The Senator Who Will Not Leave
The Los Angeles Times reports via Newsmax that Senator John Finger Kerry still thinks he's a legitimate national figure and rightful frontrunner for the 2008 Democrat presidential nomination:
After nearly drowning in a sea of red states, John Kerry is keeping his head above water and is making it clear that he has no intention of disappearing beneath the waves despite his loss last November.
As the Los Angeles Times reported Sunday, unlike Al Gore, who the Times recalled virtually disappeared for months after the 2000 race, traveled to Europe, grew a beard and gained weight, Kerry hasn't done any of these things.
Instead, he climbed back up to Capitol Hill, reclaimed his seat in the Senate, and, as the Times, put it, is "working hard to fashion himself into something rare in American politics: a presidential also-ran who isn't an afterthought."
Um-hmm. Perhaps Lurch should ask himself why that "something" he's trying to "fashion himself into" is so rare. Somehow I don't think it's solely or primarily a function of defeated presidential candidates losing all their political ambition.
And, sho 'nuff....
But the large amount of money left over from his campaign looms as a problem for Kerry's hopes.
The problem, according to the Times, is that Kerry infuriated many Democrats when they learned that he ended the presidential campaign with more than $14 million, unspent and sitting in the bank, which they say could have made a difference in Ohio, where Kerry lost by a narrow 119,000 votes.
"...infuriated many Democrats..." That's not a real smart thing to do when you're attempting the daunting task of getting those same Dems to grant you a second crack at being their national standardbearer.
That's on top of the problem that all also-rans face:
"The question for Senator Kerry that he has to answer is: Why would he win this time in 2008 when he wasn't able to pull it off in 2004?" Gordon Fischer told the Times. Fisher, the recently departed head of the Iowa Democratic Party, is reserving judgment on a possible comeback try by Kerry.
Dick Harpootlian, a longtime party leader in South Carolina, was more blunt. "I think John Kerry is a decent, thoughtful, heroic American," Harpootlian told the Times. "I do not think he can win the presidency."
The Times speculates that Kerry's biggest obstacle to another try at the White House is the feeling among many Democrats that he had his chance - that with all that money, all those volunteers and a shaky economy [sic], he still could not beat a President waging a controversial war [i.e. the Left didn't like it] and saddled with middling approval ratings [which one would expect in a "closely divided" electorate - have they dropped the "50-50 nation" template that quickly?]
Adds Harpootlian, "He never connected."
Or he was simply a horrible candidate who lost to a far better man by a margin much more decisive than the numbers would ordinarily indicate.
Democrats won't begin "moving on" from their Bushophobia until after Dubya's second term concludes, but the Boston Balker is a different story. They were never really enthusiastic about his candidacy in the first place (which is why such a premium was put upon stoking up Bush-hatred in order to energize their base); how much less so now (and in '08) given that he lost.
Look at it this way: if Donks couldn't gin up any fresh enthusiasm for, or loyalty to, Al Gore after the agonizing defeat in Florida, why would they want to reprise a Kerry campaign that fell even further short? Especially when You-Know-Who-llary is warming up in the on-deck circle.
Once again, it seems that the only person John Kerry is fooling is himself.
How ironic and fitting that he's the only one who seems to still care.
[Don't miss Captain Ed's analysis from yesterday!]
After nearly drowning in a sea of red states, John Kerry is keeping his head above water and is making it clear that he has no intention of disappearing beneath the waves despite his loss last November.
As the Los Angeles Times reported Sunday, unlike Al Gore, who the Times recalled virtually disappeared for months after the 2000 race, traveled to Europe, grew a beard and gained weight, Kerry hasn't done any of these things.
Instead, he climbed back up to Capitol Hill, reclaimed his seat in the Senate, and, as the Times, put it, is "working hard to fashion himself into something rare in American politics: a presidential also-ran who isn't an afterthought."
Um-hmm. Perhaps Lurch should ask himself why that "something" he's trying to "fashion himself into" is so rare. Somehow I don't think it's solely or primarily a function of defeated presidential candidates losing all their political ambition.
And, sho 'nuff....
But the large amount of money left over from his campaign looms as a problem for Kerry's hopes.
The problem, according to the Times, is that Kerry infuriated many Democrats when they learned that he ended the presidential campaign with more than $14 million, unspent and sitting in the bank, which they say could have made a difference in Ohio, where Kerry lost by a narrow 119,000 votes.
"...infuriated many Democrats..." That's not a real smart thing to do when you're attempting the daunting task of getting those same Dems to grant you a second crack at being their national standardbearer.
That's on top of the problem that all also-rans face:
"The question for Senator Kerry that he has to answer is: Why would he win this time in 2008 when he wasn't able to pull it off in 2004?" Gordon Fischer told the Times. Fisher, the recently departed head of the Iowa Democratic Party, is reserving judgment on a possible comeback try by Kerry.
Dick Harpootlian, a longtime party leader in South Carolina, was more blunt. "I think John Kerry is a decent, thoughtful, heroic American," Harpootlian told the Times. "I do not think he can win the presidency."
The Times speculates that Kerry's biggest obstacle to another try at the White House is the feeling among many Democrats that he had his chance - that with all that money, all those volunteers and a shaky economy [sic], he still could not beat a President waging a controversial war [i.e. the Left didn't like it] and saddled with middling approval ratings [which one would expect in a "closely divided" electorate - have they dropped the "50-50 nation" template that quickly?]
Adds Harpootlian, "He never connected."
Or he was simply a horrible candidate who lost to a far better man by a margin much more decisive than the numbers would ordinarily indicate.
Democrats won't begin "moving on" from their Bushophobia until after Dubya's second term concludes, but the Boston Balker is a different story. They were never really enthusiastic about his candidacy in the first place (which is why such a premium was put upon stoking up Bush-hatred in order to energize their base); how much less so now (and in '08) given that he lost.
Look at it this way: if Donks couldn't gin up any fresh enthusiasm for, or loyalty to, Al Gore after the agonizing defeat in Florida, why would they want to reprise a Kerry campaign that fell even further short? Especially when You-Know-Who-llary is warming up in the on-deck circle.
Once again, it seems that the only person John Kerry is fooling is himself.
How ironic and fitting that he's the only one who seems to still care.
[Don't miss Captain Ed's analysis from yesterday!]
posted by JASmius at 11:05 AM
<<< Home