To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (322158 ) 1/22/2007 12:19:25 AM From: American Spirit Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577925 The current Dem contenders are not the real frontrunners. I go back to my basic contention, that Dems will nominate a white male in the end, and Edwards is not taken all that seriously except maybe as a VP. Kerry's barely included in 2008 discussions yet. That's the way he wants it for now. Frontrunners a year before the first votes are cast have a terrible track record. Remember who was #1 in 2003, Gephardt and Lieberman. Then Dean. Between the three of them I don't think they won more than a tiny primary or two. To tell you the truth, I have no idea why political reporters don't include Kerry in the top 3-4 names when discussing the race. They should know better. Kerry has more money in the bank than anyone but maybe Hillary and he won more votes than any democrat in history. Bush also cheated in 2004, which is common knowledge, and he ran the most dishonest campaign in US political history. Not a single Bush ad was true, and none of the anti-Kerry smears can ever be used again with any credibility. The press has bought into this fallacy that Dems never give former nominees a second chance. That's about as much of a "rule" as the Colts can never beat the Patriots in the post-season. Made to be broken. In fact I think if Gore were to run, he'd walk away with it. But first he'd have to be willing to give his heart and soul to the race. Which he seems to have no interest in doing. After Gore, Kerry is certainly the next top white male candidate. Little doubt of that. Edwards is not really commander in chief material. There is also Biden who is a lot like Kerry without bthe military heroism. But no one's talking about him either. Nor Wes Clark. Don't ask me why. Wnby of those guys could beat Hillary and Obama IMHO, beause they are all more presidential.