Obama supporters, what's wrong with Obama-Kerry?

[zonkers]

on edit: Kerry may not able to deliver a big southern state but he would seem like an nice fit in many ways.

:kick:

[jlake]

1. What's right with it?

[scheming daemons]

Didn't you quit DU? Knew you'd be back....

...

[jlake]

10. Just checking in for a few minutes.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. I'm glad.

Now we'll get to see his reaction when Clinton concedes.

[zonkers]

5. Jeez, it didn't take long jlake. How are you? I better re-edit my subject line.

[Window]

2. Not a thing, IMO.

[4_Legs_Good]

3. What does Kerry bring to the ticket?

Plus you don't want to balance someone who is dynamic with someone boring as hell. It's great to know that whoever our nominee is this time, s/he is going to not be boring ala Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004. Both Obama and Clinton have some fire and some charisma.

David

[zonkers]

16. Kerry has name recognition, a solid foreign affairs resume, received a ton

of votes when he ran for President.

[democrattotheend]

4. No good

I was a Deaniac in 2004 but I really like John Kerry now. But I think he is kind of damaged goods because of that stupid "botched joke". Plus, it would be kind of strange for him to go from being a candidate for president to a candidate for VP. If Obama could be elected and then pick a VP, I'd probably pick Kerry. But he's not the best choice for the ticket. I think Richardson is his best bet, if the womanizing rumors are not true.

[RaleighNCDUer]

38. richardson has a lot going for him

but he's too DLC for me. I don't know how much of a DLC true believer he is - he did come out strongly against the war - so maybe he'd be OK.

But i'm afraid you're right about Kerry - too much "damaged goods" to be on the ticket. And going from top of the ticket to #2 DOES seem strange.

[blogslut]

6. too sexy

:)

[ray of light]

19. lol--very hot! Two sexy guys...vs an ugly old guy...

McCain would have to pick she-man Coulter to try to build any sexy interest in his/his/her ticket.

[blogslut]

25. Meh, let's leave her out of this

I just really like John Kerry. But Mr. Kerry has moved on and he's a great Senator. One of our best. He'd also make the scariest Attorney General the republicans have ever seen. Fantasies aside, I am going to assume Mr. Kerry will remain a Senator.

[ray of light]

33. He is a great Senator, and we need progressives in both the House/Senate to take back America!!!

[loveangelc]

7. no

[peace13]

8. Kerry screwed the people of Ohio when he laid down

before the count. I would be opposed to him on the ticket. NO thanks.

[sandnsea]

I love John Kerry, but - no

No more northeastern liberals. Not this year.

[politicasista]

66. Me too. I think the Kansas governor,

or Biden would be good. There are more out there. I think Kerry is still one of the good senators out there too.

[olkaz]

9. Kerry has baggage.

Last thing I want to see are those god-awful swift boat people again.

Kerry's doing fine. Give him a cabinet position if he wants it.

[book_worm]

11. Nope. I like Kerry and he has been tireless for Obama but he's damaged goods.

[Recursion]

12. No. You need two outsiders

Either a governor (Obama-Richardson), a general/admiral (Obama-Clark -- less likely now), or somebody from industry (Obama - Jobs? Obama - Gates? OK, neither is likely but that would be kind of neat).

[closeupready]

13. Personally I'd go for that eagerly.

Though as others have said, he has baggage.

[stahbrett]

14. I don't like two senators, especially with neither of them having government executive experience

Just my opinion - I'd prefer a Bill Richardson type of candidate - foreign policy, plus governor, plus experience at federal executive level.

[ray of light]

27. Kerry has way more foreign policy experience than Richardson.

You don't have to look far to find it either.

He just got back from Afghanistan and Pakistan, where he's been multiple times before.

He's been to Iraq numerous times.

He's worked with the world leaders even after the 2004 election.

He went to Bali and representing the US on world environmental issues.

Lots more too. That's just off the top of my head.

