Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Kerry's "Fired Up" over return to Senate

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,753
    'Fired Up' Kerry Returning to Senate
    Aides Say He Wants to Act as Counter to Bush, and Possibly Run in 2008

    By Mike Allen
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Tuesday, November 9, 2004; Page A02

    Democrat John F. Kerry plans to use his Senate seat and long lists of supporters to remain a major voice in American politics despite losing the presidential race last Tuesday, and he is assessing the feasibility of trying again in 2008, friends and aides said yesterday.

    Kerry will attend a post-election lame-duck Senate session that begins next week and has said he is "fired up" to play a highly visible role, the friends and aides said.


    Aides said Kerry is relishing the prospect of renewed combat with President Bush, fighting such measures as the president's proposal to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. Kerry has spent most of the past two years on the campaign trail, meaning that his return to Capitol Hill will be something of a reintroduction to colleagues.

    Kerry's plans contrast starkly with the approach taken by former vice president Al Gore, who all but disappeared from the political scene after losing to Bush in the disputed 2000 presidential election.

    Kerry fueled talk about a 2008 bid during remarks at a Washington restaurant Saturday night. He provoked a thunderous reaction by reminding about 400 campaign aides and volunteers that Ronald Reagan twice sought the Republican nomination for president before winning it in 1980.

    "Sometimes God tests you," Kerry told the crowd at H20, a restaurant on the Potomac waterfront, according to an aide. "I'm a fighter, and I've come back before."

    Bob Shrum, Kerry's chief campaign consultant, told reporters during a Democratic panel yesterday that Kerry "will not do what Al Gore did after the last election -- he will not disappear."

    "He will be active and vocal," Shrum said. "He has one of the most powerful lists in the Democratic Party and one of the most powerful fundraising bases in the Democratic Party, and I think he intends to use it to speak out."

    Several Democrats expressed skepticism about Kerry's plans, saying they believe the party needs a fresh face and must turn a corner. One well-known Democratic operative who worked with the Kerry campaign said opposition to Bush, not excitement about Kerry, was behind the senator's fundraising success. "If he thinks he's going to capitalize on that going forward, he's in for a surprise," said the operative, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

    Another Democrat involved in Kerry's campaign strategy -- who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, in order to be more candid -- said: "I can't imagine people are going to say, 'It worked pretty well last time. This is what we need next time.' "

    Kerry has mostly remained at his Boston home since Election Day and has spent some of that time preparing for his return to the Senate. The friends and aides said he wants to use his new following and credibility to become a major force on legislation that will extend well beyond his previous portfolio of national security issues.

    The senator from Massachusetts is also contemplating establishing a political action committee and perhaps a think tank to elevate his role during the jockeying over the definition and leadership of the Democratic Party. Kerry lost to Bush by three percentage points in the popular vote and by 34 electoral votes. The president carried 31 states to 19 for Kerry.

    Shrum made his remarks in an appearance at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast with James Carville, chief strategist of Bill Clinton's first presidential campaign, and Stan Greenberg, a Democratic pollster. The session started out as a clinical dissection of what went right for Bush and wrong for Kerry.

    But it quickly became a blunt, emotional discussion of the future of the Democratic Party -- a high-decibel preview of countless conversations that will occur as Democrats try to figure out how to retake the White House after winning only twice in the past seven elections.

    "I'm not in denial. Reality hit me," Carville said. "Let's take the greatest morality story of all -- we're born again," he added, in a play on words connoting both his view that the party needs a fundamental change, as well as the importance of evangelical Christians to Bush.

    "We have to treat the disease, not the symptom," Carville said. "The purpose of a political party is to win elections, and we're not doing that."

    Carville said that the party's concern about interest groups had resulted in "litanies, not a narrative."

    "The party needs a narrative," he said. adding later that one possibility would to become "an aggressively reform, anti-Washington, anti-business-as-usual party."

    Greenberg said that big forces had been at work in the election, meaning that mere tinkering was not the answer for Democrats. He said Bush had cleverly freed himself from the normal standards by which an incumbent is judged.

