I do not believe either man surrendered his Senate seat. Do they now go back to being Senators? When are each up for re-election?
Edwards didn’t stand for reelection, so I guess he either retires or goes back to his law practice.
Kerry goes back to the Senate, but I don’t know how much of his term is left. It doesn’t matter anyway; he’s a shoo-in for reelection.
Kerry was re-elected to the Senate in 2002, so he can serve until at least 2008, just in time to run again with Hillary Clinton vs Jeb Bush and Colon Powell.
I don’t think Powell wants to run for office. If he serves in Bush’s second term I’ll be highly surprised.
I want Condi to run. Jeb has indicated he’s not interested in running for office either, so I guess we’ll see.
You’re kidding, right?
Kerry was defeated pretty soundly last night. The Dems spent millions on him and he still managed to lose to a President that is hated worldwide. Think they’re going to give him another chance to lose?
John Kerry will go back to Massachusetts, John Edwards will go back to North Carolina but you can be darned sure that George “Dubya” Bush will be going no place !!!
(Gee I’m starting to get the basics of speaking this “Dubya” pseudo-language).
Kerry will disappear as thoroughly as Jimmy Carter did after the 1980 election. It took ten years and a lot of hard work for Carter to resurect his reputation to the point where politicians would again admit to knowing him. In politics, failure is the ultimate sin.
Kerry will return to the Senate, but any influence he ever wielded will be gone.
Not that soundly-it was a pretty close race.
While it’s not unprecendented for a losing candidate to be renominated, it’s unusual. The last such nominee was Richard Nixon in 1968. Most likely Kerry will return to the Senate and not seek another nomination.
Sen. Kerry has two more years to serve in his Senate term.
WRAL-TV had an interview with John Edwards’ Chief of Staff and campaign coordinator on the 5:00 news tonight. According to him, Sen. Edwards will be returning home for a rest, being exhausted from the campaign. He will finish out his term in the Senate, handling those things that come up during recess, and of course attending any lame-duck session that might hypothetically be called. He will remain involved in Democratic politics and human rights affairs here, and in response to David Crabtree’s question, the guy said that he was definitely not ruling out a run for the Presidency in 2008.
In an earlier generation, defeated presidential candidates such as Wendell Willkie, Thomas E. Dewey, Adlai Stevenson, Richard Nixon, and Hubert Humphrey all remained active in politics and sought and sometimes won a second nomination. In the past 30 years, that hasn’t happened–we seem to be operating now on a “one strike and you’re out” rule.
The last defeated candidate with an office to return to (that is, whose term did not expire concurrently with the election) was Michael Dukakis. After losing in 1988, he served out his last two years as Governor of Massachusetts and then faded from sight.
The last defeated candidate with a Senate seat to return to was Stephen Douglas, in 1860, so there aren’t a lot of recent precedents here! (Humphrey however returned to the Senate in 1970, two years after losing his presidential election.)
Ah, there was also George McGovern, in 1972. He squeaked out reelection in 1974, was defeated in 1980, ran a brief and mostly symbolic presidential campaign in 1984, and then retired.
The length and expense of campaigns makes it hard for a losing nominee to make a comeback now. Everyone has seen so much of Kerry now that people would be somewhat tired of him. And it’s going to be hard to get the party faithful energized to back him again.
It’s not like the Democrats were banging the drums for Gore to make another run in 2004.
But since 1976, the losers have been Ford (a president), Carter (a president), Mondale (a former VP), Dukakis (a governor with a couple of years to go), Bush (a president), Dole (a retired Senator), Gore (a former VP), and Kerry (a Senator with 2 more years to go).
I suppose we could go back to the 19th Century when people like Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan could lose three times (well, one of them was in 1908, but still…)
Kerry was first elected in 1984 and has four years left. He’s 61, so if he wants he could serve a few more terms. Ted Kennedy is still going, after all; we’ll see what he does.
Edwards is still young (51), I guess if he has his eye on the nomination in '08 he’ll take some kind of private sector job with a good public image. He’s got to combat both exposure from this campaign and the potential of disappearing in the next two or three years due to being out of public office. I imagine he’ll still be one of the early favorites due to name recognition, but we’ll see how it goes once things really get moving.
Didn’t Reagan lose to Carter in 1976, then came back to defeat him in 1980? Am I remembering that wrong? (I was just a child at the time ;))
In 1976, Reagan ran for the Republican nomination against the sitting President, Ford. Ford won the Republican nomination, but lost to Carter in the general election.
Didn’t work out all that well for Lieberman.
Heck, don’t forget Grover Cleveland, the ultimate comeback kid.
I can see Kerry making another bid for the nomination in 2008, but he’ll have to GREATLY simplify his speaking style. I wouldn’t want to see him reduced to a sound-bite jukebox, but surely he can lose the 20-point responses with addenda and appendices. His success in 2008 (if he tries) will depend largely on whether or not Bush’s second term is better or worse than his first, and on whether or not Al Gore spends the next four years rebuilding his own bid. Heck, I can imagine Kerry throwing support behind Gore (the “true” winner of 2000) with an eye on a major cabinet post (the Vice-Presidency might be seen as a humiliation) and his own rebid sooner or later.
I also predict Hillary Clinton getting involved in the nomination process and being one of its early casualties. This will mostly be just for practice, anyway, and she can try again in 2012.
I further predict that this is all wild speculation.
You forgot Henry Clay, although that is more than just one generation ago.
No, it didn’t. I was just saying that early on, he was one of the favorites because the voters already knew who he was. Edwards seems to be more of a mainstream Democrat than Lieberman, who was on the right of the party.