NBC: Kerry Discussed Entering Presidential Race With Billionaire’s Backing To Block Sanders

There is a bizarre conflict between NBC and former Secretary of State John Kerry after an unnamed NBC analyst reported overhearing a phone call in which Kerry discussed entering the presidential race to avoid “the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.” What is most interesting is Kerry’s alleged details, including how donors like venture capitalist Doug Hickey would have to “raise a couple of million” to help him block Sanders. Kerry’s comments are part of an increasingly open effort by the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic establishment to guarantee that Sanders will wins the nomination. Kerry later denied that he was contemplating a run and said that “any report otherwise is f**king (or categorically) false. It sounds a lot like “I was against entering the race before I was for it.

Kerry’s alleged comments comes as Hillary Clinton has continued her attacks on Sanders and the DNC appointed two Clinton allies to head the convention while DNC members discuss rolling back on reforms to block Sanders. These stories reaffirm the view of many that the Democratic establishment continues to resist the idea of a democratically selected nominee and remained aligned with powerful interests, including Wall Street investors, who are demanding that Sanders be shutout.

There are a couple of striking elements to the alleged Kerry call. First, is the utter cluelessness. Kerry was a perfectly horrible presidential candidate who could not seem to make a decision or maintain a single coherent position even as this fault was being ridiculed in the media. Yet, he reportedly considered running this year despite the continued resistance to the establishment and his embodiment of everything that young voters despise in the Democratic party. Second, it is a curious call given the fact that Kerry is campaigning for Biden. It would suggest that Kerry not only thinks Sanders has a real chance but that Biden is damaged goods. At a minimum, it rising the panic from Democratic source, like Kerry’s friend, about the need for drastic action to stop the rising support of Sanders.

Finally, and most telling, is how Kerry allegedly linked any campaign to investors like Hickey funding him. It is precisely what Sanders supporters have been denouncing in how figures like Clinton and Kerry were cutouts for Wall Street. This view was reaffirmed by Hillary Clinton’s successful refusal to allow her speeches to Wall Street investors to be released.

He told NBC News: “This is a complete and total misinterpretation based on overhearing only one side of a phone conversation. A friend who watches too much cable called me wondering whether I’d ever jump into the race late in the game if Democrats were choosing an unelectable nominee. I listed all the reasons I could not possibly do that and would not — and will not under any circumstances — do that.” That is a curious defense because it does not deny his words. It is hard to misinterpret a specific suggestions of Hickey and Wall Street funding your campaign. Yet, putting that aside, it is Kerry’s immediate reference to such big money donors as the only way to fight Sanders and allow him to run.

The call virtually writes a campaign commercial for Sanders. All of these moves by Clinton and Kerry only reinforce the support for Sanders and make an eventual unification of the party more difficult — particularly if Sanders enters with the most votes but short of a lock on the nomination. The establishment might then push Bloomberg or others as a convention substitute or preferred nominee, creating a deep rift in the party.

54 thoughts on “NBC: Kerry Discussed Entering Presidential Race With Billionaire’s Backing To Block Sanders”

  1. If Bernie is taking down the Democrat Party its because of anti American three scratch cowards like This one.

  2. Good heavens, here comes John Fraud Swift-Boat Kerry again. How many times do we have to put up with these idiot clowns?

  3. Professor Turley’s testimony before the fraudulent House committee’s hearing was brilliant, as are his posts. Rationality as practiced by him is a rarity in today’s politically charged atmosphere. There is one problem though: his posts contain sloppy grammar that I doubt he would let pass on a student’s paper. The mistakes detract from their overall effect.

  4. “…to guarantee that Sanders will wins the nomination. Kerry later denied that he was contemplating a run and said that ….. ”

    Should that be “to guarantee that Sanders will NOT win the nomination” ?

    I am pretty sure, that as with 2016, the DNC / Dems are fighting hard to PREVENT Sanders

    1. “…to guarantee that Sanders will win” – Like they conducted a three year impeachment campaign to guarantee that Trump would win in 2020? Seems contradictory until you look at the results. Do people tend to side with the party that throws the stone or with the person who gets hit?