Oh..and lets just add he's top-knotch on anti corruption--BCCI, Iran-Contra money laundering investigation...and wooops...his BCCI also lead to the Keating 5 who just happens to include...John McCain.

But...oh yeh. Richardson has more experience. (sarcasm tag)

[stahbrett]

46. Reading Comprehension 101 - try reading my post again

I suggest looking for key phrases, such as this one: "plus governor, plus experience at federal executive level.". You seem to have stopped reading when you got to "foreign policy".

[ray of light]

58. Uh...reading comprehension is fine..but Kerry's 20 plus years of Federal experience

at the executive level really didn't even need a comment comparing to Richardsons.


You hurt your case with your response and with your rudeness.

[ray of light]

60. Uh...reading comprehension is fine..but Kerry's 20 plus years of Federal experience

at the executive level really didn't even need a comment comparing to Richardsons.


You hurt your case with your response and with your rudeness.

[stahbrett]

61. Kerry has no executive level experience - he has legislative experience

Richardson was in Congress for 14 years, then was an ambassador, then member of the president's cabinet, then governor of New Mexico. More varied experience than Kerry - not a "dig" at Kerry... just saying that Obama, with many years of legislative-only experience also, would be enhanced more by a candidate more in the mold of Bill Richardson than someone like Kerry.

[ray of light]

62. Buddy, he has been on official government, SENATORIAL trips throughtout Europe and the Mid-east.

He has been a highlevel Senate ambassador or diplomat if you chose that term.

Besides, I doubt Kerry is even wanting the VP position. But I wouldn't put Richardson there by a long shot.

[stahbrett]

67. Yes, he's been a senator for a long time, with a lot of foreign policy experience

I did not argue against that statement. He does not have executive branch experience at either the federal or state level, which is experience that is considered worthwhile by many people.

[DuaneBidoux]

He brings nothing except negatives.

You have to try and bring some states on board that he wouldn't otherwise have. Clinton as a running mate probably would be good because a state like Ohio that might otherwise go McCain might go Obama/Clinton. I suppose you could say the reverse for states like Colorado and Iowa.

[ray of light]

21. Clinton has no negatives? Oh...yeh. On Planet Pluto she is a shining light!

[DuaneBidoux]

74. That is not at all what I meant to imply. On a personal level I don't like her.

And from what I hear I am not alone.

If you really wanted to talk about a running mate that would help Obama I would have to say it needs to be someone with a great deal of international and defense experience, preferably from the state vs. the defense dept. or a senator or congressman with a great deal of foreign policy experience. If Colin Powell hadn't long ago sold his soul I would have said that Obama could use him plus use the strategy of choosing a republican (a strategy that I believe if played right could get us more things than we suppose). Alas, Powell is a dead fish.

Who that could be I haven't given much thought. What do ya' think?

[krawhitham]

15. WESLEY CLARK

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. Nah.

He's unfit to be a heartbeat away from C-in-C.

[anigbrowl]

17. Nothing 'wrong', but I don't think he'd be that strong

The sad fact is that he's already lost to Bush, and Republicans would take delight in slamming him with the 'loser' tag. However, that's a disadvantage, not a barrier. I'd certainly give the idea more thought.

[NMMatt]

18. Not my first choice but much better than Obama/Clinton

I'd prefer Obama/Biden or Obama/Richardson.

[BigDDem]

20. Kerry could stand up and help out with the swiftboating

:rofl:

[taught_me_patience]

22. no

kerry adds nothing but failure and defeat.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

23. Not feeling it.

[zonkers]

37. Nor I. But I am not feeling anyone else either. Richardson worries me.

Never felt Clark was a good fit but he pretty much ruled himself out. I hear a lot around here about Webb but he has not much national recognition. Who else?

[DemVet]

24. The crops have been ruined on Kerry. n/t

[NJSecularist]

28. Kerry is damaged goods

He's a great man and a great fighter for liberal values, but he is damaged goods. He is also facing re-election this year, and he has every intention of keeping his seat. He's one of the fighters we need to keep in the Senate.

