It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Kerry to Run for President in 2008

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Defeated Presidential candidate John Kerry has dropped hints to close aide's and others of the possibility to campaign again in 2008. Citing his campaign issues Kerry said, "Fifty-four plus million Americans voted for healthcare. They voted for energy independence, they voted for stem cell research. They voted for protecting social security..." Many Democrats support Kerry in pursuing another attempt to claim the White House, but other don't and blame his perceived aloofness for losing many votes.
 



story.news.yahoo.com
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Defeated Democrat John Kerry, who has hinted he may run again for president in 2008, vowed to continue fighting for the issues he campaigned on as his party's presidential candidate.
We need to be unified and we have a very clear agenda, and I'm going to be fighting for that agenda with all of the energy that I have, and all of the passion that I brought to the campaign," Kerry told reporters one week after the election that saw him beaten by US President George W. Bush.
Kerry made his comments after dropping recent hints that he intends to play a key leadership role in his party, and may even run for president again in 2008, despite last week's Republican sweep of elections for the White House and US Congress.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


For one I support Kerry in his bid for Presidency in 2008, if he decides to run. I sincerely hope he does, but I'm afraid Hillary or some other big-wig will try to seize the party's platform in 2008. We will probably need his leadership in 2008 more than we need it now, he will have to bring us out of a depression in 2008.

[edit on 10-11-2004 by Banshee]




posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Kerry should of won this election due to his blood being more royal then Bush's. Because he didn't win, I expect either Bush did do vote fraud or they wanted to leave Bush in power to lead us into WWIII. I believe the last 4 years we saw the good side of Bush, the next 4 he will be very bad. In 2008 Kerry may not choose Edwards for his vice, I believe we will see Hillary with him.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Since Kerry lost he is a lame duck!!!!! He won't even run in 2008.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 05:16 PM
link   
I find it hard to believe, I think he ( Kerry ) threw the 2004 election so Hillary Clinton can run in 08 by the that time slick Willy will be at the United Nations and they can usher in the New World Order together.

[edit on 10/11/2004 by Sauron]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Kerry can run but he cant hide - from his record that is or is it the lack of a record or is it the records that have not been disclosed. Oh I don't know am I flip flopping here or what.

I was for Kerry before I was against Kerry - there that ought to clear things up.

It would be a complete waste of time and money for anyone to back this guy for president much less as a senator, when 2006 comes around we'll see what happens.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I don't know why so many people think Hillary has a real chance... Let's face facts, here: she's a woman. If America is as conservative as this past election has shown, then there is no chance in a deadhorse Scottish Hell that she will win the majority of Democratic primary votes, let alone America's votes.

'Kay, so we've got that covered.

Kerry has no chance either - as many people have said, votes cast for the democratic party weren't votes for Kerry, they were votes for Not-Bush. He is out.

Now.

What the hell is so bad about Bush, eh? Is Bush the worst president of all time? No. Warren Harding was. Tea Pot Dome, anyone? This guy single-handedly sold America to corporations. Bush couldn't beat that if he strangled a three legged dog to death in front of kindergarteners.

Zip



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ycon
Kerry should of won this election due to his blood being more royal then Bush's. Because he didn't win, I expect either Bush did do vote fraud or they wanted to leave Bush in power to lead us into WWIII. I believe the last 4 years we saw the good side of Bush, the next 4 he will be very bad. In 2008 Kerry may not choose Edwards for his vice, I believe we will see Hillary with him.


Kerry did win the election, so the royal blood thing still holds. The fact that the upstart with less royal blood hoodwinked the election as the exit polls reflect is no exception to the rule. Hillary wants the prize and will probably get it, at least being a candidate. By then they may amend the Constitution, repealing the 22nd amendment, thus allowing Bush to continue as our dictator. So it is not over, until it is over, with regards to Yogi Berra or Yogi Bear, whatever you prefer.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkipShipman
Kerry did win the election, so the royal blood thing still holds. The fact that the upstart with less royal blood hoodwinked the election as the exit polls reflect is no exception to the rule. Hillary wants the prize and will probably get it, at least being a candidate. By then they may amend the Constitution, repealing the 22nd amendment, thus allowing Bush to continue as our dictator. So it is not over, until it is over, with regards to Yogi Berra or Yogi Bear, whatever you prefer.


Are you serious?

Kerry lost the election, dude. That's why Bush is in office and Kerry is in the Senate. The royal blood thing has FAILED. This election was LEGITIMATE. The red states voted REPUBLICAN. REPUBLICAN. REPUBLICAN.

George Bush will not become a dictator -- HAVE YOU PEOPLE COMPLETELY LOST IT? Just because George Bush makes some foreign policy decisions you disagree with and a fat guy makes a movie about it, you declare that he has tyrannical tendencies? I'm not seeing the A-B connection here.

The LOGISTICS of this are not even POSSIBLE. The armed forces would NOT support his hostile government takeover, and THATS what it TAKES -- let alone a HUGE, well-funded army.

(Edited last paragraph out).

Zip

[edit on 10-11-2004 by Zipdot]




top topics



 
0

log in

join