  5. Again Turley Expresses..

    Disengenous Concern For Bernie

    It amazes me how concerned Trumpers are with Bernie. Trumpers seek to fuel a climate where any effort to stop Bernie is regarded as a ‘rigged’ primary. This way Trump can go around later accusing Democrats of ‘rigging’ their primary. As though the Bernie Bros will vote for Trump out of frustration!

    Here’s what’s really happening: ‘Trump, and his supporters, are praying that Bernie hijacks the Democratic party’. And hopefully the Bernie Bros will alienate every Democrat with their stupid leftist tirades. This way rightwing media will have no trouble whatsoever painting Bernie as a ‘communist’. Bernie then goes down to a landslide defeat in November as ‘X’ number of Democrats dont even bother voting.

    It’s not hard to see what Turley is hoping for. Trump survives the Mueller Probe, impeachment, then pulls off a landslide reelection victory against badly fractured Democrats. Such a scenario would make Trump look invincible! He rules like a sun king, getting everything he wants, while Democrats can only fight each other.

    This scenario, as described above, would be the final victory where conservatives triumph in their long cold war against liberals. Bernie splits the Democrats so badly the party ceases to be a force for at least 3 election cycles. Turley must be giddy at the prospect. So only an absolute an absolute fool believes Turley is sincere with his sympathies for Bernie.

    Here’s what could really happen. Bernie wins Iowa and New Hampshire and assumes he’s got the nomination clinched. Bernie Bros go mad with jubilation. Then, on Super Tuesday, Mike Bloomberg takes a major state like Florida, for instance, and scores close second in other states. And just like that Bernie’s momentum collapes! Democrats have a path to cutting Bernie off.

    Bernie Bros will scream bloody murder, of course. And Blacks will be leery of Bloomberg. But in General election Bloomberg draws ‘X’ number of Republicans desperate to be rid of Trump. In fact Bloomberg could easily win on the strength of disaffected Republicans. And this will blow the minds of Trumpers who then join Bernie Bros in claiming everything is ‘rigged’.

    1. Sure … that’s why 95% of repubs approve of DJT.
      (Because they’re just waiting to dump him in the election.)

    2. And then you woke up Rip Van . . . . lol

      The Dumbokkkrat Super Delegates will Deep-six ole Bernie like they did last time . . .

      Little Mikey will be beaten easily by Trump . . . except in NY State and California . . .

    3. dis•in•gen•u•ous

      dĭs″ĭn-jĕn′yoo͞-əs

      It does not surprise anyone whiny little sh!ts like you can spell because ….youre just too lazy to think and give it some effort

      Democrats are like that: stoooh-pid

    4. It’s not unrealistic to speculate that the DNC will rig the nomination against Bernie. They have already expressed the opinion that the voters cannot be relied upon to chose the right candidate – and they rigged the primaries against Bernie in 2016. I can’t speculate upon the effect on the DNC that the Bernie supporters have promise them a rerun of the ’68 convention if Bernie isn’t the nomination.

  6. When I hear John Kerry’s name, the picture I see in my mind is James Taylor leaning waaay over trying to awkwardly sing into the only mic he had — one that was positioned for sound coming from his guitar –during the “You’ve Got a Friend” diplomatic gift to the French after the Charlie Hebdo attacks. It was paintful to watch Kerry’s ‘big awkward hug’ to the French –among all the other painful Kerry moments. We don’t need to see or hear any more from the insufferable John ‘I married Ketchup’ Kerry.

    1. IMO John Kerry is under-rated among Democrat leaders. I won’t bother to make the argument since Republicans apparently tend to hate him for trivial reasons, and Democrats can’t appreciate what value there is to be seen anyways.

