Never been done before? Does the name Adlai Stevenson ring a bell? How 'bout Richard M. Nixon?

I don't think he meant the comeback, but rather the continuing leadership of a PAC in between elections.

Worthington Clotman for Governor!

The only chance in hell Kerry has of making a comeback is to put his personal ambitions on hold and put the larger interests of the democratic party front and center. But he doesn't seem to be doing that. In fact, he seems willing to trash party unity for his own ambition. That will get him no where.

Yaaaaaaaawn....

Excuse me for my lack of excitement... but why does he have to ANNOUNCE that he is going to be relevant instead of actually becoming RELEVANT... where was he YESTERDAY during the BK cloture debate? I see he voted against cloture - nice touch - but if he was a REAL LEADER - he would have made a HUGE STINK BEFORE the vote and SHAMED folks like Biden (as kos puts it... 'the democratic senator from MNBA') to stop cloture and accept a few amendments that would have made BK reform tolerable if not even DESIRABLE... if they had put the freeze on the GOP would have either blinked or the bill goes down... instead the GOP-lites blinked and we got a terrible bill.

Sen Kerry... you had your 15 minutes of fame.

".keep his army of 2.7 million supporters together."

That army is made of many anti-bush voters, rather than pro-Kerry voters.

Besides with him bailing over the Ohio "mis-count" most no longer have any respect for him.

I'm getting stomach cramps from the prospect of Kerry running again, not to mention all the yap-yap-yapping about Hillary Whats-her-name.

Dry Fly - you nailed it.

I'm not exactly giddy about self-help advice, but three words would help aspiring democrats: BE. HERE. NOW.

Otherwise, go the fuck home where you can feed the ducks for the rest of your miserable, worthless days. We are not your duckies.

Love,

I have to agree with KJS: Kerry doesn't have "supporters". He had a lot of people pissed at Bush.

Dean -- whatever else you might think of him -- has supporters.

It's ironic, don't you think? Kerry is -- once again -- copying Dean. Dean kept his supporters after losing the primaries, stayed relevent, and took the DNC chair -- over the fierce opposition of the current leadership.

Kerry's -- after losing -- is trying to stay relevent, keep his supporters, and take the 2008 primary.

Copies just aren't ever as good as the real thing.

We cannot win the next election with people like Hillary or Kerry as candiates. As much as I would like to see a woman as President, Rove would destroy her by bringing up the past and by telling people that we are once again voting for Clinton in the WH. Kerry had his chance and it has passed. No, we need someone who will stand up against all of those who wish us evil, and not be afraid to tell the truth. AND WE DON'T NEED A MODERATE!

"We're trying to stay relevant."

Is that "nuance"? It sure doesn't sound like the simple, powerful message that a candidate needs to get anywhere.

John Kerry -- a politician who's mastered the art of making Marcel Proust seem concise.

The only reason the RWCM & Rove float a "Kerry in 2008" or "Hillary in 2008" idea is to keep Moderate Republicans & Independents all hot, bothered, and lathered in foaming, rabid, Anti-Democrat spittle.

Although Hillary doesn't make any 2008 presidential hints, the conservative gasbags endless speculate on "what if" just to keep the Redstaters all riled up.

Hillary could just change her hairstyle and the Republican Noise Machine will use it as an excuse to speculate about a 2008 run, just to brainwash moderate voters that DEMOCRAT EQUALS ELITE EASTERN HILLARY. They hate her! They hate Kerry!

Just walk into any Redstate rural bar when FAUX News has Hillary or Kerry or Kennedy on - and watch what happens.

Why do you think the RWCM took Dean down? Because his message, as well as his being the messenger, would've appealed to the average wage-earning worker bee Republican.

DEAN/CLARK/maybe WARNER in 2008!

the conservative gasbags endless speculate on "what if" just to keep the Redstaters all riled up.

that includes tweety, right? (i think it does) cause he absolutely will not shut up about her. what a twit.

prole redstater, i sympathize, but imho dean won't run again. clark/durbin? clark/boxer?

So we took Gov. Dean down? Where was his support in Iowa and New Hampshire? Did Republicans vote in the Dem primary in the above two states. Nope, you guys get ALL the credit for Gov. Deans demise. Y'all allowed two small states to give you your nominee for president and then one state didn't even support him. Quit blaming others for your own shortsightedness.

