Here, read it for yourselves :eek:



Kerry Says He's Not Ruling Out Another Run

Wed Nov 17,12:46 PM ET Politics - U. S. Congress


By MARY DALRYMPLE, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), who has $45 million left from his record-breaking Democratic campaign, hinted on Tuesday that he may try again for the presidency.


On his first workday back in the Senate since losing his White House bid, Kerry remained far from the spotlight, granting interviews to hometown reporters and joining the depleted corps of Democrats as they elected the party's new Senate leaders.


In his first extensive interview since his Nov. 2 defeat, Kerry was asked by the Fox News affiliate in Boston about running again in 2008 and reminded the questioner that Ohio is still counting votes from 2004.


He then said, "It is so premature to be thinking about something that far down the road. What I've said is I'm not opening any doors, I'm not shutting any doors." Kerry added, "If there's a next time, we'll do a better job. We'll see."


Reflecting on his loss, Kerry said he was not sitting around thinking about it. "You've got to go on," he said. "Do I find it some mark of failure or distress, the answer is no."


The former presidential nominee described himself as a "fighter," and added, "I can envision a lot of years of fight ahead of me."


In an interview with WCVB-TV, Kerry said, "Fifty-thousand votes — we'd be in a different place, having a different conversation," a reference to Ohio, which decided the race.


The Democrats have no clear front-runner for the 2008 nomination. Kerry has a distinct financial advantage over any rival based on his fund raising.


Kerry had roughly $45 million left in his primary campaign fund as of mid-October and could use that as seed money for another presidential bid. In addition, he had about $7 million on hand in a legal and accounting compliance fund that he could use for legal expenses in a 2008 campaign.


Because Kerry accepted full public financing for the general election phase of this year's race, he will have to give any of that money that remains back to the government.


During his day in the Senate, Kerry's colleagues thanked him, congratulated him and wished him well.


"Every time his name was mentioned, there was enthusiastic applause. Literally, every time his name was mentioned," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich.


Democrats met in a closed-door session to choose their leadership team for next year in what is certain to be an uphill struggle for the party. Not only did Democrats lose their second straight presidential election on Nov. 2, but the Republicans increased their numbers in the Senate and the House.


In January, the GOP will control 55 Senate seats to 44 for the Democrats with one Democratic-leaning independent.


Sen. Joe Lieberman (news - web sites), D-Conn., a former vice presidential candidate who lost in 2000 and a one-time presidential aspirant who fell short in the 2004 primaries, spoke from experience in offering Kerry words of support.


"He has a lot to be proud of, and I hope he'll find what I did — that it was great to have the U.S. Senate to come back to," Lieberman said.


Senators predicted that Kerry would find an expanded role as he eased back into his old job.

"Obviously, he brings some experience, and people are interested in what he has to say," said Sen. Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record), D-Neb., pointing out that nearly half the country, if not quite enough to elect him president, voted for Kerry. President Bush (news - web sites) received 60.5 million votes to Kerry's 57.1 million.

Kerry didn't make any remarks on the Senate's pending legislation nor did he deliver any speeches at the Democrats' meetings. He met privately with Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., the former Minority leader who, like Kerry, lost on Nov. 2. Kerry also thanked other Democrats one-by-one for their support.

Kerry got a two-minute standing ovation from his staff, whom he thanked for giving "your heart, your soul and even your vacation time," one aide said.

The day belonged to another Democrat, Sen. Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) of Nevada, the party's newly elected leader. Questioned on a range of issues as he assumed the job, Reid predicted that Kerry will find a role, pointing to the four-term senator's past work on banking and foreign policy issues.

"Senator Kerry is not a shrinking violet," Reid said. "We are looking for John Kerry to find what he wants to do. We are sorry that he's not in the White House, but we're glad that he's back on Capitol Hill."

Kerry also met with his policy staff to talk about health care, energy and other legislation that might build on themes from his campaign.

Not since George McGovern lost a bid for the presidency in 1972 has a senator returned to the Senate as a defeated presidential candidate, according to the Senate Historical Office.


Here's the link from Yahoo
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041117/ap_on_go_co/kerry

I guess as the old saying goes "The games not over till the fat lady sings" :)


It appears that in this case the old fat lady just got a second wind :D

Oh PLEASE no...

Has a Presidential candidate, who lost the first time after being nominated, ever come back to win? Must do some research, but I can't recall one.

Nixon lost once and then ran again a few terms later and won. He embodies the Republican parties ideals.

You're right. I had forgotten him. At least Kerry didn't sound as bitter as Nixon did when he went home in 1960.

Originally posted by Imagineer
Has a Presidential candidate, who lost the first time after being nominated, ever come back to win? Must do some research, but I can't recall one.
John Adams. Thomas Jefferson. Andrew Jackson. Grover Cleveland, though he lost the second time, not the first. Nixon.

Kerry wouldn't get the nomination. Hillary has that in the bag.

He then said, "It is so premature to be thinking about something that far down the road. What I've said is I'm not opening any doors, I'm not shutting any doors." Kerry added, "If there's a next time, we'll do a better job. We'll see."
From that, it's really a bit of a stretch to say "Kerry says he's gonna run again in 2008." I think that even if he does run he's going to have a tough time getting nominated.

Oh God help us ! I can't stand to look at him again !:mad:

Originally posted by DaveTooner
Kerry wouldn't get the nomination. Hillary has that in the bag.