  7. Bernie “news” reminds me of all the free “news” Trump got. I can’t go anywhere, to include the “alternative” media without hearing the praises of one Bernays Sanders. I have to wonder if all this free “news” coverage means the oligarchy has decided we need an Obama, not a Trump in office. After all Obama was much more effective than Bush at getting a police state and bloating war industry as well as saving the bankers from their crimes. That is because Obama was able to garner the worship of many people with only a handful of Democrats ever bothering to hold Obama to account for anything he did, not matter how evil it was.

    Bernays would serve that same role, not as well as Obama, but better than Trump. I would caution people to at least consider that the Bernays “news” is a psy-op, just as the Trump “news” was. That worked and we now have president Trump.

    What is true is that the Democratic Party is revealing itself for the utterly depraved and corrupt institution that it is. Time to leave that party. I would also point out that no matter who you vote for, it’s who is counting the votes that matters and that will be the machines. I’m linking to an interesting article by Whitney Webb about speaks directly to who will be actually determining your “winner” or perhaps canceling the election all together.

    My solution is to vote for whoever you want and then start working with local groups to form the community you want to see. Perhaps we can have Constitution Sanctuary cities? There are other ideas to look into. Lose the Bernays worship right away. Any politician, Bernays, Trump or Obama, etc. does not deserve your trust. Hold them to account for their actions! Then look for change from the “great unwashed” not the powerful!

    Go to Mint Press News: “How Government and Media Are Prepping America for a Failed 2020 Election” by Whitney Webb

    P.S. Those of us on the actual left who do not worship Bernays are being prevented from speaking on social media.

    1. Jill, it sounds like Trump whether you like him or not serves your purposes. He is destroying the Democratic Party because they focus on Trump instead of reasonable politics and they do this based on their relationship with the largest companies in America, Hollywood and academia.

      Trump is Turning the Republican Party and ridding it from many of its awful people from the deep state.

      I don’t know what you really want and I probably don’t agree with it, but it is a different direction than what we have. Trump is an accellerant of change.

      1. Allan, I don’t think there are really two different parties. If you look at Trump he is simply completing Obama’s work. He’s killing, torturing, regime changing, protecting bankers, engaging in mass financial fraud and mass surveillance. How do you see this as “change”. I see it as more of the same.

        The most important thing I wrote was in the last couple paragraphs–how we might get out of this mess! It’s not a guarantee of success, it’s an idea. Why not try some different ideas instead of worrying about which oligarch selected candidate will “win” an election and change absolutely nothing?

        I honestly don’t know how to respond to you because you create arguments that are really your own thoughts or things others are saying and attribute them to me. Then you tell me how I’m wrong! It’s a logical fallacy called: creating a straw man. I’m not saying you are doing that on purpose but that is what you are doing. It makes it impossible to engage in a straightforward back and forth of ideas. Every person in an argument must accurately represent what the other person is saying, then proceed to show why what they are ACTUALLY saying isn’t correct.

        1. Allan, I don’t think there are really two different parties.
          _____________________________________________
          You lost Allan right there. His eyes glazed over before he got thru that sentence and every sentence that followed became a blur.

          But Jill take your own advice at look at what he wrote.
          Allan actually thinks trump is destroying the Democrat party. The fact is Trump is rather successfully driving people to both parties which is truly sad commentary of the state of things, but that is the world we live in.

          1. Jill, If Anon could understand the english language he would recognize what a fool he is.

            We mostly have Democrats and Republicans with Independents that can move in either direction.

            For the most part Democrats hate Trump and many Republicans hate him as well. He has been an agent of change something both entrenched parties worry about. Fortuantely Trump is good at what he does so he will win in 2020 and keep pushing the country in a more appropriate direction.

            In the meantime we might find that the Democratic Party decides to move more to the center and to accept a less warlike position. Those in the Republican Party that hate Trump are losing power and either converting to his side or slowly some are losing their positions being replaced by others less warlike and more understanding of economic realities. The biggest corporations have supported the left. That may change but I don’t think Trump will accept the idea of continuing corporate welfare that has existed for too long.

            1. and many Republicans hate him as well.

