February 05, 2004
Kerry's Appeal
I think I finally figured out why Kerry has the appeal he does.For months, we've had polls where an "Unnamed Democrat" beat Bush in 2004, even though Bush beat all of the named candidates head to head.
Kerry's the only one that was smart enough to realize that and co-opt the "Unnamed Democrat"'s campaign. He's making himself as bland as possible. Kerry symbolizes nothing except for "Not Bush", and that's why people are voting for him. Bush has bullied everyone for three years into a state of learned helplessness, and they're stumbling through with barely enough wits about them to blindly reach for the most obvious Not Bush candidate out there.
All the rest of the candidates make these voters think. They don't want that. They just want a generic, obvious, Not Bush guy so they can get on with it already.
I don't think you are giving the American voter enough credit. They have it all figured out and it is quite simple. Democrats need a man to beat Bush. To beat bush the Democrats are all going to have to agree on someone. Being that the Dem party is so diverse it is hard to get someone who can pull voters from all corners. The diversity is really the problem in front of the beat Bush problem. The best bet to get someone who people can settle with. To settle for someone means not voting from the heart. To settle for a candidate who's absence of powerful rhetoric is also absent of powerful deterrence. Reason says to settle for someone who is boring yet professional enough to pull from all the corners of the vast Democrat party. Kerry seems to be that man. He has no powerful stance. He has no powerful flaws. Just another professional who can beat Bush.
Posted by: RobDob at February 6, 2004 12:52 AMYou're budling together the quality of being "well-rounded", which is good, and the quality of having no message, which is bad. A clear message doesn't have to be divisive, neither does taking a stand on behalf of the nation. Equivocation isn't the same thing as being well-rounded, and I fear that the voting population is going to realize this too late to reconsider their nominee.
Kerry might be the nominee, but he faces one of the most negative, and effective, political machines in running against this Administration. The chances are high that he will be neutralized by many attacks by the Republicans, and lose the election. If so, whither the Democrats? I can see a Dean resurgence in 2008, with the ticket being Dean/Edwards, and with the Senate being retaken. The Democrats will learn from Kerry's implosion to choose a candidate based on character and principles rather than expediency and avoidance, and both Dean and Edwards will fit that bill nicely. Not even Hillary could beat that team!
Posted by: Glenn at February 6, 2004 11:07 AMI too have fears regarding a Kerry coronation.
I see a softened media these days following the mini-tuesday 7 state marathon. The problem with that is Kerry takes NO body blows during this period - making him appear stronger to voters.
The truth is, until he takes a couple on the chin, and is at least staggered a bit, we [the voters] cannot trust his ability to take a hit from Bush & Co. and get back up and fight.
Will the Democrats buy a 'fightin' John' Kerry, only to discover there's a 'cowerin' jack' in the box, instead?
Posted by: Angie in WA State at February 8, 2004 02:57 AMI am a Dean supporter that is despondent yet resigned to a Kerry nomination.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Kerry is a bad guy. It's just that I had way more respect for him at the begining fo the campaign than I do now. Kerry seems to be stamped from that politican mold of a spineless survivor who bends whichever way the wind is blowing.
I think Kerry is getting the nomination because he is "none of the above." I don't think it will be easy for him to beat Bush, who at least stands for something.
I want to grab those Dem voters who are giving Kerry support and shake them by the shoulders and ask them: "What has Kerry done to deserve your support? What does he stand for?"
Posted by: ilan at February 9, 2004 02:35 AM