[MadBadger]

29. Kerry has a bad rep with the public...otherwise, they would be a favorite ticket for me.

[Hutzpa]

30. I'll have to agree with everyone

else, Kerry would be a liability in so many ways.

I'll dread to think of those swift-boaters popping their head again.

[calico1]

31. No.

Damaged goods. Besides it would greatly damage his credibility if he went from running for President and almost winning to accepting a VP spot.

I agree with whoever mentioned the 2 Senator thing. Whoever wins the nomination should ideally pick a Gov. It is a more well rounded experience. Richardson would be a good choice for either one.

[David Zephyr]

32. I think it's a great idea. Kerry should be on a short list.

No doubt.

[knixphan]

34. I don't fear swift-boaters, they shot the load...

...but I agree he's more valuable in his current seat.

Richardson
Dodd
Webb
Napolitano
Edwards
Boxer

...or the Dream ticket...Obama/Sinbad '08

[goletian]

35. kerry lost to bush, just like mccain did

both are thus tainted and unelectable.

[XemaSab]

39. We need ALL our senators

:(

[pansypoo53219]

40. i want more than 8 years

lurch is not the answer.

[Hatalles]

41. Kerry would be a solid choice.

Name rec, "experience," voters are comfortable with him, and there's nothing more the RW slime machine can throw at him. Fully capable of being CiC. He'd be a strong foil against McCain as well.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

42. There's nothing really wrong with it, but there are a lot better choices

My take on it is that Obama needs be neutralize McBush's perceived foreign policy advantage. Someone like Webb who might also bring along VA, or Clark would be better choices. Obama or even Flick can beat McLame on the economy, health care or any domestic issue for that matter.

[Not the Only One]

43. Not a bad idea, but, no.

Obama's campaign persona is about looking forward and Kerry says "past" in people's minds.

[Romulox]

44. Kerry is a wishy-washy, pro-war, DLC, free trader type

What in god's name does he add to ANY ticket??? :wtf:

[karynnj]

48. Kerry was the co-author of Kerry/Feingold

He was NEVER for the war - unlike HRC he spoke out before the invasion several times.

The DLC itself does not consider him DLC

[Romulox]

49. That was AFTER he voted against (after he voted FOR it)

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

[karynnj]

52. That is true - but you ignore the words before that

which speak of the process that Bush and Powell had promised to undertake. That process included inspections and diplomacy and going to war onlt as a last resort. He said then that if Bush violated those promises he would be the first to speak out - and he did. His speeches and op-eds in that time show him to have been against invading. His vote was wrong and he has said so hundreds of times - but it does not make him pro-war.

To say in 2008 that he is pro-war, when he has led the efforts to get out, is bizarre.

As to your oh so old clever he voted against after he voted before - it is getting pretty old.

Who exactly do you like? I tried to use search in this forum and it is not clear you like anyone.

[Romulox]

55. The vote was either very cynical or a colossal failure in judgment; I don't care which.

"As to your oh so old clever he voted against after he voted before - it is getting pretty old."

It was old the moment Kerry uttered such contemptuous bullshit.

"I tried to use search in this forum and it is not clear you like anyone."

I'd say it's accurate to say that I am extremely disappointed in the current state of American "leadership".

[karynnj]

57. The Kerry quote the Republicans used was not contemptuous

He had just explained in detail the 2 votes on an $87 billion funding bill - he explained how they were different and why he voted for the Democratic version (sponsored by Biden) and against the Republican bill that passed. He was asked about 5 minute later by a heckler about voting against the funding - and he referred back to the earlier answer. It was not contemptuous - and it was not about the war. It was a short hand response after saying he had already answered that. and yes, the short hand was unfortunate - and the media played dumb every time he tried to explain what was not that hard to understand.

Whether you think the vote was bad judgment, cynical or political - it doesn't change the fact that he was clearly against the war and he has worked on an exit plan more than almost anyone else.

[busymom]

45. Gag

I'll never vote for Kerry...I made that mistake already.

