The truth is, in my view, the left never embraced John Kerry, even though he is/was in fact a very good liberal. I remember February 2004, being at the very first general meeting of New Democratic Majority (NDM)over at cinema classics in the east village. This was weeks after the New Hampshire primary, and just after Howard Dean had formally dropped out. The room was full of Dean supporters, and some Kucinich supporters, enthusiastic to form a new group and keep the campaign energy going. We talked about a lot of things at that meeting, issues and such, but one thing barely even mentioned was the name "John Kerry" Someone (not me) stood up late in the meeting and said something like, "is anyone here going to mention John Kerry's name and working with the Kerry campaign?" It was obvious by then that Kerry was going to be the nominee and yet there was no enthusiasm, none, for him. Nobody wanted to talk about him. Part of the problem I think was even though Kerry was a good liberal, he was also DLC, he was establishment. Part of the problem was also there was lingering bitterness among many Dean followers for how his campaign got taken out in Iowa, and what role if any Kerry's camp had in it.

Many of the most active people I knew on the left, people in that room at the first NDM meeting, had a passion for defeating Bush, a passion for pushing the right issues, but no love at all for Kerry. Just as many on the left had no passion for Gore in 2000. It still amazes me that the guy (Gore) who would have been the most pro-environment president in our nation's history was shot down in part by those in the key states who voted for the GREEN party candidate! In the following months I went from being a very active Dean supporter to supporting Kerry. I went to Marjorie Gersten's Brooklyn for Kerry meetups wearing a Kerry button and expecting to find other Dean and Kucinich supporters lining up behind our nominee. At least certainly after Edwards dropped out and the primary season was effectively over. I saw very few. I went to the NDM meetings every month that first year and was often the only one to be seen in the room wearing a Kerry button. Even in the days before the election, when I went enthusiastically on the locally organized buses out to Ohio to canvass for days, and expected to see many fellow NDM and DFNYC members, I saw very few. Most seemed to prefer working on local campaigns and voter registration than to have to go door to door enthusiastically pushing the name "John Kerry"

The 2000 campaign result was clearly a disaster. Gore should have been president and would have been a great president. Kerry would have been a fine president. We'd have a better world today with either of them having been president. But we got eight years of Bush instead because neither Kerry nor Gore fully inspired the left the way Bush did the right. They were both too establishment for many on the left, liberal but not liberal enough. This brings up the question, "can you be TOO idealistic?" Can you be too picky, as if you not only have to have something thats the right color, but it better be the exact right shade of that color. I think you can. I think many of us on the left want a candidate we can fall in love with, and do not react the same way when the candidate is not that person. You get a fine and totally competent candidate, somebody like a Kerry or a Gore, who you can respect but for whom there simply isn't any love, and when that happens you can end up not having your heart in their campaign.

This has happened the last two presidential cycles for the Democrats, it helped the Republicans beat the fine people and good liberals we nominated, and it could do so again. This is one reason I'm conflicted over who to support in the 2008 cycle. My sense is that Hillary Clinton is the one who would be the best, most competent President out of all the presumed candidates. My sense is also that the left will never fall in love with her because, like Kerry and Gore, she is too establishment. I think John Edwards might also be a fine president, but if the love for him was there, it would have been there four years ago. His being on the ticket didn't ignite any extra passion for Kerry. This leaves Barack Obama, who is right now the one candidate many on the left are courting and actually want to fall in love with. Obama might not make a better president, more qualified or competent, than either Hillary or Edwards, and he does lack their level of experience on the federal level. But if it means more on the left will have their hearts in the race, he could well be the best candidate. Which is one who can win.