January 27, 2004
Dean, Not Kerry
The thing that ticks me off most about the Kerry resurgence is the electability thing. I agree that if neither Dean nor Kerry would be attacked by Bush/Rove, Kerry might have an electability advantage, due to the wide variety of people who might, in a vacuum, vote for Kerry's veteran resume.But, duh, they will be attacked. And who's shown the ability to stand up to attacks, and who's shown the tendency to fold? Kerry sure wasn't all that inspiring back when the war was being debated. The Iraq vote wasn't really even all that important, it was the behavior. Kerry and all those guys were so busy strategizing and running around and trying not to step on their own tails that they couldn't be bothered to actually stand up for anything in the face of opposition. Dean, on the other hand, has taken the worst of what his opponents have given him - all ganging up on him - and an incredibly unfair media treatment, and is gaining support again. He's made his record on standing up for what is right even when it's unpopular.
So given that, who's the one more likely to be able to handle the attacks of Bush/Rove? Which one will get tougher and fight back, and which one is just going to dissipate into a cloud of mist and fog?
One other pet peeve - switching your vote to someone else just because you think it's more likely that guy will win the election you're voting in does not make any sense. You do not get a prize for picking the winner. Nobody cares. Vote for your damn first choice already. There's no reason not to.