I think the best chance for a minority to run for president would be a Black woman who served in the military for many years... She would win by a landslide! depending on her political views.

Well, liberals do consider the Clintons to be black, right?

Kerry wont run in the next election. It is not politically good to run for an office you recently lost. Too many people see you as the "loser". He may run again, but not in the next one.

I doubt very seriously that the republicans will allow a minority or a woman to sit as president. They'd rather let foriegn born people run than allow an american minority to be in charge.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
Well, liberals do consider the Clintons to be black, right?

Am I a liberal? ::sighs:: Thank you for defining that for me... I wasn't exactly sure what I was. And No... I do not consider Clinton to be Black. I just was impressed that he did not deny smoking pot, and he was a simple man at one time, that used to live in a trailer.

I didn't mean to insinuate that you were a lib.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
I didn't mean to insinuate that you were a lib.

Perhaps I am.... on most issues... however.. I let the first two comment's toward my political stance slide by. I just had to let you know. ::smiles:: Nice to meet you Dave.

Clinton admitted smoking pot, he just denied inhaling.

Originally posted by TheGreat Gatsby
Clinton admitted smoking pot, he just denied inhaling. Yeah, thats like saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." and then explaining that a blowjob isnt "sexual relations" in his opinion. And liberals worship that liar. Go figure.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by HaVoK
Yeah, thats like saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." and then explaining that a blowjob isnt "sexual relations" in his opinion. And liberals worship that liar. Go figure.:rolleyes:
The horse is dead and has nearly rotted completely away...please quit beating it...

Originally posted by HaVoK
Yeah, thats like saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." and then explaining that a blowjob isnt "sexual relations" in his opinion. And liberals worship that liar. Go figure.:rolleyes:

I'm sorry that just made me laugh. Anyway everyone has sex, and you would be suprised how many politicians have engaged in "questionable" activites... Clinton and Nixon got a bum wrap because they got caught... and Clinton was being persecuated for being "too honest". In my eyes... all Politicians are liars. Socrates had it correct when he said that Democracy was a system set up by the ignorant. I mean there are few "enlightened people out there and if the enlightented inidividulas are the minority, then we are letting the mass population vote for us, so it becomes a system rulled by the ignorant masses.

As a man, i dont blame Clinton for letting her blow him. Im pissed off that he was dumb enough to get caught in the first place. I will say that since he was married, he should have only been letting his wife blow him, but on this forum I know im in the minority in that opinion. Everything is acceptable for most here, that is, unless you believe in God. Oops...sorry for derailing the thread.



*Ahem* I hope Kerry does decide to run in 2008. That mean the republicans can count on running things for the next 8 years at least. :)

Better than Hillary...

I have to admit that the mental picture of Hillary on her knees doing slick willie is not helping me digest breakfast. Ewwwww!

Everytime I see a cigar I chuckle.

Originally posted by Echo2
Nixon lost once and then ran again a few terms later and won. He embodies the Republican parties ideals. bush ran once, lost, and became president........lmao.....

Originally posted by korg
bush ran once, lost, and became president........lmao.....
::sigh:: He won the electoral vote, get the hell over it.

The majority of the American public will always remember the stolen election. We will NOT "get over it" as you would like us to do. We realize you want us to forget it and move on, but that isn't going to happen. Bush will go down in history as having cheated his way into the white house. You can scream and hollor and jump up and down all you want, but it will not change how people will view that election.

I suggest you quit trying to ignore it and hide from it and attempting to stop us from talking about it and get on with your life. It happened and it wont be forgotten, at least not in the lifetime of every american that experienced it.

How exactly did he "steal" it? What did Bush do that was illegal?

In 1876, New York Gov. Samuel Tilden won the popular vote (51% to 48%), however lost the presidency to Rutherford Hayes, who won by just one electoral vote. In 1888, Grover Cleveland won the popular vote by a single percentage point, but lost re-election to Benjamin Harrison by 65 electoral votes. Does this mean that Hayes and Harrison cheated their ways into the White House? Did we not move on from these two occasions? Why is Bush's case so much different?

Dave, you and your neoconservative cronies have had this explained to you a thousand time. You also witnessesd it. If you still don't understand it, it is because you don't want to understand it.

It is past being debating about whether it happened. It did and nothing you can say can change that.

You may not like that but you have to live with it. Denying it will not change that it happened. It was a significant event in American history that will not be forgotten.

Hillary clinton will win

Originally posted by Echo2
The majority of the American public will always remember the stolen election. We will NOT "get over it" as you would like us to do.

The majority of Americans aren't as fanatically kooky as you are and don't view it as a stolen election. Yes, even most Democrats.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
The majority of Americans aren't as fanatically kooky as you are and don't view it as a stolen election. Yes, even most Democrats.

You are wrong about that. Many dems are not actively talking about it but they all witnessed it and didn't like it as did many republicans. Denying it happened will not make it go away.

Originally posted by Echo2
Dave, you and your neoconservative cronies have had this explained to you a thousand time. You also witnessesd it. If you still don't understand it, it is because you don't want to understand it.

It is past being debating about whether it happened. It did and nothing you can say can change that.

You may not like that but you have to live with it. Denying it will not change that it happened. It was a significant event in American history that will not be forgotten.

Yeah, I didn't think you could answer it.

So how about answering my question?