KERRY: What went wrong?

[carrowsboy]

A year ago, I was very excited about him. I thought he was a great candidate to wipe the floor with the thieves in the White House.

A year later, my impression of him has done a 180. Was it his support of the war? The Medicare vote? His bitchy attitude towards Dean? Firing his campaign workers?

What do you guys think went wrong? Can he still pull it together?

[UTUSN]

1. A Drumbeat Like This? n/t

[xJlM]

2. I still like him

But his reactions to Bush*'s convenient little war rule out any possibility of my voting for him in the primaries. This is supposed to be someone we will trust to lead our nation. And he was fooled into believing the lies about WMDs and an imminent threat?

[Skittles]

6. no he wasn't fooled

but he voted yes anyway - which makes it all the more despicable.

[sendero]

9. Hey Skittles....

... that is exactly what I think. I doubt that 10% of Congress actually bought the "imminent threat" argument, it was simply not founded on any facts. The white house set up their own intelligence office because the CIA wouldn't make up stories for them.

As trite as I'm sure it sounds, I don't think there are many people who can serve in Congress for any length of time without being corrupted by the process. Too bad.

[JNelson6563]

3. I think it was a monumental case of

poor judgement. Politics is a chess game. Many were sure that by supporting our "popular" pResident and his "popular war" they could point to it and assure us they'd keep us "safe".

It didn't quite work out that way and they've been frustrated and have had to do some scrambling because of it. It was a gamble some took and lost.

That's why they call it "gambling". Even those that look like the safest bets ever can come back and bite you.

Julie

[jeter]

97. I think Kerry saw this Iraq war and the last one as the same

That was the problem. He saw the last war and saw how popular it was. No down side in supporting it. So there must be no downside here either.

I think he actually opposed the 1991 War Resolution. Same with Gepthardt. And it killed them both to support it this time. How do you oppose a war 10 years ago when there was an obvious act of aggression and violation of international law (by Iraq) and support one this time when there was NO SUCH VIOLATION.

That vote killed many of the Democrats. Especially when the war went badly and people turned against it. C'est le fin pour M. Kerry.

[LuminousX]

4. He zagged when he should have zigged

And he didn't realize what his IWR vote was a bad thing. So while he thought he was starting on an even mark with the other candidates, he was actually starting behind them. He campaigned as a front runner from day one when he really needed to hamstring Dean, Edwards, and Gephardt immediately and truly clarify his vote, not make statements like "it was exactly the same as this other proposed resolution." Far better to make a heartfelt apology noting that he trusted the President, something he shouldn't have done.

[Kolesar]

5. Why don't you find an article on it and "break it down" for us?

I don't need to write a senior-level thesis on political science on the subject for you.

www.google.com

[Hep]

112. wow

To think someone would have the gall to ask for opinions on a DISCUSSION FORUM.

And to think some people can't share an opinion without writing a senior level thesis.

[GCP]

7. I believe he did the politics as usual thing

He knew he'd be running for president in 2004 and would need a good turn-out from the red states to turn around and vote for him against Chimp. This was before the war started and became the mess it now is, and he probably thought it would be fast and easy and the Iraqis would greet us with open arms, yada yada yada.

If he'd voted against what they all expected it to be, then all Chimp would have had to do in the race would be to make him out to be Un-American and doubting of our plans and military.

Unfortunately, life is what happens when we're making other plans.

Things went badly wrong, the war is a huge mess and Dean and Kucinich come across as visionaries who had the real chops in a time of crisis.

If Kerry had only listened to people like Scott Ritter, he'd have known there were no WDMs, and he'd have known it was a sham.

But even then, if the war had been a success, he'd still be fucked if he'd voted against it, in the eyes of the great unwashed in the red states.

Just my $0.02.

[Carolina]

94. a good 2 cents

but he could also have done what he just did on the Medicare bill: not voted at all.

Kerry had the upper hand on IWR vote because his MA constituents were solidly opposed, he faced little opposition in his 2002 re-election bid and most importantly, as a decorated Vietnam veteran, he surely knew that pre-emption was wrong and that the outcome of any war is unpredictable. After all, Bush 41 won Iraq I and still lost in 1992.

No, Kerry thought he was being politically expedient but it was a cowardly move and it has cost him.

[dusty64]

8. When it became apparent

our President Gore wasn't going to seek reelection I turned to Kerry. Unfortunately, time and again I was disappointed by the puzzling lack of leadership. Yes, the vote for chimp's "war" was the straw that broke my back. A Senator from one of the most Democratic states voted against the will of his constituents, apparently thinking it would be too harmful to his political future if he didn't. He still will not admit that he was wrong.

Support for the "patriot act" and many horrendous regime nominees also left a bad taste in my mouth. Now he simply can't be bothered to show up for important votes that he is being paid by the taxpayers to. Sorry, up to now I have not participated in candidate wars but Kerry is NOT on my list anymore. When leadership and opposition has been called for he has been nowhere to be found, obviously putting his personal interests above those of the People.

[Abe Linkman]

10. Hard to play the game when you're an insider...

Kerry knew or should have known it would be a no-winner vote no matter how the invasion turned out; so he did the only realistic thing an insider could do.

I think what he should have done is pretty much ignore the invasion (after all, the public doesn't care anything about it anyhow)...and come
out swinging about how bush is bad news for most Americans. Wrong priorities putting ever larger numbers of people at all kinds of risk...and worse.

[knight_of_the_star]

11. Simple

He was annoited as the front-runner too early on. He sat on his laurels, did some things he shouldn't have done, and PRESTO! Dean was able to spin his IWR vote against him despite holding the same position. I think it was just a case of arrogance in the saddle. He got too comfy, so he was easy to unhorse.

[LeftPeopleFinishFirst]

12. I used to like Kerry a lot.

I'm starting to have some doubts... I'm still on his email list and everything and was thinking about getting off of it. Good thing I don't have to vote next election, I'd be a mess in deciding.

[pocoloco]

13. I would have really appreciated it if he had followed

up on his Flight 800 comments.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24734

[NewYorkerfromMass]

59. TWA 800 was an accidental shootdown by the U.S. Navy

Yet some would like to pretend it's a terrorist incident that no terrorist ever took credit for.
And the VRWC blames it on Clinton and Gore.

I think worldnetdaily.com links should be banned from this site.

[seaglass]

14. You're the one who made the statement that your impression

has changed, so shouldn't you know why?

[Armstead]

15. He seems to want his cake and eat it too

Kerry's my senator, and I thought he'd be a goiod candidate. But he turned out to be too much of a "business as usual" kind of Democrat and politician.

Although I strongly disagree with their stance, Gephardt and Lieberman took a stand on the war, and didn't back away or try to cloud it. It turns out they screwed up, but at least they had convictions.

Kerry waffled and weasled, and almsost made me think he'd bite against it. But he did so is a two-faced way. "I'm giving you unlimited power Mr President, but I'll be watching you closely." Yawn.

Alas, he does that on every issue. He seemed to be ducking any positions, and I can't tell if he's a fiery liberal or a pandering centrist.

Finally it's at the point whereI just can't even listen to him. He's done so much bobbing and weaving that when he occasionally does make a good point it's lost in all the jargen and double talk.

[dreissig]

67. Where Is John?

Excellent post. Too much ducking in and out behind trees; now you see him now you don't. Too bad.

[cosmicdot]

16. was riding a motorcycle onto Jay Leno's set in jeans, jacket & helmet

symbolic of John Kerry and his campaign ... was it an indication of the times ... or good judgment or a case, in Jon Stewart of The Daily Show's words: that dog won't hunt?

flashback to Dukakis in a tank

J.Kerry is from the Brahmin class of Boston, and whether he rides cycles or not ... how did it play? If not well, why not?

Leno is in ga-ga land as it is; and, his pretending Kerry was late and, oh, let's look outside the studio to see what's going on was so Ding-Dong School and cheesy. We're not all mor(a)ns ...

