pokerfied.com
Promoting poker discussions.

Main
Date: 15 Jan 2009 13:59:11
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
didn't he run?




 
Date: 18 Jan 2009 11:17:03
From:
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
It has been a long time since I've posted at this site. Since I don't
do politics or religion, there is little for me to comment on.

However, I thought this was a post on Bob Kerry. He is someone I
thought would have been a fine president:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Kerry

Oh, well, My bad. I guess the 80 degree California weather is getting
to my brain.


May you NEVER "seven-out," ...*guy...


 
Date: 18 Jan 2009 00:07:52
From: Clave
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
"Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?

Why didn't the Pigs run Bobdole again?

Jim




 
Date: 17 Jan 2009 07:36:24
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 17, 7:15=A0am, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2:48=A0am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
>
> > <moon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
> > >want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
> > >either Obama or Hillary.
>
> > Based on what? =A0The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
> > unpopular incumbent?
>
> Based on what? Are you kidding me? Kerry has served in the Senate for
> 24 years. He has more experience than Obama and Hillary combined. I'm
> not a big fan of Kerry. I'm just making a point at how lousy the
> Democratic party is.

By that standard, the Democrats should have nominated Robert Byrd for
president!

By the way, Senator, I just want you to confirm something for me. You
are aware that Kerry already ran for president, aren't you? Do you
remember how he did?

- Bob T.


 
Date: 17 Jan 2009 07:15:21
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 17, 2:48=A0am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid >
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
>
> <moon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
> >want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
> >either Obama or Hillary.
>
> Based on what? =A0The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
> unpopular incumbent?

Based on what? Are you kidding me? Kerry has served in the Senate for
24 years. He has more experience than Obama and Hillary combined. I'm
not a big fan of Kerry. I'm just making a point at how lousy the
Democratic party is.


  
Date: 17 Jan 2009 18:20:55
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:15:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>On Jan 17, 2:48 am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
>>
>> <moon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
>> >want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
>> >either Obama or Hillary.
>>
>> Based on what?  The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
>> unpopular incumbent?
>
>Based on what? Are you kidding me? Kerry has served in the Senate for
>24 years. He has more experience than Obama and Hillary combined.

That did him a lot of good in 2004. Kerry is a proven loser. You
can't possibly be serious about your position in this thread.


   
Date: 17 Jan 2009 19:16:48
From: Travel A
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Seems funny to me that Kerry is now being criticized, when at the time
of the election, everyone was screaming that Karl Rove "stole" the Ohio
election and Kerry "got screwed."

What happened to all the praise for Kerry crushing Bush in the debates?
Now it's all Kerry's fault for running a lousy campaign?





    
Date: 17 Jan 2009 23:56:14
From: Mr Bungle 34
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
THE NAIL IN THE COFFIN....



Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic Party's presidential
nominee who narrowly lost to President George W. Bush in 2004, will
not run in the upcoming presidential contest, say sources close to the
senator. Kerry's decision comes after several high-profile Democrats
-- including Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama -- have already
filed paperwork establishing exploratory committees. It also comes
after Kerry's widely reported "botched joke" right before the 2006
midterm elections, which hurt his political standing.

At a campaign event for then-California gubernatorial nominee Phil
Angelides (D), Kerry set off a political firestorm with this comment
at the top of his speech: "You know education, if you make the most of
it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be
smart, you - you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Kerry and associates said the remark was a botched joke about the
President -- not about the troops. Still, the joke earned him
criticism from both Republicans and even some Democrats.



  
Date: 17 Jan 2009 13:57:22
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:15:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>On Jan 17, 2:48 am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire

>> <moon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
>> >want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
>> >either Obama or Hillary.

>> Based on what?  The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
>> unpopular incumbent?

>Based on what? Are you kidding me? Kerry has served in the Senate for
>24 years. He has more experience than Obama and Hillary combined.

Whatever. He ran the most competent campaign I've ever seen in
Presidential politics. As a politics junkie, I've never seen anything
so brilliant. Obama's campaign is a game changer and will be studied
and analyzed by political science students and campaign strategists
like boxing junkies do with the Ali-Frazier fights.


 
Date: 17 Jan 2009 07:02:38
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 17, 2:48=A0am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid >
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
>
> <moon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
> >want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
> >either Obama or Hillary.
>
> Based on what? =A0The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
> unpopular incumbent?

