The Deanization of John Kerry is complete
How can you know how much trouble John Kerry's campaign is in? Just listen to what he's (now) saying about Iraq.
In much the same way that Bill Clinton turned to the hard-left when he was facing impeachment, so Lurch, facing the indifference-to-outright-hemorrhaging of his base at a time when swing-voters have failed him on the "sniff test" and Republicans are more energized and unified than ever, is trying frantically to throw them the red meat they've been demanding ever since the Boston Bacchanalia.
Remember, in the wake of that convention, when President Bush challenged Kerry to either repudiate or stand by his vote for the Iraq war resolution "knowing all that we know now," and the Dem challenger took the bait and said that he'd still vote the same way? It didn't seem to make any sense based on what he had said during the primary campaign. But then again, that didn't make any sense based upon what he'd said in the run up to the war, either. Flip, flop, and flip. And now we have flop again.
But look at the respective political needs of the moment. In 2001-2002 Kerry was laying the groundwork for his presidential run, and he needed a consistent record as a hawk on something in order to neutralize his Vietnam-era quislingism. Whereas in 2003, after the aformentioned "Dr. Demented" shot into the stratosphere, Kerry suddenly had to compete for the support of a nominating electorate that had gone off its collective nut. However, after he had the nomination in hand, he had to appeal to the broader electorate, which isn't made up of pathologically pacifistic Bush/America-haters.
What he didn't count on was the Swiftboat Vets for Truth demolishing the war hero persona behind which he'd hidden his hard-left pacifism for his entire political career. Then the GOP convention exposed that hard-left pacifism before the entire country. And now the Kerry campaign is being dragged down further by its emerging connections to Rathergate. By my latest, up-to-the-minute estimate, if the election were held today, Kerry would lose the popular vote 51%-46% and the Electoral College 343-195.
So he's taking the only option he has left - shore up his base (with the attacks on Bush and the thinly-veiled pledge to "cut & run" from Iraq) , make the contest maximally ugly to turn off the center as much as possible (Rathergate, Kitty Kelly, etc.), and hope turnout is low enough to narrow the result sufficiently that he can pursue the "Gore option" starting on November 3rd.
Makes me wonder, and not for the first time, why the Democrats didn't just nominate Howard Dean.
Must be that "honesty" thing...
In much the same way that Bill Clinton turned to the hard-left when he was facing impeachment, so Lurch, facing the indifference-to-outright-hemorrhaging of his base at a time when swing-voters have failed him on the "sniff test" and Republicans are more energized and unified than ever, is trying frantically to throw them the red meat they've been demanding ever since the Boston Bacchanalia.
Remember, in the wake of that convention, when President Bush challenged Kerry to either repudiate or stand by his vote for the Iraq war resolution "knowing all that we know now," and the Dem challenger took the bait and said that he'd still vote the same way? It didn't seem to make any sense based on what he had said during the primary campaign. But then again, that didn't make any sense based upon what he'd said in the run up to the war, either. Flip, flop, and flip. And now we have flop again.
But look at the respective political needs of the moment. In 2001-2002 Kerry was laying the groundwork for his presidential run, and he needed a consistent record as a hawk on something in order to neutralize his Vietnam-era quislingism. Whereas in 2003, after the aformentioned "Dr. Demented" shot into the stratosphere, Kerry suddenly had to compete for the support of a nominating electorate that had gone off its collective nut. However, after he had the nomination in hand, he had to appeal to the broader electorate, which isn't made up of pathologically pacifistic Bush/America-haters.
What he didn't count on was the Swiftboat Vets for Truth demolishing the war hero persona behind which he'd hidden his hard-left pacifism for his entire political career. Then the GOP convention exposed that hard-left pacifism before the entire country. And now the Kerry campaign is being dragged down further by its emerging connections to Rathergate. By my latest, up-to-the-minute estimate, if the election were held today, Kerry would lose the popular vote 51%-46% and the Electoral College 343-195.
So he's taking the only option he has left - shore up his base (with the attacks on Bush and the thinly-veiled pledge to "cut & run" from Iraq) , make the contest maximally ugly to turn off the center as much as possible (Rathergate, Kitty Kelly, etc.), and hope turnout is low enough to narrow the result sufficiently that he can pursue the "Gore option" starting on November 3rd.
Makes me wonder, and not for the first time, why the Democrats didn't just nominate Howard Dean.
Must be that "honesty" thing...
posted by JASmius at 6:22 PM
<<< Home