Maybe it would have played better if some rugged dude got off the bike ... wind-blown hair; needing a shave look ... instead of looking one was checking into the Plaza Hotel vs. Motel 6 ...

I'm afraid many of our current lot of politicians are caught up in some political-PR and product-sell anachronistic mindset ... they should just be real, natural, and talk common sense ... of course, if one hasn't been doing this all along, it can become awkward as Americans and the world changes ...

Instead of trying to look like Joe Cool by riding a chopper onto the Leno Show ... a better idea perhaps would have been to have used the opportunity to turn the table on George by making the schtick look like it was 'mocking' George, 'mission accomplished', and all the other White House-staged photo-ops ... to show how fraudulent and irrelevant they (and George) are ... and, what counts is substance ...

Years and years of polling and packaging and programming and PRing can have a diminishing return in a changing world ... sort of a separating of the egg from 'We the Yolk' ... sooner or later, it begins to look like plastic in a china shop ... shallow, insincere, and hypocritical ...

Of course, it's not just John K ... we've witnessed campaigns in the past and present, too, experiencing similar ...

``````

David Bowie is about one of the few people who can cha-cha-cha-change and pull it off.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One of the things that did it for me was his behavior during the 11/7-12/12/2000 period; and, of course, when the Electoral College met in January '01 -- that was a moment for true heroism ... and, Biden and Kerry released CYA messages: no one asked them to stand up with the Congressional Black Caucus -- IMHO - leadership shouldn't require being asked to lead. I agreed not to forget or to never get over it ... and, that meant the entire stolen election debacle. Some would say, it wouldn't have mattered. The GOP would've still installed GWB ... but, that's not the point -- it's the principle, not to mention how the Founders designed it ... while Al was virtually standing alone ... his peers were starting to mobilize their own campaigns at the expense of our Constitution, We the People, and our democracy ... you don't think they weren't?

(January 11, 2001 -- 11:02 PM EDT // link // print)
As you know Talking Points was pretty taken with the protests/objections raised by the members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) on January 6th during the formal counting of the Electoral College vote. And also chagrined that no Senator would agree to sign on with one of their objections, and thus force a brief debate on the merits of the Florida electors.
But I was talking to some folks in the Senate today. And maybe there's a little more to say about this. I talked to a source close to one of the Senators you'd really expect would have been high on the list of senators to go to. And apparently no member of House spoke to this senator and asked him to join the objection.

None. Not one.

Now there were apparently some contacts between staffers, informal discussions, and so forth. But not the sort of request directly from a member of House that would signal that they're serious. Is this source trying to cover for the Senator in question? Yeah, sure, there's some of that. But you'd think one of the CBC members would have tried to up the ante by making a direct request.

(In fairness, I didn't get the sense this Senator would have agreed anyway. But the point is they say he wasn't really asked.)
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2001_01_07.html

[Scott Lee]

22. That was his Dukakis in a Tank moment

Disingenuous, phoney, didn't fly.

[CTLawGuy]

37. he's a good guy

but he has a self-consciousness problem. I see pictures of him Waterskiing, playing guitar, riding a motorcycle, playing hockey, and he looks lame. they are attempts by him to dispel his so-called "aloofness" problem. "I'm John Kerry, Im a regular person, just needed to clear that up".

Just be real. When Howard Dean appears before the people, he is very real, straightforward and simple.

[Zynx]

17. His problem is that he is very unlikeable.

He comes off as an elitist snob who is incredibly arrogant. Maybe its just because I'm from Wisconsin and we are touchy about that sort of thing here, but I think he really is very unlikeable.

[DancingBear]

18. Seconded

My wife finds him to be very condescending and aloof in both his mannerisms and his way of speaking. I do not necessarily find this to be true, although I cringe sometimes at his attempts at being "one of the guys."

Perception is everything in politics - ya think * got elected because of his grasp of world affairs?

Disregarding (for the moment) all issue related reasons for his downfall, I think his (perceived) personality plays a greater role than one may think.

[Squeech]

20. I agree too

He's my senator, and I like him okay as a senator, where he can wax professorial in the way that comes naturally to him. I just don't think he knows how to talk to anybody else-- besides another Northeastern librul with a policy-wonk streak. And as a candidate, that makes him (along with his snail mail address) Dukakis redux, which just isn't what we need next year.

My opinion, of course, and worth what you pay for it.

[tabasco]

44. Yeah, but I agree he should be himself.

He might come off as an arrogant, elitist snob, but he used to come off as a PRESIDENTIAL arrogant, elitist snob. I don't really care if the President is a regular guy. In fact, I hope he's not. If Kerry was intelligent and principled, a lot of Americans would support him despite that image.

[poskonig]

92. a PRESIDENTIAL arrogant, elitist snob

You hit the nail on the head.

Kerry's "weakness" could be his greatest asset. Why he isn't being packaged as "Mr. Statesman" is beyond me. One thing is for sure -- the crusty the clown "I'm a real guy" act sucks.

[mb7588a]

108. elitist snob?

I'm from Wisconsin too. We elected Herb Kohl to the Senate......

[jarab]

19. He cannot pull it together

Imo,
A Democrat who places enough trust in * and his Admin to go along with their programs has shown a weakness that is undeserving of our support.
Kerry might have been helped also if he'd been through tougher campaign battles before this. He is not a fighter, and he incorrectly thought his insider status was a plus. And obviously his Vietnam experience has little or no benefit to his candidacy.
A poor campaigner. I still like him, but my one vote is insignificant to his predicament.
...O...

[Scott Lee]

21. Kerry is an ordinary politician in an extraordinary time

The two do not mix.

We face unprecedented threats to our civil rights and liberties, unprecedented threats to our security exacerbated by an alarmingly brutish and aggressive military policy on the rest of the world. We have never been so divided, or hated in the world. That requires extraordinary people to rise to extraordinary heights.

Kerry is just not that person. He is not evil, he's just an average politician trying to make a difference in a non-average period of our history.

[paulk]

27. Kerry is anything but an ordinary politician

If you'd bother to check out his service to this country, both in the military, the Vietnam anti-war movement, and his time as an elected official, you would know that.

Instead you choose to stand on the sidelines and throw rocks.

You describe yourself as a "radical leftist", yet you consistantly disparage one of the most liberal Democratic politicians we have; while painting your favorite, Howard Dean, as some kind of left wing Svengali. Even a cursory examination of these two candidate's records would show Kerry to the left of Dean politically.

[Scott Lee]

43. I guess you've never read one of my posts on Leftism or Dean

So let me save you the trouble of being too embarrased.

I am a New Leftist. It means I hold to some old school Red values (workers rights, unionism etc) but adopt others that were not in favor with the 60's liberal set - for instance I'm pro gun. Trying to lump me into the cartoon mold of 1930's european leftism will fail you.

"Liberals" and "Left" do not often coincide. American 60s liberalism, for instance, does nothing to cast capitalism in a bad light or criticize the excessive repression of Israel. Leftists will often counter those positions.

Howard Dean is not a Leftist to my degree, no how no way. But I see him as the best hope to do three things:

- Get Bush* out of the White House. That will also get his fascist cadre out as well.

- Put a stop to the disastrous path we're on with the rightwing aggressive war policy. This cannot be over emphasized. The current fascist inspired doctrine is an enormous threat to the rest of the world and hence to our own security. It must be stopped. No one seems as opposed to it as Dean.

- Disrupt, shake up the stagnant establishment elitism of the Democratic Leadership so that the party becomes a true force of opposition against the fascist right. Give the bums rush to the entrenched leadership and their power club.

Hopefully that clears up your confusion, and you're welcome.

[Octafish]

49. John Kerry is the most qualified Liberal candidate in two generations.

We've got to go back to RFK's time to find a comparison.

The people who judge Sen. Kerry by mischaracterizations of his Iraq war vote are uninformed. Sen. Kerry, for all his complex intentions, has seldom been heard stating he "voted to protect America." That is the post9-11 reason, pure and simple.