The problem is that we _have to_ accept the idea that Kerry could have
had the nomination, which he couldn't have and won the election, which
he could have. We have to accept this, which he _proves_ by repeated
assertion, so that he can get on with his theory about how this is all
tied up with the government or the Israelis or both blowing up the
WTC.

Since we aren't allowing his premise, we may never hear the much more
complex lunacy that follows.

--
Will in New Haven


 
Date: 16 Jan 2009 14:07:08
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 16, 1:26=A0pm, "ChrisRobin" <a9db...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
> On Jan 15 2009 4:59 PM, Senator Millionaire wrote:
>
> > Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> > didn't he run?
>
> Troll.
>
> --------=A0
> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com

Troll? I'm not trolling but I guess you dumb motherfuckers think
Obama, Hillary, or McCain would have beat Kerry if he ran. You're not
to smart.


 
Date: 16 Jan 2009 10:26:18
From: ChrisRobin
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15 2009 4:59 PM, Senator Millionaire wrote:

> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?

Troll.

-------- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 16 Jan 2009 10:22:31
From: thepixelfreak
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On 2009-01-15 13:59:11 -0800, Senator Millionaire <moone99@gmail.com > said:

> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?

MY dog would have beaten McCain/Palin.
--

thepixelfreak



 
Date: 16 Jan 2009 00:12:54
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:59:11 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>didn't he run?

It might have something to do with not even being able to beat George
W. Bush.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 15:22:21
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
I think Kerry was the strongest candidate with the most experience and
he could have won the Democratic nomination very easily. Heck, he
could have become President. I find it very strange that he didn't run
and I believe there's much more to the story. This election cycle
Kerry was no where to be seen or heard from. Maybe he decided that he
just didn't want the position.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:11:13
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
"Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?


Because he was already entered in a 6 furlong event at Santa Anita?




  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 20:12:41
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:0xObl.2096$%54.360@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>> didn't he run?
>
>
> Because he was already entered in a 6 furlong event at Santa Anita?



Why the long face?




   
Date: 15 Jan 2009 20:58:24
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:12:41 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
<jhankins5@cox.net > wrote:

>
>"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>news:0xObl.2096$%54.360@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> "Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>>> didn't he run?
>>
>>
>> Because he was already entered in a 6 furlong event at Santa Anita?
>
>Why the long face?
>
BADDA BING

Then, there was always the problem of his having a haughty,
French-looking demeanor.


  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 16:41:15
From: La Cosa Nostradamus
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15 2009 5:11 PM, Paul Popinjay wrote:

> "Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> > didn't he run?
>
>
> Because he was already entered in a 6 furlong event at Santa Anita?

YES
Atheism is drawing dead

____________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 19:44:29
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 5:39=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Bob, if he wanted the job he would have won the Democratic primary and
> the nomination. Then, he would have went on to defeat McCain in the
> election. For whatever reason, he didn't want the job...that's my
> summation.

Well, Senator, you seem to be alone in your opinion. Everybody else
thinks Kerry would have gotten creamed in the primaries.

- Bob T.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 17:39:59
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Bob, if he wanted the job he would have won the Democratic primary and
the nomination. Then, he would have went on to defeat McCain in the
election. For whatever reason, he didn't want the job...that's my
summation.


  
Date: 16 Jan 2009 00:15:52
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:39:59 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>Bob, if he wanted the job he would have won the Democratic primary and
>the nomination. Then, he would have went on to defeat McCain in the
>election. For whatever reason, he didn't want the job...that's my
>summation.

Not a snowball's chance.


   
Date: 16 Jan 2009 03:22:50
From: Travel A
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
The Democrat presidential nomination process isn't legit. If you think
it is, that's the first mistake made in trying to analyze this stuff.

The Democrats choose their nominee long before the Democrat primary
election campaign even begins.

Note how fast Howard Dean dropped off the charts when Kerry merely
appeared on the campaign scene. Howard Dean made Kerry look like a
centrist; he did his job and was out. It's all planned, staged.

Jimmy Carter, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, all of them were
pre-selected as the intended Democratic nominees.

Kerry didn't run because Kerry became irrelevant and out of the
"candidate pool" with Hillary as the party favorite to run for
President. Kerry has already played out his presidential candidate
roles.

