although I would prefer someone other than Kerry - he is the only one that can win, that IS the reality for dems/others that want bush out: "beggars can't be choosy"
this is our last shot-if we have 4 more years of the bush cabal, well...perish the visual on that.

Despite my preference for Dean, I think your instincts are correct. Of course, it is still early in the game. Dean has an early head of steam, which he could squander or use to his advantage. The challenge for both Dean and Kerry is to reach out from their base, but I think Kerry is handicapped by his equivocations regarding the Iraq war resolution. He does have a decent progressive record he can build on. Dean has elements of a moderate/conservative record he can point to. So the nitty gritty should be interesting to watch unfold.

And so long as Lieberman gets shoved to the side, I'll be happy. Sanctimonious shmuck.

I'm not really sure why you assume Kerry will triumph in the end. Yeah it's probably a good bet that he will overtake Dean on the left front, but unless Kerry can somehow break his image of being an elitist New England liberal he will never play in any of the states that Democrats desparately need in 2004. He brings nothing new to the table.

Like it or not (and I think educated people who actually know the candidates will end up liking it) Gephardt is probably the only one that stands a chance at beating Bush. I've heard comments on Kos and others that Gephardt is nothing more than the Democratic Bob Dole, but for Democrats, that could be a good thing.

Democrats tend to look for an fresh face outsider for their nominee for president (Clinton, Carter) while Republicans have generally gone with someone who is the heir apparent within the party. They go with a pedigree. That's why they went with Dole in 1996 and somehow in 2000 pedigree really became literal.

But my point is, if there are voters out there who are going to swing, they might want someone who is a proven leader who seems to come from the same tradition of leadership that Republicans tend to favor, while Democrats will get a leader who is actually far more liberal than many Deanies give him credit for. Gephardt brings everything Democrats want to the table, but the hyperliberalism of Dean and Kerry are preventing people from seeing what will win.

How many states will Kerry really bring with him? All of New England. That's nothing new. Gephardt brings Missouri first off, which is huge, and he bring a more populous appeal for those who want a candidate who grew up like they did. Gephardt is truly the most like the average American.

Don't let his time in office fool you. It's not always a bad thing.

the other big news about the move on primary is the utter failure of the freeper campaign to flood the vote with votes for sharpton (which you wrote about a few days ago). sharpton came in last place, losing not only to lieberman, but also to "other" and "undecided"

I voted for Kerry in the moveon.org primary, but wonder if any northern liberal, ie, Dean, Kerry, Kuninich, can win against Bush? Since 1960 the Dems have only won when they nominated white, male, Protestant candidates: Johnson, Carter, and Clinton. The last time a Dem from north of the Mason-Dixon line won was in 1960. Given this history are Graham, Edwards, or Clark better choices to defeat Bush in 2004?

"the hyperliberalism of Dean and Kerry...."

Chris-

You think Dean and Kerry are "hyperliberals?"
Yipes - those guys are about as centrist as it gets, IMHO. Just shows how far the perception of the "center" has been shifted in recent decades...

"Just shows how far the perception of the "center" has been shifted in recent decades"

peter, in politics perception is everything. Kerry is seen as an elitist New England liberal. Like it or not. Skulls anyone?

Dean has cast himself as the savior of the left. I realize he's actually somewhat conservative on some very key issues - gun laws for example - but he's seen as a small New England state governor with nothing but leftiness abounding from his campaign.

These two can't get elected if they remain out there. Democrats need to realize this and select a candidate who can actually cater to the interests of the WHOLE country. Dick Gephardt is that candidate.

Here is why Kerry is not an "elitist New England liberal": he has killed people in combat, in fact, he is the only candidate who knows what it is like to be in combat. That gives an incredible leg up on Bush on the whole war issue.

My problem is that I am still wondering if the Dems have to nominate a southerner to win the presidency. Such a candidate appeals to a wider spectrum of voters and, just as importantly, such a candidate would force Bush to spend money in states like Ark., N.C., W.VA. and Florida, possibly MO. Not an insignificant thing if Bush takes Federal Matching Funds which limits his spending. Of course, if he decides not to, which he probably will, then that consideration is not as important.