[Xithras]

47. I think he should ask Janet Napolitano

She's pro-Obama, is a governor (which will help the ticket), and is a woman (which may help to calm down the many women who are going to be pissed about losing the opportunity for a female presidency under Hillary). She's a former federal attorney under the Clinton administration and was an Az. attorney general, which should appeal to the law and order types. She's also term limited out in a couple of years, so a VP job offer might be readily accepted. She appeals to a crowd that Obama doesn't and will help to broaden the ticket.

[TBF]

50. Someone new...

I liked Kerry and voted for him. But he really is in the past, along with Gore (whom I still love), and others. Obama needs someone who hasn't run already. The exception might be Edwards, but he doesn't have the foreign policy experience. I like Richardson, but there are probably others who would be just fine. Perhaps there is a dem/moderate governor out there with military experience. I have a feeling Obama is going to surprise us with someone we're not expecting.

[dansolo]

51. He voted for the IWR

The most significant aspect about Obama's campaign is he objection to the Iraq War. He would severely dilute his message if he were to pick a VP who voted for the IWR. This also eliminates Biden and Dodd, for the same reason.

[Cogito ergo doleo]

53. He's ok - but what about someone new like Jay Inslee (WA)?

more> http://www.congress.org/bio/id/612

[jazzjunkysue]

54. So I can watch him concede early to two lame, boneheaded republicans?

Gee. Let me think about that.

no.

[blm]

56. Second slowest concession in American history for those of you playing at home.

.

[jazzjunkysue]

69. In the first computer-rigged election, ever. He should have stayed and

fought. He didn't. He's done.

[blm]

70. Terry McAuliffe's DNC made SURE there would be no evidence to access by refusing to secure

election process.

There was nothing to take into that fight. No math. No legal evidence. No Dem PARTY willing to take on another battle.


There isn't a braver lawmaker to be found in modern history, and yet the spin that has been put up against him has been accepted by those who should know better and has only helped those who benefit most from keeping Kerry's influence downplayed.

BTW - since y'all haven't FIGURED this out on your own - who the heck do y'all THINK has been helping Obama with a national network to go up against the Clintons? Kerry's been helping Obama way longer than his endorsement in Jan.

Once the Clinton loyalists were gone to help her publicly, the serious Kerry workers were still in place and readying for another run. You can't buy that level of readiness.

[annie1]

59. kerry = limpwrist. Obama def. needs someone tough to even out the ticket.

[blm]

72. Name ONE PERSON who took on BushInc more than Kerry has. Kerry didn't have a KERRY backing him

and supporting him on all the battles the way Bush had the RNC and the RW message machine.

The nominee is supposed to have a party machine working FOR him and not against him the way the party was set up by Clinton loyalists over the past decade.

[PresidentObama]

63. I'm pulling for Hillary. But Kerry has experience, and name value. He'd add a lot to an Obama ticket

[New Dawn]

64. John EDWARDS should be VP, not Kerry.

In addition, he is a white guy from the south, so it would give 'regional balance' too.

[PresidentObama]

65. Sigh, I miss John Edwards.

[slick8790]

68. He brings nothing to the ticket.

A senator from a reliably blue state who's proven he can't win a national election. Bzzt, nope.

[theboss]

71. I like Kerry but he would hurt that ticket

"The most liberal senator" doesn't need a Massachusetts liberal.
"The fresh-faced" candidate doesn't need the very face of the Democratic establishment.
"The candidate with no baggage" doesn't need the fully vetted Kerry.

Obama needs someone with experience who isn't terribly well known nationally. Richardson maybe.

[blm]

73. Kerry HAS NO BAGGAGE. RNC had to create a lie. BTW - Kerry has a REAL record

if you bothered to learn something about your country - he is the lawmaker who has uncovered and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history.

Those Dems who buy into the spin and lies against the some of the best lawmakers this nation has known and then continue to PROMOTE those lies and add to the false perception are just as bad as the RW slime who started the lies.

[dailykoff]

75. Sounds good to me.

Too bad it's too late to rec.

:kick: