|
|
<< Funny | Main | Denying Medals to Coverup Casualties >> December 06, 2003Alterman on KerryEssentially, Alterman summarizes why it's sad that Kerry has run such a poor campaign-- he deserves far more respect than he's gotten by the "horse race" media, but there's no mistaking the fact that he's failed to connect with voters. Alterman and others blame Kerry's Iraq vote, but I don't think that's enough of an explanation, since Kerry's position of giving Bush an initial benefit of the doubt but feeling betrayed by his unilateralism is probably the consensus Democrat position. I think Atrios's position on this is also about right. I think this understates Dean's positive success, not just in framing his own Iraq position (which is only one inch more anti-war than Kerry, since Dean supported the war in Afghanistan and supports keeping the troops in Iraq) but more importantly just defining a broad "anti-Bush" position from early on. Kerry's "Stop the Madness" message-- see the adstrip to the left -- is just too little, too late. Dean's antiwar position was less important on the substance of Iraq than as a signal to a broader set of Dems that he was willing to fight, period. If Kerry had exuded the same energy to take on Bush on a whole range of issues early on, his Iraq vote wouldn't have been a problem. Posted by Nathan at December 6, 2003 01:38 PM Related posts:
Trackback PingsTrackBack URL for this entry: CommentsI live in Massachusetts and volunteered for Kerry's senate runs in 1990 and 1996. I was totally psyched when Kerry announced his run for president and was prepared to spend many many hours volunteering for him. Especially in August of 2002, when he published an editorial in the New York Times saying "We must not go to war because we want to, only becuase we have to." Not to mention that the day MoveOn sponsored meetings with senators across the US in August to try to stop the war I was with the folks who met with Kerry's staffers, and they came down and told us that Kerry was with us 100%. Then, after saying that, he voted to give Bush a blank check to go to war. There had been an amendment requiring Bush to go back to congress before declaring war, and given everything he had said Kerry should've refused to vote for the war unless that amendment was in there. I mean, for crying out loud, TRUSTING the crowd that stole the 2000 election, violated nearly every campaign promise, screwed us on refusing to fund No Child Left Behind, and countless other ways!?! *TRUSTING* them!!! Hell, Kim Jong Il is more trustworthy than Bush! It's often said that the one thing worse than the enemy is the traitor, and most of us felt personally betrayed by Kerry's war vote. Whatever the polls may have said, by making that vote Kerry alienated most people who would have been his core volunteers, myself included. Most of us gravitated to Dean, who is currently polling ahead in Massachusetts. (I'm undecided, but leaning toward Dean.) I'll also ad that, while it has improved recently, the Kerry campaign was clueless for much of 2003. Example: not having a single volunteer at the Boston Gay Pride march in June 2003, despite the fact that Kerry had personally marched in the parade in previous years, and has a very honorable pro-gay rights record. Meanwhile, the Dean campaign of course had a table and lots of volunteers passing out stuff. Posted by: Kevin Block-Schwenk at December 7, 2003 03:07 AM Post a comment
|
Series-
Social Security
Past Series
Current Weblog
January 04, 2005 January 03, 2005 January 02, 2005 January 01, 2005 ... and Why That's a Good Thing - Judge Richard Posner is guest blogging at Leiter Reports and has a post on why morality has to influence politics... MORE... December 31, 2004 December 30, 2004 December 29, 2004 December 28, 2004 December 24, 2004 December 22, 2004 December 21, 2004 December 20, 2004 December 18, 2004 December 17, 2004 December 16, 2004
Referrers to site
|