    "In being successful in making the election about security/safety and values," Greenberg said, "they don't say, 'Vote for us because we're making progress.' They say, 'Vote for our worldview.' " Greenberg said that "downscale America, starting with rural voters and cascading with older, blue-collar America, shifted to Bush" in the last 10 days of the race, including some union voters.

    Shrum said of the campaign's decision to emphasize a final-week revelation about missing explosives in Iraq: "There wasn't disagreement inside the campaign about that. So if it was a mistake, it was a mistake that we all share responsibility for."

    Shrum acknowledged that he had not seen the problems at the time, saying that he believed on Election Day and the night before that Kerry would win. "All the polls appeared to be moving in the right direction," Shrum said. "We thought, 'We're ahead in the battleground states, we'll win in the battleground states.' "

    Also yesterday, the Associated Press quoted a party veteran as saying that Howard Dean, who lost the nomination fight to Kerry, is considering a bid to become chairman of the Democratic National Committee.








    Here is a question for the liberals here, If Kerry was running again in 2008, would you support him over say, Obama, Edwards, or Hillary. My guess is that you wouldn't.

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    He needs to hang it up. A majority of Americans don't want a thinker in the whitehouse. The Democratic party has to find some southern yokle who calls himself a Democrat to run.

    Stop all this talk about Obama. I agree he would be a great candidate, if he was white. But lets be honest here, there is no chance in hell a black person will be elected president anytime in the near future. There is too much racism, especially in less populated areas. People may not even consciencly know it, but deepdown they will not support him.

    I'm sick of you Republicans trying to offer Democrats advice on how to win next time. Don't you see what you are doing? Don't you think for a second that by reiterating the GOP talking points that you are simply trying to stir more hatred towards Democrats? Take for example, after the election, the GOP comes out and says the American people were tired of being looked down upon. I can't tell you how many times I've heard that crap. The people we look down upon are not our base, so screw them. The GOP has all the answers, they are trying to act as a "mentor" on how to win elections. The democrats don't need their advice, thank you.

    I do not support Hillary for the same reason as Obama, there is too much predjudice against women for her to be elected. Plus you Republicans hate her more than any Democrat I can think of. You guys were even saying you wouldn't mind if Kerry one because it would ensure Hillary couldn't run for another 8 years. I can't imagine the smear campaign you guys would launch agaist her.

  3. #3
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Mavrik[/i]@Nov 9 2004, 07:00 PM
    [b]
    Here is a question for the liberals here, If Kerry was running again in 2008, would you support him over say, Obama, Edwards, or Hillary. My guess is that you wouldn't. [/b][/quote]
    id support him over hillary and edwards cause they are also useless... but not obama... but he's too young.

    a governor like Easley will come out of nowhere and make it a race... the Dems need to seriously change the way they do business, cause they botched this election big time.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,753
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 9 2004, 07:33 PM
    [b] He needs to hang it up. A majority of Americans don't want a thinker in the whitehouse. The Democratic party has to find some southern yokle who calls himself a Democrat to run.

    Stop all this talk about Obama. I agree he would be a great candidate, if he was white. But lets be honest here, there is no chance in hell a black person will be elected president anytime in the near future. There is too much racism, especially in less populated areas. People may not even consciencly know it, but deepdown they will not support him.

    I'm sick of you Republicans trying to offer Democrats advice on how to win next time. Don't you see what you are doing? Don't you think for a second that by reiterating the GOP talking points that you are simply trying to stir more hatred towards Democrats? Take for example, after the election, the GOP comes out and says the American people were tired of being looked down upon. I can't tell you how many times I've heard that crap. The people we look down upon are not our base, so screw them. The GOP has all the answers, they are trying to act as a "mentor" on how to win elections. The democrats don't need their advice, thank you.

    I do not support Hillary for the same reason as Obama, there is too much predjudice against women for her to be elected. Plus you Republicans hate her more than any Democrat I can think of. You guys were even saying you wouldn't mind if Kerry one because it would ensure Hillary couldn't run for another 8 years. I can't imagine the smear campaign you guys would launch agaist her. [/b][/quote]
    Wasn't offering you advice, just merely asking you if you would support him.