There's the individual that the Democrats pick to become the nominee,
and then, all the other Democrat primary candidates are there for show,
or to attack the Republican front runner, or to move up in the party
hierarchy; (Richard Gephardt became Speaker of The House after running
in the Democrart presidential primaries, for example.)

If you want to figure something out, figure out who the pre-selected
Democrat nominee was this time around: Hillary or Obama.

I think, it was hillary who the Democrat machine picked as the nominee:
the Hillary campaign, by design, deliberately gave away the caucus
states to Obama by not campaigning in the "smaller states". The plan was
to ensure that Obama had a great showing in the primaries and Hillary
would then choose Obama as VP.

It could have been a miscalculation where, Obama did much better that
expected, (due to momentum/cash contributions generated by the smaller
state wins) and he ended up winning the nomination by a hair.

I really don't think that this Democrat presidential primary election
was an exception where there was a legitimate contest between Obama and
Hillary; as in a kind of a two candidate free-for-all where the Democrat
estabishment picked two equally favored candidates this time and "let
them go at it". That's not the way the left-wing operates.









 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 17:32:23
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 5:24=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 15, 7:54=A0pm, "RussGeorg...@aol.com" <RussGeorg...@aol.com>
> wrote:> Do you really think he didn't consider running? Did you ever cons=
ider
> > that multiple polls probably didn't give him any chance of winning?
>
> I don't think he wanted it. It's obvious now he would have won easily.
> Don't you agree?

If by "won" you mean "for the purposes of this thought experiment,
let's pretend there's no such thing as primaries and we can imagine
anybody we want as the Democratic nominee", then my answer is yes,
Kerry would have beaten McCain. But not as handily as Obama did.

- Bob T.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 17:24:34
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 7:54=A0pm, "RussGeorg...@aol.com" <RussGeorg...@aol.com >
wrote:
> Do you really think he didn't consider running? Did you ever consider
> that multiple polls probably didn't give him any chance of winning?
>
I don't think he wanted it. It's obvious now he would have won easily.
Don't you agree?


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 18:59:01
From: bub
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:59:11 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>didn't he run?

his wife cut off his allowance,that's why he had the long face. she
threaten to sue him for palamino.


  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 19:01:58
From: mccard
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

"bub" <bub@plotuss.com > wrote in message
news:qrmvm45gaspsp1sff5qeus0mbl9ebin0t4@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:59:11 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
> <moone99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>>didn't he run?
>
> his wife cut off his allowance,that's why he had the long face. she
> threaten to sue him for palamino.

Probably caught him "horsing" around?



   
Date: 15 Jan 2009 19:48:23
From: Susan
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

"mccard" <no_won@no_won.none > wrote in message
news:Z%Qbl.11985$1k1.7930@newsfe14.iad...
>
> "bub" <bub@plotuss.com> wrote in message
> news:qrmvm45gaspsp1sff5qeus0mbl9ebin0t4@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:59:11 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
>> <moone99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>>>didn't he run?
>>
>> his wife cut off his allowance,that's why he had the long face. she
>> threaten to sue him for palamino.
>
> Probably caught him "horsing" around?

teehee




 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 16:54:38
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Do you really think he didn't consider running? Did you ever consider
that multiple polls probably didn't give him any chance of winning?






On Jan 15, 3:22=EF=BF=BDpm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I think Kerry was the strongest candidate with the most experience and
> he could have won the Democratic nomination very easily. Heck, he
> could have become President. I find it very strange that he didn't run
> and I believe there's much more to the story. This election cycle
> Kerry was no where to be seen or heard from. Maybe he decided that he
> just didn't want the position.



 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 16:21:49
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 7:06=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
> want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
> either Obama or Hillary.

He could not have been nominated. The Democrats are very tough on
candidates who have lost winnable elections. Also, the Democrats knew
that they could nominate anyone they wanted and win. I gave two to
one, betting on the Democrats to win the election, before we had any
idea who would be the candidates.

John Kerry is dogfood. I voted for him in 2004, which shows how
disgusted I was, and am, with the current administration.

--
Will in New Haven


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
either Obama or Hillary.


  
Date: 16 Jan 2009 23:48:12
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
>want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
>either Obama or Hillary.

Based on what? The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
unpopular incumbent?


   
Date: 17 Jan 2009 13:53:47
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:48:12 -0800, Pepe Papon
<hitmeister@mindspring.dot.com.invalid > wrote:

>On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
><moone99@gmail.com> wrote:

>>You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
>>want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
>>either Obama or Hillary.