              Nope. His approval ratings among self-identified Republicans are equal to those registered by George W. Bush in early 2004. You’ll recall that Bush’s nomination was uncontested that year and Trump’s will be essentially so this year. Exit poll data indicates each year there are a certain number of self-identified Republicans who vote for the Democratic candidate in the general election. This share bounces around 9% of Republican respondents. It’s a reasonable wager this contains the residue of Rockefeller Republicans (the bulk born prior to 1950) and an array of people alienated for idiosyncratic reasons. There is no popular NeverTrump constituency of any detectable size.

              Remember the ‘Obamacons’? The share of Republican voters who cast a ballot for the Democratic candidate in 2008 was if anything lower than usual. Who were the ‘Obamacons’? A collection of opinion journalists, publicists, lobbyists, and quondam officials looking for an in or just preening. The NeverTrumpers are drawn from the same nexus. They tend to be opinion journalists on the patronage of liberal news outlets, liberal donors, or establishmentarian NGOs. They’re astroturf at this point, and it’s a passable guess that what motivates most of them is a chronic inability to admit error.

              1. DSS, I disagree with you. When Trump came to office many Republicans hated him and worked against him. Some changed their minds because they found he has done a good job but I suspect a good number despite now supportng him still hate him, Rubio and Mitt Romeny are probably the best known. I don’t care about comparable ratings because they are very non-specific. The Bushes continue to dislike him and one can tell that from what they say and their actions. They represent a good number of Republicans.

                That Trump’s election will be non-contested only means that contrary to before when they openly outright hated Trump many Republicans fear Trump.

                The never Trumpers are dwindling because some have changed their mind and others don’t like to wear the face of a never Trumper while others remain never Trumpers and make considerable money off of remaining never Trumpers.

                1. Yes, Paul Ryan, John McCain, Bob Corker, and Jeff Flake were antagonists of the President. So were the Justice Department lifers like Rod Rosenstein (few of whom were, it’s a reasonable guess, aught but Republicans of convenience). That’s four guys. That’s not that many.

                  1. Believe me, the count was more then 4.
                    The Methodist Mafia, known as the Bush family, has an impressive group of loyals in elected and appointed positions. (Mostly thanks to Big George)
                    They were/are all Never Trumpers.

                    1. Thank you Cindy, all DSS has to look at is how Trump was treated by the Republicans at the start of his term and how he is treated today. Not only that but among the 4 DSS mentioned we found powerful opposition that other members of Congress sided with.

                    2. The Methodist in the family is Laura Bush. He attended services with his wife, Bible study with a man named Evans. Jeb and his family are at least nominally Catholic. It’s a reasonable inference the 2d wife of Neil Bush and the 2d husband of Doro Bush were at least nominally Catholic. The Bush family is all over the map now but was Episcopalian 40-odd years ago.

                  2. TIAbsurd….
                    Yes, I know. I live in Texas. My nieces in Dallas attend Highland Park Methodist, little George’s and Laura’s church. I have worshipped there, myself, and have used a hymnal dedicated to Big George.
                    Barbara and Big George were members of St. Martin’s Episcopal in Houston. A dear friend of my family’s oversaw the building of St. Martin’s magnificent organ, btw.
                    Since the Dallas Bushes are the most prevalent of the Bushes in these parts, I chose their particular denomination to compose my clever alliteration/label. Since you are a dedicated Jenna viewer, you may know her religious preference, as well.
                    Thanks for playing😎

                    1. No clue where Jenna and her husband attend. I assume she lives in New York City. Sister Barbara supposedly lives in Manhattan, married quite late in life (at 37) and has no children. Supposedly, her husband writes screenplays. You look at the two of them (especially Barbara) and your best guess is that peer cultures mattered more to them than parental instruction.

                2. I know some DC bureaucrat types in my own extended family that trip over themselves to insult Trump in my presence even though they pretend to be Republicans. May God bless them nonetheless.

                  This may be anecdotal, but, I think Allan is right, there are still a lot of Republicans that don’t like him.

                  Mostly however they are bootlickers and Deep State sycophants.