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,753
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti+Nov 9 2004, 07:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (bitonti @ Nov 9 2004, 07:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Mavrik[/i]@Nov 9 2004, 07:00 PM
    [b]
    Here is a question for the liberals here, If Kerry was running again in 2008, would you support him over say, Obama, Edwards, or Hillary. My guess is that you wouldn&#39;t. [/b][/quote]
    id support him over hillary and edwards cause they are also useless... but not obama... but he&#39;s too young.

    a governor like Easley will come out of nowhere and make it a race... the Dems need to seriously change the way they do business, cause they botched this election big time. [/b][/quote]
    I never really thought Edwards has much respect for Kerry to begin with so it would be interesting to see the mudslinging they threw at each other if each ran again in 08.

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Naples FL
    Posts
    43,529
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 9 2004, 07:33 PM
    [b] He needs to hang it up. A majority of Americans don&#39;t want a thinker in the whitehouse. The Democratic party has to find some southern yokle who calls himself a Democrat to run.

    Stop all this talk about Obama. I agree he would be a great candidate, if he was white. But lets be honest here, there is no chance in hell a black person will be elected president anytime in the near future. There is too much racism, especially in less populated areas. People may not even consciencly know it, but deepdown they will not support him.

    I&#39;m sick of you Republicans trying to offer Democrats advice on how to win next time. Don&#39;t you see what you are doing? Don&#39;t you think for a second that by reiterating the GOP talking points that you are simply trying to stir more hatred towards Democrats? Take for example, after the election, the GOP comes out and says the American people were tired of being looked down upon. I can&#39;t tell you how many times I&#39;ve heard that crap. The people we look down upon are not our base, so screw them. The GOP has all the answers, they are trying to act as a "mentor" on how to win elections. The democrats don&#39;t need their advice, thank you.

    I do not support Hillary for the same reason as Obama, there is too much predjudice against women for her to be elected. Plus you Republicans hate her more than any Democrat I can think of. You guys were even saying you wouldn&#39;t mind if Kerry one because it would ensure Hillary couldn&#39;t run for another 8 years. I can&#39;t imagine the smear campaign you guys would launch agaist her. [/b][/quote]
    Gee 109..I&#39;d vote for a Zell Miller..Got any like him in the Wings?? ;)

  7. #7
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    1,541
    So Kerry is fired up to miss all those votes again?

  8. #8
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 9 2004, 08:33 PM
    [b] He needs to hang it up. A majority of Americans don&#39;t want a thinker in the whitehouse. The Democratic party has to find some southern yokle who calls himself a Democrat to run.

    Stop all this talk about Obama. I agree he would be a great candidate, if he was white. But lets be honest here, there is no chance in hell a black person will be elected president anytime in the near future. There is too much racism, especially in less populated areas. People may not even consciencly know it, but deepdown they will not support him.

    I&#39;m sick of you Republicans trying to offer Democrats advice on how to win next time. Don&#39;t you see what you are doing? Don&#39;t you think for a second that by reiterating the GOP talking points that you are simply trying to stir more hatred towards Democrats? Take for example, after the election, the GOP comes out and says the American people were tired of being looked down upon. I can&#39;t tell you how many times I&#39;ve heard that crap. The people we look down upon are not our base, so screw them. The GOP has all the answers, they are trying to act as a "mentor" on how to win elections. The democrats don&#39;t need their advice, thank you.

    I do not support Hillary for the same reason as Obama, there is too much predjudice against women for her to be elected. Plus you Republicans hate her more than any Democrat I can think of. You guys were even saying you wouldn&#39;t mind if Kerry one because it would ensure Hillary couldn&#39;t run for another 8 years. I can&#39;t imagine the smear campaign you guys would launch agaist her. [/b][/quote]
    I know you&#39;re just being sarcastic about most Americans wanting a thinker in the White House.

    The Demoscratic party doesn&#39;t need a Southern yokel, just not a pompous, rich traitor from New England with no ideas that hasn&#39;t a clue how anyone other than New England lives and thinks.

    I agree Obama sadly won&#39;t be elected because of his race.