>Based on what? The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
>unpopular incumbent?

I will never forgive Kerry for that. He is personally responsible for
the last four years of failure. OTOH anyone who ran a campaign so
incompetently that they lost against a total shitclown like Bush would
probably have been a shitty President too.


   
Date: 16 Jan 2009 23:52:35
From: Clave
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
"Pepe Papon" <hitmeister@mindspring.dot.com.invalid > wrote in message
news:j733n41fpe5uq1si1bjpe6ehbqn2rnke2p@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
> <moone99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
>>want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
>>either Obama or Hillary.
>
> Based on what? The fact that he blew the 2004 election against an
> unpopular incumbent?

Wingnut concern trolling has yet to become an art.

Jim




  
Date: 16 Jan 2009 23:11:53
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:06:21 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
>want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
>either Obama or Hillary.

There's only two statuses for a Presidential candidate. They either
beat the other guy or they don't. Doesn't matter whether or what
Kerry would have been. He's a loser. Obama won.


  
Date: 16 Jan 2009 19:32:38
From: Steam
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15 2009 4:06 PM, Senator Millionaire wrote:

> You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
> want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
> either Obama or Hillary.

If a democrat gets nominated, and loses the election, he's toast. Kerry
could never get nominated again. End of story.

____________________________________________________________________ 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



  
Date: 16 Jan 2009 14:10:11
From: DaVoice
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

"Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:8308cfe0-6eb1-4dc1-a57e-7498ad1731bd@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
> You're saying the Democrats didn't want Kerry. I think Kerry didn't
> want to be President. Kerry would have been a stronger candidate than
> either Obama or Hillary.

Let's not forget that the Dem's had basically "annointed" Hillary, why would
he want to fight against the Clintonista machine? Obama got lucky, just
like Carter did. No "real" record to be beaten up by, no "baggage" that
the BIG 3 networks or the NYT or LAT would report on, only the cable
networks were hammering him on the connections between he and the real
estate thief, the BOMBER, and the only one that the big 3 networks ran with
was the Preacher.

Clinton's people thought that they had the whole thing in the bag and didn't
work as hard as the Obama people, and didn't use the internet well at all.
Obama's grass roots organization and internet campaign SHOCKED and AWED the
Clintonistas.

What really pisses me off is that now that he was elected Obama has filled
his cabinet with nothing but the Clintonistas. The only GOOD appointment I
think he made was Hillary for Secretary of State. As much as I loathe her,
I think she's the most qualified person that was "on the short list". She
knows many of the leaders that she'll be dealing with and they all love
Bill. She will be great in that job.

Back to the original subject, as I said earlier, Kerry knows he'll be the
SENIOR Senator from Mass within a couple of years, as Kennedy has major
health problems and will be resigning or at least not running again. He'll
have more power in the Senate than he would have as VP, cuz he was NEVER
going to be considered for the Top of the ticket, because he was soundly
defeated 4 years ago.

--
Rick "ADB DaVoice" Charles




   
Date: 17 Jan 2009 08:02:59
From: mo_charles
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
> What really pisses me off is that now that he was elected Obama has filled
> his cabinet with nothing but the Clintonistas. The only GOOD appointment I
> think he made was Hillary for Secretary of State. As much as I loathe her,
> I think she's the most qualified person that was "on the short list". She
> knows many of the leaders that she'll be dealing with and they all love
> Bill. She will be great in that job.

a secretary of state whose husband's post-presidential career consisted
entirely of whoring to foreign interests sounds like an astoundingly
stupid selection to me.

mo_charles

______________________________________________________________________ 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



    
Date: 17 Jan 2009 10:29:52
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
"mo_charles" <harrybalzer@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:j2c946xl3s.ln2@recgroups.com...

"DaVoice" <davoicergp@cox.net > wrote in message
The only GOOD appointment I
>> think he made was Hillary for Secretary of State. As much as I loathe
>> her, I think she's the most qualified person that was "on the short
>> list". She knows many of the leaders that she'll be dealing with and they
>> all love Bill. She will be great in that job.
>
> a secretary of state whose husband's post-presidential career consisted
> entirely of whoring to foreign interests sounds like an astoundingly
> stupid selection to me.
>

Are you implying that DaVoice is "astoundingly stupid"?

Mo, if you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
anything at all.

-PP







     
Date: 17 Jan 2009 13:38:14
From: Susan
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:8tpcl.14466$c45.10164@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...


LOL I just found my new signature line.

if you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
anything at all.

-PP 01/17/09




      
Date: 18 Jan 2009 15:05:53
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 13:38:14 -0600, "Susan" <sdbratt48@netscape.net >
wrote:

>
>"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>news:8tpcl.14466$c45.10164@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
>LOL I just found my new signature line.
>
>if you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
>anything at all.
>
>-PP 01/17/09

It needs a little improvement.

If you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
anything at all, fuckface.


       
Date: 18 Jan 2009 16:56:49
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 15:05:53 -0500, A Man Beaten by Jacks
<nobody@fool.foo > wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 13:38:14 -0600, "Susan" <sdbratt48@netscape.net>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>news:8tpcl.14466$c45.10164@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>
>>
>>LOL I just found my new signature line.
>>
>>if you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
>>anything at all.
>>
>>-PP 01/17/09
>
>It needs a little improvement.
>
>If you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
>anything at all, fuckface.

lol


      
Date: 18 Jan 2009 05:47:20
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
"Susan" <sdbratt48@netscape.net > wrote in message
news:Esqcl.23134$qi.11514@newsfe09.iad...
>
> "Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:8tpcl.14466$c45.10164@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
> LOL I just found my new signature line.
>
> if you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
> anything at all.
>
> -PP 01/17/09
>

It's a good saying, a good philosophy to live, something my grandmother
taught me years ago. Ain't you never heard it before, you dumb broad?





       
Date: 18 Jan 2009 10:53:48
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 05:47:20 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
<paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

>"Susan" <sdbratt48@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:Esqcl.23134$qi.11514@newsfe09.iad...
>>
>> "Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:8tpcl.14466$c45.10164@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>
>>
>> LOL I just found my new signature line.
>>
>> if you can't say something nice about someone, maybe you shouldn't say
>> anything at all.
>>
>> -PP 01/17/09
>>
>
>It's a good saying, a good philosophy to live, something my grandmother
>taught me years ago. Ain't you never heard it before, you dumb broad?
>
>

Say, now that you mention it, how is Mama G these days?
We haven't heard from her in a long time.
She is still alive and well, I hope.

I always kinda liked the Old Bat.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 15:36:44
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 3:22=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I think Kerry was the strongest candidate with the most experience and
> he could have won the Democratic nomination very easily. Heck, he
> could have become President. I find it very strange that he didn't run
> and I believe there's much more to the story. This election cycle
> Kerry was no where to be seen or heard from. Maybe he decided that he
> just didn't want the position.

He lost an election in '04 that many Democrats perceived as winnable,
and therefore had no chance to be nominated in '08. The same problem
kept Gore from running in either '04 or '08, despite the fact that he
had even more experience than Kerry.

- Bob T.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 15:17:52
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Palin would have beaten McCain, so what does this mean?




On Jan 15, 2:59=EF=BF=BDpm, "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com > wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2:52=EF=BF=BDpm, OrangeSFO <intangible...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 15, 1:59=EF=BF=BDpm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>
> > > Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> > > didn't he run?
>
> > Nonsense
>
> Not completely nonsense - if by some miracle, Kerry had won the
> nomination he very likely would have beaten McCain. =EF=BF=BDBut it would=
have
> taken a miracle to nominate him because he's had a great big "L" on
> his forehead since 2004. =EF=BF=BDThe Democrats had other strong candidat=
es
> available in '08 - there's no way they were going to risk Kerry losing
> for them again.
>
> - Bob T.



 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 15:16:20
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Hate to correct you Paul, but it was a 6 1/2 furlong race. He'd needed
the extra distance since he had to come from behind.





On Jan 15, 2:11=EF=BF=BDpm, "Paul Popinjay" <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net >
wrote:
> "Senator Millionaire" <moon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> > didn't he run?
>
> Because he was already entered in a 6 furlong event at Santa Anita?



 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:59:23
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 2:52=A0pm, OrangeSFO <intangible...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Jan 15, 1:59=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> > didn't he run?
>
> Nonsense

Not completely nonsense - if by some miracle, Kerry had won the
nomination he very likely would have beaten McCain. But it would have
taken a miracle to nominate him because he's had a great big "L" on
his forehead since 2004. The Democrats had other strong candidates
available in '08 - there's no way they were going to risk Kerry losing
for them again.

- Bob T.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:52:06
From: OrangeSFO
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15, 1:59=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?


Nonsense


  
Date: 19 Jan 2009 10:19:58
From: richlp
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 19, 8:51=A0am, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> OK, I get it now. The Dems only like to run their best horses for one
> race. Gotcha!

Asses and Elephants both.

Since the Civil War I believe that William Jennings Bryan, Adlai
Stevenson, and Richard Nixon are the only major party candidates to be
given a second chance after losing their first run as the party
standard bearer. Obviously, Nixon is the only one to do so
successfully.

I'm less certain about losing VP candidates getting a shot at the
brass ring. The only one who comes to mind is Bob Dole.

Regardless of his qualifications, there's absolutely no way somebody
who couldn't beat a crippled incumbent in 2004 was going to be given a
second shot in 2008.


  
Date: 19 Jan 2009 09:04:01
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 19, 8:51=A0am, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:

> OK, I get it now.

No you don't.

> The Dems only like to run their best horses for one race. Gotcha!

Q.E.D.

- Bob T.



  
Date: 19 Jan 2009 08:51:11
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
OK, I get it now. The Dems only like to run their best horses for one
race. Gotcha!


   
Date: 19 Jan 2009 09:07:38
From: Steam
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 19 2009 8:51 AM, Senator Millionaire wrote:

> OK, I get it now. The Dems only like to run their best horses for one
> race. Gotcha!

If they win the nomination and lose the general race, yes. Anyone with
even th tiniest amount of awareness can see that.

-------- 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



  
Date: 19 Jan 2009 08:40:10
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 18, 7:59=A0pm, Senator Millionaire <moon...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 17, 9:20=A0pm, Pepe Papon
>
> <seth.at.rowtown.dot....@earthlink.invalid> wrote:
>
> > That did him a lot of good in 2004. =A0 Kerry is a proven loser. =A0 Yo=
u
> > can't possibly be serious about your position in this thread.
>
> First of all, I'm not talking about the 2004 election. Try to stay on
> topic will ya? I suppose you're going to tell me that Obama and
> Hillary are more qualified to be President than Kerry? If you are
> going to say that..please save yourself the embarrassment.

You keep tapdancing around the only important point.

KERRY COULD NOT HAVE BEEN NOMINATED

If you cannot convincingly answer that one, you may not go on to
whatever asshole idea you have about why he didn't run again. You
don't have to prove he would have been nominated but you have to
answer all the people who have said he couldn't have been. If you keep
ignoring this, I won't be surprised.

This has nothing to do with who would be a better president.

--
Will in New Haven


>
> Don't bother bring up Bush either because we already know he ruined
> the economy.



  
Date: 18 Jan 2009 16:59:47
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 17, 9:20=A0pm, Pepe Papon
<seth.at.rowtown.dot....@earthlink.invalid > wrote:
>
> That did him a lot of good in 2004. =A0 Kerry is a proven loser. =A0 You
> can't possibly be serious about your position in this thread.

First of all, I'm not talking about the 2004 election. Try to stay on
topic will ya? I suppose you're going to tell me that Obama and
Hillary are more qualified to be President than Kerry? If you are
going to say that..please save yourself the embarrassment.

Don't bother bring up Bush either because we already know he ruined
the economy.



   
Date: 19 Jan 2009 12:51:11
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:59:47 -0800 (PST), Senator Millionaire
<moone99@gmail.com > wrote:

>On Jan 17, 9:20 pm, Pepe Papon
><seth.at.rowtown.dot....@earthlink.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> That did him a lot of good in 2004.   Kerry is a proven loser.   You
>> can't possibly be serious about your position in this thread.
>
>First of all, I'm not talking about the 2004 election. Try to stay on
>topic will ya? I suppose you're going to tell me that Obama and
>Hillary are more qualified to be President than Kerry? If you are
>going to say that..please save yourself the embarrassment.

Start making sense. You can't talk about Kerry's chances of winning
without talking about 2004.

Unless you're actually talking about Kerrey, not Kerry, in which case
you've been misleading us, either intentionally or not.

>Don't bother bring up Bush either because we already know he ruined
>the economy.


