Dean's out...

[quietann]

... and I am sad. I hadn't decided for sure who I would vote for, and the "electability" issue definitely became important, but the guy got bad breaks from all the Powers That Be. And I can't believe the DNC can't come up with someone better than John Kerry to be the Democratic candidate. Feh! A Pox on All Their Houses!

Comments

[achinhibitor.livejournal.com]

Seriously, though, if Dean couldn't win any Democratic primary, what hope does he have in the general election? Especially after not winning Wisconsin and Washington (which have progressive traditions) and Michigan (which has plenty of disgruntled working-class people right now).

[gingicat]

Does this mean you've written off Edwards?

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

Well, he was also hit incredibly hard by a Fourth Estate that was basically in the GOP's back pocket. That balance has changed, with the press actually questioning the GOP now. This may continue.

Re:

[quietann.livejournal.com]

I just think he's not likely to get the nomination. A "Kerry-Edwards" ticket or a "Edwards-Kerry" ticket... what's the difference?

[klingonlandlady.livejournal.com]

I took the candidates-by-issue poll finally, and got Dean then Kocinicz (sp?). Is he still in?
My reaction to the Kerry thing was "the big-money corporate stooge wins- surprise!" At least he should be a better big money corporate stooge than Shrub, and will mean Rumsfeld and company get OUT.

Re:

[achinhibitor.livejournal.com]

IMHO, you're exaggerating. From where I sit, it seemed like the press was ready to crown Dean the nominee from somewhere in the fall up until the day after the Iowa caucuses.

As for the GOP, I think Karl Rove would sacrifice his first-born to have Dean nominated.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I think presidential nominations are a lot like the medal-awarding system of Olympic ice skating: You get it when the people in charge decide that it's your "turn" to get it.