

http://icpj.org/nuclear_weapons.html

The "U.S. Space Command in its "Vision of 2020" brochure describes its goal as, "dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests and investments. Integrating Space Forces into warfighting capabilities across the full spectrum of conflict."

The command explains candidly that they are planning to control space, wage war, and serve the interests of investors. In their report they say: "The globalization of the world economy will also continue, with a widening between "haves and "have-nots." Therefore, the U.S. will be "challenged regionally" and needs to dominate "future battlefields."


http://pilger.carlton.com/print/124759


As for Iraq's alleged "weapons of mass destruction", these were dismissed, in so many words, as a convenient excuse, which it is. "While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification," it says, "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

[Alinsky]

24. Kerry is not a liberal

The Republicans call Kerry a liberal Democrat. He is not now nor was he as and elected official in Congress.

He has a poor voting record in Congress see counterpunch article:

It's deplorable. Three-hundred-seventeen bills introduced. Seven passed. And four of those were ceremonial ones -- designating special days. Voted for the horrific Telecommunications Act (in fact, led the charge); voted for the illegal war/occupation; voted for the Patriot Act (in fact, helped draft parts of it when it was first drafted under Clinton); brags about voting for class war on poor moms and kids--Clinton's welfare "reform" -- need I go on?

http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly02092004.html