So I noticed that when Nader announced that he was going to run for president earlier this week, everyone and their mother posted in their blogs that they weren't going to support him. It must've been the top topic of the day. What was interesting was how vehemently opposed people were to his running, even people who had supported him in 2000. I think that people are just so fed up with Bush that they figure they have to get behind a candidate who can win.
But is John Kerry that candidate?
It seems like everyone has just given in and backed Kerry because they see him as the most "viable" candidate. Because they think that everyone else will vote for him even though they're not really excited about him. He's just so-so. He doesn't REALLY fire anyone up. But if everyone thinks everyone else is going to vote for him, who actually will?? Will he be able to convince Republicans that he is better than Bush? Will he be able to convince left-wingers that he's not a special-interest candidate? He's not convincing me. (well, about the special-interest thing, not that he isn't better than Bush. Hell, my cat is better than Bush.)
It would have been much more interesting if more candidates had been able to stay in the race. I think that the debates would have been more lively and they would have been able to keep each other accountable for their platforms. If Kerry doesn't have any opposition (besides Edwards) for the next few months, he's going to get hammered when he faces Bush. It's the whole trial by fire thing - you come out of it that much stronger. I just think Kerry won too easily and is going to take everything for granted.
Then we'll be stuck with Bush for another 4 years. Joy.
