Republicans always ridicule democrats for nominating liberal candidates and Democrats always ridicule Republicans for nominating conservative candidates. For example, many Dems ridiculed the Repubs in '00 when Bush beat out McCain.

These accusations that the Dems would have won if they had could have found someone better than Kerry are, in my opinion, baseless. Believe me, no matter who they put up, he would have been viewed as an out of touch looney liberal by Bush voters.

As far as Kerry being a socialist and unable to reach out to moderates, he was to the right of Dean and Kucinich and to the left of Gephardt and Edwards. That is what I would call a "moderate democrat". If anyone here wants to see a real-life liberal democrat (not just a democrat that Bush and company call liberal, but a real liberal), come out here to San Francisco and I'll introduce you to some.

So then why did nobody vote for him? Hmm..

Is the country really making a values shift to the right or was this election just the result of Bush's 9/11 popularity and/or the idea that he will somehow handle Iraq and terrorism better? I just don't know and I don't think anyone does right now.

If the country is indeed shifting to the right, then expect the Democrats to be dragged along. The two parties are constantly shifting in the wind in order to better align themselves with the values and beliefs of the voters. But right now I think the talk of Democrats needing a major overhaul could be premature. This is only the first time their presidential candidate has lost the popular vote since 1988. If the next 2 or 3 elections go the same way, then some major changes will of course need to be made.