                3. Allan…….DDS, predictably, loves to undermine any information I and others bring to the table…but, I’m a fighter because growing up as a girl, I had to fight to be heard.
                  Anyway, DDS really brings out my bragging rights, LOL! Sorry😊
                  BUT, I have told DDS that I like him and consider him to be an extremely intelligent poster……not that he cares.

                  1. Cindy, this is not something I give much concern to. DSS has some interesting knowledge that is factual. He also has some interesting opinions that are debateable. He adds to the blog.

                    Growing up as a boy one has to fight as well and have their wits. One has to see trouble coming. I remember the big kids that would approach the sandbox. That was time to run, before the cherrybombs were lit.

            2. Allen is pointing out two pertinent facts that Trump, unknowingly, is accomplishing: he has exposed the downward side of the Democrats into the putrid puddle that now exists, (The Swamp), while showing up the stuffy, pompous Republicans, who have long been personified by the likes of “Mitt” Romney, et al.They both MUST improve.

        2. “he is simply completing Obama’s work.”

          Jill, war is not something one looks for in this world. War is something that seems to happen no matter what. The object is to reduce our involvement in such actions and help make the world a more peaceful place. Trump by being strong has decreased the long term likelihood of war and has raised the ire of those in government that prefer more military entanglements than did his predecessor. I don’t believe there is any American candidate that could do more than Trump to reduce our foreign involvements long term. Short term we could reach all sorts of agreements like Chamblerlain did which led to WW2.

          Trump is exposing the deep state for what it is whether you agree with him or not. I think that is one of your objectives. Trump is using new ideas and they have been quite successful.

          I don’t know what strawmen were created in my last last post so perhaps you can quote the strawman part and explain why you think what you do. I’m not looking for perfection because Trump is far from that. I am looking for movement in the right direction which he has accomplished, not perfectly but better than his recent predecessors.

          1. Allan,

            Trump has filled his administration w/deep, deep staters. I used to hear how Obama really didn’t mean to start wars, they just happened under his watch, all seven of them!

            It’s time to recognize that Trump is in control of his cabinet and has picked policies such as killing Solemeni (that was decided 7 months ago), and prosecuting Assange because he exposed the war crimes of past presidents. He picked Haspel, (a woman who loves and ordered torture and went to watch it) and he picked Pompeo because he agrees with their policies. If he didn’t want war he wouldn’t keep starting them, prosecuting them and taking money from our economy to support the black budget. He has talked about how the US should use nukes for years, long before he was president. This isn’t just a recent thing with him.

            He was a war monger before he was president, just as was Obama. I think this is very difficult for his supporters to take in but it is still true. Surveillance has increased. Prosecution of Assange will assure the end of the First Amendment. The banks are being bailed out as we speak. I’m sorry, he’s worse than Obama and the next person will be worse than him because supporters will not hold the president to account according to the rule of law. Until you all will do this, every president will know they can get away with anything and their supporters just won’t see it and won’t object. That’s why we are very nearly in a state of open dictatorship.

            1. Jill,

              Assassinating Solemani was not a pro war move. It was a well calculated attack on a high ranking combatant that probably saved tons of lives on both sides.

              You have to recognize the reality that Iran really is engaged in decades of mischief in the Middle East. Most of which is aimed either directly or indirectly at the US. Now, some of that is to be expected, and at a certain level it can be contained. For my party, I don’t want a war with them whatsoever but if they go too far they need to get spanked.

              As for Trump and the Deep State if you don’t see how obviously they hate him after this impeachment farce, then you never will. It’s as plain as day with Brennan and his stay behind saboteurs in the CIA like Eric Chiaramella doing dirty deeds of sabotage against his leadership.

              As for banking, the entire world is running their economies with QE after QE style massive bailouts now, for example, the PRC just injected gobs of money just yesterday. So, it’s questionable if it is really feasible for the US to suddenly tighten monetary policy. That is a complicated subject.