As far as his reception in any 'red' state, his mouth took care of that. Being one of those "average wage-earning worker bee Republican"'s, I can tell you he surely didn't appeal to me or many of my associates.

I don't believe Chrm. Dean would pose any problems for 2008, from a Republican perspective. We would welcome it. I don't think y'all would ever do it, he'd have to resign his post to run anyway, and who do you get to replace him with his appeal? Clark 2008 would be nice and easy. Warner 2008 would be more challenging. Richardson 2008 would be very interesting. How about Tom Hanks for 2008? Or even the Meathead, Rob Reiner, if he's not a governor by then? Please don't bring us any of those Senators, or ex-senators.

Let's concentrate on holding the milktoast moderates accountable for the next two years.
Then in 2006 we will have a case for being 'the people's party' again. AFTER 2006 is the time to start handicapping the horserace.

I am going to return the compliment to Arvin Hill above (who said I 'nailed it')... no sir, YOU nailed it:

BE HERE NOW

Any of those candidates mentioned could beat the pathetic GOP lackies to crap in 2006 or 2008 or tomorrow - in blue or red states - but they have to stand up and fight for common sense middle american values... not credit card companies...

The BK cloture vote was a perfect opportunity squandered... all they had to do was be there for it, show up... and more than 'be there' physically - be there in spirt, ready - knowing how far they were going to push and how painful they were going to make if for the toadies of Citi & MNBA.

Damn people, even if Biden et al knew they had to eventually cave to appease constituencies at home - keep the fight going, visible for two maybe three weeks - keep bringing up amendments and alternatives... then press conferences when shot down, then more cloture votes, etc...

Show the country what a terrible bill it was - A TERRIBLE BILL IT IS! And either make it better (and make sure to take credit for that). Or if at the end of the day, the bill can't be made better, and it is going to pass anyway, the process has shown the electorate what the GOPers really stands for... and it isn't working people.

That is how you build character and prove you have values in the eyes of the public... not by spending millions on DC beltway consultant's opinions - hear that Carville & Kerry?

Sorry for not being up on all the upandcomers in the party but... what Clark are we talking about, surely not Wesley?

And how about my man, Spitzer, maybe not enough high level experience, but definitely an upandcomer

Well, unfortunately for the Kerry despisers, I am a pro-Kerry (4JKBEIA) as are very, very, many out there (both in blogland and in the real world). Even if you don't like him, I think you should reconcile yourselves with the fact that he may very well be the nominee in 2008.

People are excited about John Kerry and like him a whole bunch.

People are excited about John Kerry and like him a whole bunch.

Yes, that is why he is currently President. Kerry had his chance and blew it. He ran a horrible campaign. He dawdled for months, threw away his convention, and only got serious in the last month. Kerry only got the nomination by happening to finish slightly ahead of Edwards in Iowa. He lost, he is yesterday's man, and he needs to realize that. We have thrown away two winnable elections by nominating boring robots (Gore, Kerry) and I don't fancy doing it again in 2008. Hillary and Kerry absolutely must not be the nominees in 2008. Oh yeah, and not to mention, Kerry lost us a good number of Senate seats with his horrible campaign.

Here's what nominating Kerry did:

North Carolina:
Burr (R) 52%
Bowles (D) 47%

Florida:
Martinez (R) 49%
Castor (D) 48%

South Dakota:
Thune (R) 51%
Daschle (D) 49%

Kentucky:
Bunning (R) 51%
Mongiardo (D) 49%

Alaska:
Murkowski (R) 49%
Knowles (D) 46%

5 races we could have won, with a better presidential candidate. 2008 represents an excellent chance to win back control of Congress. Do we want to blow it by nominating Kerry or Hillary? If we had a better presidential nominee, we'd have a Democratic President and 50 Democratic Senators (counting Jeffords). Let's not throw away another presidential election.

People are excited about John Kerry and like him a whole bunch.

Ono you need some real excitement in your life.

I can't stop myself, everytime is "Ono", I think of Yoko. Sorry John.

chris65203, why not wes clark? admittedly, he wasn't prepared when he ran last time, but the guy's a quick learner (1st in his class at west point!), plus he's southern and opposed the war despite his lifetime of service to the army (maybe because of it). also he's not tainted by the whorishness of congressional dems.

hell yes, we want wes!

let spitzer be elected governor first. (which he probably will)