This Time in 2002, Kerry was in 4th place

[JCMach1]

Should be food for thought for Hillary, Obama, et al...


http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/1111.htm

2002 Nov 8-10 (National Adults)
Al Gore 38
Joe Lieberman 13
Tom Daschle 12
John Kerry 12
Dick Gephardt 8
John Edwards 3
Howard Dean 3
Other 1
No one 3
No Opinion 7

[skooooo]

1. oh brother...

We don't need another Kerry performance. I'm putting my hopes elsewhere.

[skooooo]

2. oh brother...

We don't need another Kerry performance. I'm putting my hopes elsewhere.

[JCMach1]

3. Was pointing out how early it is...

Hillary is now the BIG target in the room.
Obama will burn-out his early 15min and have to show himself as a candidate.

This leaves an opening for someone with the organization and campaigning skills (like Edwards)... or perhaps a Clarke, or Gore to slip in...

It's too early to know ANYTHING!!!

[Hoosier Dem]

4. Kerry will be luky to get 4th place this time

Here's a reality check:

Kerry ran a LOUSY campaign in 2004. Aside from the fact that the Pukes stole Ohio, Kerry's performance does nothing to warrant a second bite at the apple.

He failed to respond quickly or adequately to the Swift Boat Liars, he never hit Bush hard enough, he made sure NOT to spend millions from his presidential campaign account (a cynical bet-hedge for a second run),and then he refused to fight for Ohio (unlike Gore, who hung on until he had no options left).

I don't like Kerry, though I held my nose and voted for him in 2004 because he was still LIGHT-YEARS better than Chimpy. This time, I'm really torn between Obama, Edwards, and Clark. (Unless Gore runs, then I'm with Al).

Sorry to eb harsh. I know there are many peopl here on DU who fantasize about a Kerry nomination in 2008, but it's not going to happen. He had his chance and blew it. We need a fresh face who can expand our base and offer a new direction.

[JCMach1]

5. I don't think Kerry will run...

[Hoosier Dem]

7. I hope he doesn't...

THe Democrats have only given one losing nominee a "do-over" and that was Adlai Stevenson in 1956, mostly because NOBODY was going to beat Ike and Adlai didn't seem to mind a second thumping.

If Kerry were really thinking about this, he'd look at how low his favorables are and just stay in the Senate. I thyink that, if he gets in, he's going to be humiliated in the primaries.

Americans aren't just calling for a real change of course, they're SCREAMING for it. That's part of the reason that totally new facers like Obama, Richardson, Brownback, and Huckabee are attracting attention on both sides of the aisle.

[blm]

6. The same Dem election legal team who told Gore he had a case to continue told

Kerry there was NO LEGAL CASE to continue.

You want to believe that Gore would have still continued if he had no legal case to make and the math was against him, too?

You want to believe that Kerry would have conceded even if he HAD a legal case and the math with him?

The circumstances of each were not similar in any way.

What was the same is that both ran campaigns that won, however the DNC lost it for both of them by not securing the election process BEFORE the elections. The election frauds discovered in 2000, were never addressed by Terry McAuliffe or the Office of Voter Integrity that was charged with securing the votes for Dem candidates.

DNC let the RNC steal it for Bush in 2000, 2002, and 2004.

Thank undergod Dean has been working to strengthen the party infrastructure in all those states McAuliffe let it collapse.