              The international finance capos and the intel community backstabbers, ever intertwined, are very dangerous and powerful nests of vipers to try and restrain. Trump has been enfeebled by Democrat party mischief and prevented from doing much on those accounts. That’s the sad reality of the “Deep State.”

            2. “Trump has filled his administration w/deep, deep staters.”

              But Jill, look at the reality. People like Bolton would go to war tomorrow if they could yet Trump didn’t go to war. Many of the “deep staters” that worry you might have pushed him several times to go to war with Iran, but he didn’t. When it came to Russia Trump wanted to talk but the war loving Democratic Party wouldn’t permit talk and urged warlike action. Trump is trying to extracate the US from the middle east by creating a balance of power. Take note of the criticism of him that we didn’t side with the Kurds and go to war with Turkey. So far the actions of Trump on the whole move our nation away from military involvement abroad.

              Don’t be greedy. Cautious movements can lead us away from battle. Impetetuous and impatient movements can cause wars. I’ll take the former.

              Yes, Trump killed Solemeni who killed many people and was a threat to the US. Much better to kill Solemeni than go to war with Iran. That action demonstrates a seriousness. Take note he didn’t take the opportunity of the Baghdad bombing of our troops to go to war against Iran and didn’t even answer it. He let it go with a threat. Impatient people end up in wars. Patient people can frequently avoid them.

              Had Trump been in power instead of Obama, Iran might no longer pose a threat to anyone. Russial likely wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine, the Chinese wouldn’t be so militant, and the North Koreans without the bomb would have been more amenable to change. One has to be realisti. A lack of realism may have permitted WW2 to occur when it might have been avoided.

              “That’s why we are very nearly in a state of open dictatorship.”

              If anything Trump has moved us in the opposite direction. Obama was using state agencies as weapons of power, using his phone and his pen, using the IRS against enemies, using the intelligence services against American citizens, etc. Trump as a whole has acted in the opposite direction. I’m not telling you he is perfect. I am merely saying that compared to his immediate predecessors he is moving the country in a better fashion and using Presidential power less than his predecessors. Do you wish to be so impatient that you end up with a dictatorship. Be patient. Nudge the country in the right direction.

    2. Jill . . . the Party of JFK has changed . . . they have now gone full Karl Marx . . . !

      Trump has created the Best Economy in 50 years . . . lowest Minority Unemployment EVER ! ! !
      He will win Easily . . . which is why the imaginary Impeachment and the complete unhinging of the Dem Party these days.
      The Party of slavery, Jim Crow, KKK, Segregation and fools should have been destroyed 50 years ago . . . right after the CIA & LBJ took out Kennedy.

  8. Kerry sort of reminds me of “senator” richard blumenthal (D-CT), the King Rodent. He has been exposed repeatedly LYING about his Vietnam military service, deliberately leaving people thinking he served in combat . . . And this jerk keeps getting reelected. Somebody needs to open a can of whoop-ass. (on him or on the voters? You choose.)Just sayin.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html

    1. John Kerry actually was a combat veteran. It’s just that his peers in theatre didn’t have much respect for him and his record was not as impressive as it seemed. (His boatmates generally thought well of him, bar one).

      IIRC, Blumenthal was in the reserves stateside and pretended he had been in theatre. Da Nang Dick’s deceptions were an order-of-magnitude worse than any yarn-pulling done by Kerry.

    2. there is no comparison between blumethal and kerry. kerry won two legit purple hearts and silver star.

      kerry complained about the war after the fact, an interesting story in itself, but I know a lot of patriotic vets that have had quite a few bad things to say about it too. i cant fault him on that account either.

      1. sorry three purple hearts and also bronze star. in addition to silver.

        if I recall, I have heard people criticize him because he had to knife some VCs they had tied up when they came under fire and had to ex-filtrate. i can only say that seems reasonable to me even if it was a sketchy choice in the lawyer’s playbook of war.

  9. The real fun will begin when Sanders’ supporters boil over because the DNC and the MSM have dropped all pretense and are actively trying to screw him again. If they are successful look for Bernie to deliver a major F-U to the DNC and run a third party campaign.