   
Date: 19 Jan 2009 07:19:07
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 18, 10:41=A0pm, Nortwo...@webtv.net (John B) wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0 Would you explain how "Bush" ruined the economy? =A0 He can only =
sign
> or veto bills and budgets sent to him by a democrat majority congress.

Bush never had a workable effective energy plan to keep oil prices
low. Low oil prices drives the economy and Bush failed miserably.



   
Date: 18 Jan 2009 22:41:00
From: John B
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

Group: rec.gambling.poker Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2009, 4:59pm (EST-3) From:
moone99@gmail.com (Senator=A0Millionaire)

Don't bother bring up Bush either because we already know he ruined the
economy.

Would you explain how "Bush" ruined the economy? He can only sign
or veto bills and budgets sent to him by a democrat majority congress.



    
Date: 19 Jan 2009 12:53:24
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:41:00 -0500, Nortwoods@webtv.net (John B)
wrote:

>
>Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
>
>Group: rec.gambling.poker Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2009, 4:59pm (EST-3) From:
>moone99@gmail.com (Senator Millionaire)
>
>Don't bother bring up Bush either because we already know he ruined the
>economy.
>
> Would you explain how "Bush" ruined the economy? He can only sign
>or veto bills and budgets sent to him by a democrat majority congress.

Please. Bush has a Republican Congress for his first 6 years in
office.


 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:38:19
From: DaVoice
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?

"Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?

You ARE joking, right? Kerry couldn't win anything outside of Mass. He's
already proved that. With Kennedy ready to keel over or at least walk away
soon, he'll be the Senior Senator from Mass, no way would he put that on the
line to have run again, and ended up 2nd or 3rd to Obama and Hillary. Why
would he give up that kind of POWER? Senators have tons of POWER and that's
what he's after, and he can't be thrown out in 4 or 8 years like Obama.

The last Mc Cain Vs Kerry poll that I saw on Real Clear Politics avg when
there was talk of him running again McCain was 65-31 with 4% undecided, but
that wsa two years ago.

--
Rick "ADB DaVoice" Charles




  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:50:06
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15 2009 5:38 PM, DaVoice wrote:

> "Senator Millionaire" <moone99@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:859b37e8-63fc-4422-9647-320de5b406a8@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> > Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> > didn't he run?
>
> You ARE joking, right? Kerry couldn't win anything outside of Mass. He's
> already proved that. With Kennedy ready to keel over or at least walk away
> soon, he'll be the Senior Senator from Mass, no way would he put that on the
> line to have run again, and ended up 2nd or 3rd to Obama and Hillary. Why
> would he give up that kind of POWER? Senators have tons of POWER and that's
> what he's after, and he can't be thrown out in 4 or 8 years like Obama.
>
> The last Mc Cain Vs Kerry poll that I saw on Real Clear Politics avg when
> there was talk of him running again McCain was 65-31 with 4% undecided, but
> that wsa two years ago.
>
> --
> Rick "ADB DaVoice" Charles

and at the same time, the polll between Obama and McCain showed McCain
carrying every state but Illinois and Hawaii. So what?

Fell
--
Be Loud. Be Proud. Be Considerate!

------ 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



 
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:15:05
From: johnny_t
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
Senator Millionaire wrote:
> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> didn't he run?

Because Hillary was running, and she was the establishment player...


  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 14:22:49
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
"johnny_t" <nobodyis@home.com > wrote in message
news:005b9266$0$15744$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> Senator Millionaire wrote:
>> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
>> didn't he run?
>
> Because Hillary was running, and she was the establishment player...


Ha ha, like Obamafuck wasn't? Get outta here, Johnny, you're too stupid for
words.




   
Date: 16 Jan 2009 10:25:29
From: ChrisRobin
Subject: Re: Why Didn't Kerry Run For President?
On Jan 15 2009 5:22 PM, Paul Popinjay wrote:

> "johnny_t" <nobodyis@home.com> wrote in message
> news:005b9266$0$15744$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> > Senator Millionaire wrote:
> >> Kerry could have won the election easily if he would have ran. Why
> >> didn't he run?
> >
> > Because Hillary was running, and she was the establishment player...
>
>
> Ha ha, like Obamafuck wasn't? Get outta here, Johnny, you're too stupid for
> words.

Seriously, I'm with Paul on this one. What a dope!

_____________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com