so has Kerry got the nomination locked up?

It's been pointed out to me that it's ridiculously early to decide who's going to win, but I think Kerry gets it. A big factor will be how much the media decides to run with the line that Kerry takes a stand on both sides of an issue. The "liberal media" basically established the conventional wisdom that Gore fudged the truth about his background, which had a lot to do with his loss.

Maybe. Granite Staters can be weirdly knowledgeable, close to primary season. A big adjustment for me when I moved was realizing that in other states you are actually pretty unlikely to meet people running for president. In NH -- southern NH, at least -- it's ... well, it's exactly as stupid and common as it looks on television. "Hey Big Sully, whatchoo doin up this early, carn ain't ready to be hahvested yet!" "Goin on up to the Breakfast Nook, Skinny Sully, gonna meet up with Little Sully and have some waffles with Jack Kemp." Being able to talk about the candidates becomes a social thing, like knowing who botched the last Sox game, so there's at least more awareness of the non-frontrunner candidates than I've found the other places I've lived.

Is Gephardt going to run? I've been assuming he would, but don't see him mentioned in this thread yet.

yeah, Edwards definitely strikes me as not ready for prime time - he looks great on paper, lots of backing, Clinton's backing him, Bush is clearly afraid of him, and yet whenever I see him on TV he comes off as a lightweight - it reminds me with the preliminary hype around Dubya

well, maybe that's the point? we're not the people who have to be convinced. the people who would vote for Dubya are. Clinton's giving him advice. I don't know if that = backing.

Clark is getting increasingly bold in his criticism (usually not voiced as criticism per se, but undeniably meant as such) of Rumsfeld et al, in his CNN appearances, which is impressive in itself and perhaps suggests that he is testing the waters for a run. His politics aren't common knowledge, although he filed a pro-Affirmative Action "friend of the court" brief in the Michigan case, which is encouraging.

yeah, Clark's outspokenness is pretty interesting though he's got to lose that black sweater. however, his amicus brief is nothing special - practically the whole US military and corporate world filed pro-affirmative action briefs.

I'd love to see Kerry and Clark just because I think they'd go to town all over Bush and Whoever. Not sure if that's the way to win, but not sure if there's a better way.

that said, i'll vote for anyone who can get rid of Bush. which probably means appealing to those who voted for Bush on the mistaken belief that Bush was a moderate. and who won't pander to the Naderites or let Nader get away with his bullshit this time around (or we'll have four more years of Bush). if that person is Kerry, then so be it.

I wonder if, as I think the Note said today, Kerry/whomever can start winning the election now. Saw some poll tonight on the CNN crawler saying Bush would win CA today. Name recognition time.

Senator John Kerry, who is a New England Yankee, Skull & Bones at Yale, Vietnam war hero who married into lots of money.

General Wesley Clark is a West Pointer and a Rhodes scholar born and raised in Arkansas.

That looks like a damn fine Democrat ticket if you ask me. A New Englander & a Southerner. Both are intelligent, proven leaders and highly-distinguished. They even look like a Prez and Veep too.

I hope that's what it will be.

Ditto to Cub's sentiment.

From the same people that make people believe Dubya is a Texan.

nothing has changed -- i'm still for Dean (whose views are closest to mine), but i could just as easily vote for Kerry. i like what i've seen of Wesley Clark, but until he puts forth his views on economic and social issues i can't render an ultimate judgment.

I think Gephardt and Lieberman are weak. I can't stand Lieberman. He's probably my least favorite Dem. Senator. Gephardt should know his role, and stay in Congress if he knows what's best. Bush would destroy either one of those guys I think.

If Nader and some joker jump in against Kerry, saying he's the lesser of two evils, I will forever hate the Greens and Ralph Nader, despite all the good the man has done.

But in their defense, one cannot blame everything on them. There are far more important cows to butcher, but I can understate any level-headed liberal's frustration at those brainwashed types.

Occurred to me this morning: Kerry talks too fast.

Interesting Note today on swing voters.

Edwards will make a great Veep. Graham doesn't have a prayer. Not sure Lieberman does either. Gephardt - I'm impressed with the politics of his health care program. Still too wonky in language, but he could do well with some work - he's the closest to Bush in presenting the ordinary American image. Kucinich is on some serious populist shit, which could go somewhere, but he's not tv-ready - comes off a ittle crazy. Dean was fantastic - passionate, plain-spoken, on message. But I'm seeing him with Northeastern eyes. Don't know how he'd play elsewhere. Al absolutely rules, from criticizing Kerry and Dean for fighting and thereby making the party look bad to mentioning "the hiphop generation" in his closing. Kerry maybe seems more a member of the pack now - a little boring, needs work on language - but he still is distinctly more Presidential than the others, and I think he still beats the others on positives v negatives.

that said i do think campaigning for kerry might be more fun if only cuz it'll let me keep working that 'cokehead deserter' meme on bush.

Though I imagine that phrase will be uttered once more after March 2.

For instance, Blount, I don't recall you ever explicitly saying anything about whether you personally are for or against the war, but if I had to guess I'd say you were against, mostly, right? So but Kerry has been back-pedaling ever since voting to invade while Edwards hasn't. Do you stick by Edwards just because of southern loyalty/"only a southerner can win" sentiment or what (and I realize that war is only one issue, but it seems like Edwards tends to lean right of Kerry on most everything)? Is it all based on some element of not wanting to put Heinz/anyone that close to a big corporation in the white house?

Augh, massive X-post, what were these golden stump speech contents?

kerry bugs me for a number of reasons -- yes, the iraq/patriot act/etc. votes (over which he's STILL squirming); that he's a bit of a stiff; that aside from being brave in vietnam he hasn't really done much of ANYTHING to distinguish himself; his rather underhanded methods in taking out howard dean (if only he'll fight bushco as hard and as dirty as he fought dean). and i'm really at a loss wr2 his "electability" -- even if one didn't think that dean was electable, why kerry and not edwards? it seems like some people are voting for him now, and are convinced that he's electable b/c, well, he's won a lot of primary votes. at heart, i still dunno whether kerry really "gets it" -- he's mouthing a lot of dean-esque rhetoric, vows to fight bushco hard and dirty, his platform is really good, etc. but i'm really not yet convinced that he isn't Dukakis v.2004, or our version of Bob Dole. if he has no competition at all, i am afraid that he's just gonna revert to being a DLC insider/weenie who's running just because he thinks that it's his due for being around so long.

i'd love to be proven wrong, and if kerry wins i WILL vote for him ... but nonetheless, that's where i stand right now.

to be honest alot of my edwards luv is rooted in 'he's a southerner like me!', his personality, the SPEECH, vague notions of 'electability' (kerry looks better on paper against bush, but on the field i think edwards makes the better matchup). ALOT of it is rooted in class prejudices - i'm all about po people growing up to be president.

:-)

Yes I also think Kerry is a big phony Blount. He is something of a last resort for me.

way xpost

I read a profile on him where the writer mentioned a massively effective closing statement Edwards gave in one of those big trials, something on malpractice, where he was asking them to imagine how the case would be seen from the infant's perspective.. really laying it on thick. Everybody really admired this and he won the case, and I thought.. if I was in that jury it'd take a lot of restraint for me to wait and call bullshit after the statement and not during.