  10. Whoever edits these posts, I think you mis-stated this: “Kerry’s comments are part of an increasingly open effort by the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic establishment to guarantee that Sanders will wins the nomination. .

    My GUESS is this should be “Sanders will not win the nomination.”

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  11. How much longer before the progressive wing of the Democratic party realize that they will not ever be able to realize the school within the Democrat party and will break away to form America’s third party? They are clearly not happy within the party, and the party is clearly not happy with them.

    1. There are few policy differences between different components of the social nexus that makes the Democratic Party its electoral vehicle. Sanders has more integrity than the rest of them and more expansive plans in certain areas, but that’s all. The differences among Democrats concern social roles, not policy. Consider the pantomime between college administrators and obstreperous students, for examples. It’s all LARPing.

      1. i tell you out here in flyover Democrats are not as crazy as they are on campuses and coastal areas. if they were then they couldn’t get anything done whatsoever. nearly every big city is a Dem stronghold now but not all of them are as pathetically bad as San Fran.

  12. If Kerry actually had been a ‘horrible’ candidate, he wouldn’t have taken the nomination and he wouldn’t have come near to winning the prize.

    The late Dean Barnett maintained that Kerry was not respected in Congress, because his word wasn’t worth much in transactions where other federal politicians expected your word to be your bond. No clue whether this was true or not. Barnett did have an informed opinion about Massachusetts politics. One thing that is verifiable was that Kerry wasn’t much of a legislator. He preferred to run investigatory hearings. I guess you need oversight specialists in Congress, but the crazy-quilt committee architecture doesn’t provide them with optimal venues.

    One thing about Kerry you can see from a distance is that he’s an example of a phenomenon Michael Kinsley identified 35 years ago. “In Washington, someone’s reputation expands – like a gas – to fill whatever office he occupies”. U.S. Senator from Massachusetts is pretty much a lifetime gig if you’re a Democrat. In the history of popular elections to the Senate, only one Democrat from Massachusetts has ever been voted out of office, and that man was a blatant and thorough dissident in the Democratic Party, Joe Liberman-squared. Kerry was first elected in 1984; his Republican opponent was a capable engineer and businessman, but not-ready-for-prime-time (his history with the John Birch Society being one example); he won the Democratic primary over James Shannon by – you guessed it – emphasizing his history has a combat veteran, something that Shannon (b. 1952) lacked. One aspect of the awkward position Kerry was in in the fall of 2004 was that his entire career as a public figure in Massachusetts had been constructed on a foundation composed of his military service record.

    He started out in 1975 in the public prosecutor’s office (supposedly assigned administrative tasks in lieu of much work as a prosecutor). When the state’s attorney tired of him a couple of years later, he opened a general law practice with another quondam prosecutor (who doubled as his girlfriend for a time after his wife gave him his walking papers). The partnership was dissolved after about four years and his partner IIRC practiced solo for a few years ‘ere cadging a judgeship of some sort. Kerry landed a sinecure in the statehouse (Lt. Governor) and then a seat in Congress. You look hard at Kerry and you see what’s there when you pump out the air and the airs. What’s there is a mediocre Boston lawyer.

  13. To run for president, you have to be ambitious – perhaps almost sociopathically ambitious.

    But you have to have brains – or at least have smart advisors.

    Mr. Kerry has neither.

    More concerning is that the Dems lack all ethics – they are willing to tear the country apart in a half baked impeachment attempt, they continue their rolling coup, they exacerbate the national divide to gin up party support, they lie about obvious things (employment, the economy, etc.).

    Voters see the depths to which the Dems are willing to stoop – and they are getting turned off.

  14. Whether it’s true or not, the corporatists in the Democratic Party DONT want change or equality. As Biden assured his corporate buddies, the “leaders” want nothing to change but the optics!

  15. The fix is in and at least 10% of Bernie’s disaffected backers will vote for Trump. Many of the rest will not vote.

Leave a Reply