    Now, do you realize that you said it&#39;s crap that you&#39;re looking down on people as the GOP says... and then you turn around and say "The people we&#39;re looking down on..."? That makes no sense unless I&#39;m missing something. THEN in the same statement you say that the people you&#39;re looking down on "aren&#39;t our bas, so screw them." Well, that&#39;s exactly what the people that weren&#39;t your base thought Kerry were saying... and they didn&#39;t vote for him. It seems that the Democrats DO indeed need some advice. Maybe they should humbly take it from the people who won.

    I disagree with your comparison of Abama to Hillary. I think there&#39;s far less prejudice against women as there is against people of color. I think the biggest fear Americans would have with having an African American president (right or wrong) is that his/her policies would be SO redically slanted towards the benefit of his/her race.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Section - Kerry is nothing but a nakedly ambitious weathervane, even more so than most politicians are. He was simply a bad candidate. That&#39;s whay he lost. Bill Clinton would have trounced W in this election, had he been running.

    It&#39;s not that people don&#39;t want a "thinker" in the White House, it&#39;s just that they don&#39;t want John Kerry in there.

    Just a few questions - Why is it that when the GOP criticizes a Dem, it&#39;s "smearing" but then the Dems criticize the GOP it&#39;s not?? Do you think the Dems tried to "smear" Bush at all?

    Do you really think calling conservatives in general, and Bush in particular, "dumb" has been an effective strategy? Do you really think branding those who disagree with the Dems as "racists" "bigots" "anti-women" "neanderthals" or worse has been an effective strategy?

    I am against affirmative action, abortion and think that hate crime legislation is unconstitutional. Yet, you know that I am not a racist, bigot or anti-women. You&#39;ve calmly discusses these topics with me and tried sincerely to show me why you think I&#39;m wrong on them. Why can&#39;t politicians do the same?

    (I 100% admit that the GOP does the same thing, and it sucks.)

    We really do need a viable third party, cause neither party is much to brag about these days. This "I&#39;m right and you&#39;re wrong" stuff just feeds into it, and I admit that during elections, I get caught up in it too. I 100% wanted Bush to win badly and will admit that it clouded my judgment. It&#39;s sad, really. I wish we did have a viable third-party to hold these two groups accountable....

  10. #10
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]We really do need a viable third party, cause neither party is much to brag about these days. This "I&#39;m right and you&#39;re wrong" stuff just feeds into it, and I admit that during elections, I get caught up in it too. I 100% wanted Bush to win badly and will admit that it clouded my judgment. It&#39;s sad, really. I wish we did have a viable third-party to hold these two groups accountable....
    [/b][/quote]

    Help me in supporting the Libretarians over the next 4 years. Not because I agree with them, although I like them more than Republicans, but because they will take away votes from the GOP, which sadly seems to be the only way a Democrat will become president. Clinton would have lost both times without Perot.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 10 2004, 10:45 AM
    [b] [quote][b]We really do need a viable third party, cause neither party is much to brag about these days. This "I&#39;m right and you&#39;re wrong" stuff just feeds into it, and I admit that during elections, I get caught up in it too. I 100% wanted Bush to win badly and will admit that it clouded my judgment. It&#39;s sad, really. I wish we did have a viable third-party to hold these two groups accountable....
    [/b][/quote]

    Help me in supporting the Libretarians over the next 4 years. Not because I agree with them, although I like them more than Republicans, but because they will take away votes from the GOP, which sadly seems to be the only way a Democrat will become president. Clinton would have lost both times without Perot. [/b][/quote]
    I do like the Libertarians a lot...I agree with most of their positions. I&#39;ll check out their stuff. I&#39;ve contributed to them before, but have to admit that I didn&#39;t this time around.


    I&#39;m not really jazzed about the GOP either. Aside from the "teams" we are on, we don&#39;t really disagree too much about the flaws of the two-party system. A lot about the GOP pisses me off - war on drugs, death penalty, immigration, the ridiculous spending and overall growth of the public sector, the Federal Amendment to define Marriage, the absurd bills to ban flag burning, some types of censorship, their lack of flexibility regarding sexual education for minors, creationism in schools, etc.

  12. #12
    Good,

    Let him run again. It will for sure be a landslide in 2008...

    He is all fired up. It only took 20 yrs for him to get fired up and want to do something in the Senate.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us