You guys better settle on a candidate pretty quick. Bush will spend practically nothing on the Republican Primary. What is spent will be geared towards combatting the dems. Your in deep poop.

I don't think Democrats are in that much trouble if Bush's supporters do not know the difference between you're, which is a contraction of you are, and your, which is a possessive form of you.

Just testing you.

I beg t differ., I think it may turn out that Dean will beat gephardt in Iowa, and he may come close to beating Kerry in NH. If that happens.., all bets are off and then we'll see who takes the crown. My bet (IMHO)is Dean will best kerry, primarily because he is "of the people" whereas Kerry seems to be "above the fray".

Can Kerry Carry?

The Dean Diagnosis:

The ultra-leftwing has once again deluded itself into the politics of reaction. Angry over the war in Iraq, progressives have become blindsided by politician who is no more a “liberal” than Tom Delay is a “moderate.” In fact, candidate Howard Dean has said so himself. Repeatedly. As The Nation illustrated (May 8, 2003), “Dean said some welfare recipients ‘don't have any self-esteem. If they did, they'd be working’ and scaled back Vermont's welfare program, reducing cash benefits and imposing strict time limits on single mothers receiving welfare assistance.” In addition to such an indefensible act, The Nation pointed out that “Dean advocated sending nuclear waste from his state to the poor, mostly Hispanic town of Sierra Blanca, Texas.” As a woman of color, I keep wondering why the ultra-left and the white liberal establishment ignore the need for broader politics.

For people of color and working women, the choice is clear, a politics that address the broad political spectrum is the politics that act as a catalyst for minority rights. To the degree that politics is compromise once again, the naïve attention given to Mr. Dean has skewed political diversity, political reality and political effectiveness.

Yet the former is only secondary as to why Mr. Dean is not the alternate to Mr. Bush, as so many red in the face—albeit living in blue states—believe. The reason is simple. Mr. Dean cannot win. As the Economist (July 17, 2003) and other journals have reported on a recent sighting of one Mr. Karl Rove. “At one July 4th parade Karl Rove, Mr Bush's chief strategist, was overheard laughing as a group of Dean supporters marched past: ‘Yeah, that's the one we want.’” Need one say more?

A Southern Breeze:

Here is why the Democrats should choose John Kerry. He can beat George Bush in his backyard.
Can Kerry’s status as a decorated Vietnam vet and his vast knowledge of foreign policy (moderates, independents and conservatives), his strong environmental and labor record (traditional base), his support for education and his healthcare plan (the disenfranchised) carry the South? Yes. A Brahman for the South you say? Yes. His civil rights record, his support for local businesses and his economic development record will indeed appeal—not only to Democrats but—to the millions of unemployed and uninsured workers who have seen the Republican south decimate all legitimate forms of “local government.”

The decline of the South in terms of government I am talking about is not government services, but government’s ability to generate economic development and structural adjustments to meet global demands. Were anyone to look at the red states dispassionately, they would notice that the economic strength in the South has continuously been eroded while so called “free-market conservatives” have dominated local politics.

From The Senate and Beyond:

The Senate factor should not be underestimated by the Kerry campaign. Rather this issue should be addressed head-on in the following manner. As Tipp O’Neil is famously quoted as saying, “all politics are local.”

In the post-9/11 world, the reality is that all local politics are global. At no other time in history has knowledge and skill of foreign policy been so central to the requirements of executive office. The complications surrounding global politics require, not the black and white (good guys vs. bad guys) view of the current administration, but a firm understanding of the nuance and complexity of global convergence.

Mr. Graham as VP or no Mr. Graham as VP, Kerry can carry.

pissing
dripping
wet see through bikinis
see through
wet t-shirt
wet t-shirt contest
t-shirts
wet t-shirts
t-shirt
70 t-shirts
funny t-shirts
caught
wet pants
underwear
mens underwear
men in underwear
boys underwear
mens underwear
piss
peeing
girls peeing
women peeing
pee
watersports
wet t-shirt
wet
wet pussy
wet t shirt
wet see through bikinis
wet t-shirt contest
wet panties
wet t-shirts
wet t
wet shirt
wet tshirt
wet girls
wet t shirts
wet t shirt contest
wet pants