Reply #7: That's true and good food for thought.

[TayTay]

Remember, Kerry increased the Deomcratic vote in '04 by about 6 million. (And then there is the issue of election fraud which may have influenced the outcome by inflating the Repub vote.) It is difficult to see a figure as divisive as Hillary Clinton winning over the 'red states' that Kerry lost. (Hey, even Ohio.) Truth to tell, I see her as just as divisive a figure as Teddy Kennedy. (Except Teddy would never endorse that Flag-burning Amendment. He has more integrity than that.)

She doesn't do anything for me in terms of a Presidential run. I don't see her as a President. She lacks whatever that quality is that allows you to see someone in the Oval Office. It's very interesting to see her upstate numbers and to see that Kerry beat her here (from her 2000 race, which had a very weak opponent. Guiliani had to bow out due to his cancer and her ultimate Repub opponent was low on cash, name recognition and a good campaign staff. And still, it was fairly close, especially in Upstate.) Funny, contrary to what CW thinks, Kerry has won his MA races in the working-class cities and towns of Mass. (He is a popular guy with the traditional Dem base here.)

The pattern in the past is that some early candidate in DemWorld emerges in the first couple of years of the Pres cycle and looks unbeatable. (Hey, it was Gore last time, until he took himself out in Dec of '02.) I have a feeling this is the same thing. (Well, except for the money.)