For example, why wouldn't Kerry say that Bush would lead us to war with Iran, when it was obvious that this would be their next step? When I was at shows working with Music for America I would talk to kids and try to get them to care about the election. The one thing that always seemed to break through the apathetic responses of "I just don't care about the election" was when I asked them "So you don't care if the next country we invade is Iran?" Some might snicker at me and laugh "no" but many others listened to what I had to say about the radical nature of the Bush Administration, how this was unlike any administration the US had ever seen, and would at least think about what a revolutionairy, worl conquest loving, power would mean for all of us.
Our leaders in the Democratic party were way too cautious in the last election, and now, unfortunately, we all must pay the terrible price of four more years of Neocon rule.
Bush had the good fortune of running agaist Gore and Kerry in that neither could call Bush out on being born with a silver spoon (or foot) in his mouth.
Edwards was a good VP choice, but he could not counteract Kerry's image. Nor do I believe did he press the message of economic populism that got him elected from a very conservative NC. (Edwards is surprisingly economically liberal. He is also quite good friends with Dennis Kucinich - they told their supporters to support each other in Iowa if the one was considered "not viable")
Bush was so popular in mid-2003 that all the best Democrats stayed away. To be honest, it is only due to the remarkable efforts of the Democratic grassroots and Bush's incompetence that Kerry was able to get 48%.
