Kerry: Should he or shouldn't he?

ELLEN GOODMAN'S April 28 column (''Don't run, John Kerry," op-ed) pleads for our junior senator not to seek the presidency in 2008 and adds numerous explanations as to why he lost in 2004.

In response, I offer Occam's razor, which states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible.

In other words, the correct answer for many of the most vexing questions of our time is usually the most obvious one, which brings us back to Kerry.

The senator lost in 2004 because he was too liberal on many of the issues that concern most Americans and not because of all the excuses and theories offered by the fine Ms. Goodman.

ANTHONY MUNCHAK
Newton

WHILE IT is true that John Kerry made many mistakes in the 2004 presidential campaign, one can learn from mistakes. If he can be himself and not what a group of advisers thinks he should be, we would have not only a great candidate, but a great president who would be the antithesis of what we have today.

Almost half of the US population voted for Kerry in '04. It would not take many more to give him a majority, especially as a great number of those who did not vote for Kerry now regret their action.

I had the opportunity to see and hear John Kerry last year at my grandson's graduation from Boston University Medical School. I found him to be personable and sincere, and should he become president, I believe he would surround himself with people with similar values and restore the trust we have in our government as well as the image of America abroad.

SIMONNE QUIGLEY
Newton