Ciao!

You are correct in that too many people weren't thrilled with Kerry including me. But, I had to vote for him because I am appalled at the way Iraq went down and the results (100,000 civilian deaths?). I don't think Hillary will be the Dems' strongest candidate, as far too many people hate her the way that many hate Bush.

I don't agree with your silver lining. Although we can blame the GOP for what is happening in Iraq and around the world, I don't want to see them continue to make mistakes and cause more death. I want to see the U.S. and Iraq succeed for the sake of the world.

I can totally see where you're coming from. But I believe Kerry wouldn't have changed policies on Iraq much, certainly not ended the war or pulled out. So he'd be like Johnson, very weak going into '08 on the same basis as Bush, but would still be run as an incumbent by the Dems, meaning a staggering loss (probably on the scale of Nixon's '72 520/17 sweep). So in terms of long-term strategy, I still think it's good Kerry didn't win.

A vote against Bush (for Kerry or anyone else) could be a protest vote against Bush's policies, but a Kerry victory would continue most of the foreign policy ones anyhow, so the protest would go unheard.

Sad thing is, Moveon.org & other PACs could've spent some of their billions of dollars to promote local races to tilt the Senate & House in their favor, meaning that whoever won the presidency, they could've put an anti-war coalition in Congress. Instead, they focused almost exclusively on the personality of the president, meaning many potentially close House/Senate victories were thrown away. That's something to keep in mind for the '06 midterms & going into '08. To use a Clintonism: "It's Congress, stupid."

Finally, I don't think Hillary's as unpopular as you think. Many people would vote for her (from conversations & around the blogosphere) who voted for Bush this time around. Essentially, she's social liberal hawk. And if she runs w/ Obama ... I'd predict today (though far to early, of course) a Dem victory.

miguel. this is mary. hello.

one of the things that bothers me most is that the rest of the world sees this as america backing bush. when in actuality, almost half of the nation voted against bush. and i don't mean voted for kerry. as you said, he was a pretty lousy candidate and few americans were really excited about the guy. i can't wait for a new start in 2008.

Yes, almost half the voters voted against Bush. But whether you or I agree w/ Bush doesn't really matter when you consider this: Bush received 3.5 million votes more than Kerry, was the first candidate since 1988 to win an absolute majority of the entire vote, and he did better against Kerry than he did against Gore in 2000, in an election w/ the highest voter turnout in recent memory. The American people DID vote for Bush, we have to accept that.

Now, part of that is a poor Kerry/Edwards campaign. Part of it was due to the public's growing distrust in the mainstream media. Part of it was due to the public's distrust of celebrities & New England socialites taking the political center stage (the Dems should go back to its grass-roots politics and put millionaire celebrities on the sidelines). We can probably find a host of problems in hindsight. The thing is to now move forward, not get caught in partisan bickering, as Kerry said in his very eloquent & moving concession speech.

Also, we have to remember that those who voted FOR Bush aren't evil, immoral, stupid people. They're our friends, neighbors, perhaps even family. If you don't know a single person who voted for Bush, you live in a bubble. Same if you don't know a single person who voted for Kerry. The electorate WAS very split (as it almost always is). Hopefully we can all be gracious winners & losers.

And, yes, 2008 will be a clean slate. But to win it, and not sink into oblivion, the Democratic Party has to learn the hard lessons of this election year.

yes yes. i guess what i meant to say is, yes, bush received the majority of the votes. however. many people, especially europeans, overlook the other half of the nation who opposes bush and his "global relations". that's all i'm saying. just because bush is president of my country doesn't mean i speak with a southern drawl, live on a ranch, or mispeak frequently when giving speeches abroad. my sister and i were the only non-bush-supporters out of the seven people in my family. i'm not trying to whine. i just think people need to give americans more credit.