All the self-righteous and self-proclaimed leftists in the world and their brothers who criticize Kerry for his war vote shoud know Kerry lost six of his best friends in the war. He's not interested in getting anybody else to lose someone they love to war.

[Scott Lee]

81. Which might be the exact reason he's wrong for the job

There is a schism going on in the Democratic Party, due to an increasing polarization of old school (60s RFK liberal Dems) and new school (post Reagan antiWTO Dems). I've written about this exhaustively so forgive me if I don't want to post it again. Suffice to say, Kerry - while a decent man, I'm sure - is out of step with the political realities of the day. If this were 1968 I'd vote for him in a second.

[Octafish]

91. Great to hear you're a new school scholar.

I've been voting since 1976 and have seen a thing or two. This is no theory: The nation needs more than a new type of politician to recover from Bushler's criminality and the coming environmental, economic and military threats. John Kerry is best qualified to handle the responsibilities of leadership. He's also a good man who has always done what is best for his crew, his constituents, and his country. That's a fact.

[Scott Lee]

113. Kerry just showed us his resolve...by not voting.

Mr. Hang-Dog sighed that his vote wouldn't have counted anyway on the Medicare bill. Woe is us. Why bother.

Way to lead, Mr. Kerry! Way to send the message that it's fruitless to vote on something you see no chance of winning! And in a year leading up to a presidential election.

Breathtaking.

John Kerry, Dickless Gephardt, Joe Lieberman, Tom Daschle and the rest of the Democratic has-been crowd needs to be consigned to the glue factory of failed politics. I don't know how much more of their "proven leadership" we can take.

[Carolina]

98. oh, puhleeze

protect America by giving * free reign to attack a nation that had nothing to do 9/11, to attack a nation that the PNACers had in their sights since 1997?

Yeah, right. Fifteen out the nineteen hijackers as well as the yet to be found bin Laden were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. That said, attacking Saudi Arabia would not have eliminated terrorism because terrorism is not a single nation or state. Bombing countries as if it were does not protect America. It just hardens more hearts and minds.

Thanks a lot, for the protection JFK.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Haunted by that cowardly vote.

He sold out cheap. Now he's paying the price. Kerry was my guy until he cynically sold his soul for what he thought was political expediency. No one to blame but his sorry self.

[calimary]

26. And why didn't he stick around to vote on the Medicare issue?

He spoke out against it but didn't stay to finish the job. Okay, maybe his vote wouldn't have made much difference, but it would have proven that he stayed with it and completed the pass. To bail like that - SHEESH!!!!

Plus, he voted for the war and Patriot Act, allowing himself to be swept along, and buying into the rhetoric when he should have known better. AND, what still sticks like a thorn in MY particular side, he told people to "get over it" about Selection 2000, which, as long as I believe in living in a democracy, I can NEVER EVER EVER EVER DO! If we get over that and move on away from it, we are destined to have it happen to us again and again.

As Mad-Eye Moody would say in the "Harry Potter" saga, "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!!!!" Especially against THESE dark-siders we're up against.

Kerry's a HUGE disappointment. I once had my hopes. But when I heard Dean saying the things I wanted to hear also from a THEN-better-positioned candidate, and I NEVER heard those same things from Kerry, I turned into a Deanie.

Seems to me we need someone as our standard-bearer who's not into capitulating and making nice-nice with the enemy, OR trying to sound/look/seem like them or like a kinder, gentler version of them. Kerry hasn't shown any willingness OR ability to do that. And now he's losing momentum, and I believe that's the reason. Any outrage he seems to be displaying about what's going on is several days late and many dollars short. It's no good, NOW. He should have been on it, boldly, courageously, loudly, and WAY out in front, a year ago. Instead, he sided with THEM, not US.

on edit -

That said, if he DOES, somehow, I DON'T know how, become our nominee, of course I will support him (ANYBODY but bush), but I won't be happy about it.

[IndianaGreen]

29. The problem with Kerry is that we expected more from him

We expected more from Kerry precisely because of his resume. What if Kerry had objected to PATRIOT Act as Russ Feingold and Dennis Kucinich did? What if Kerry had spoken against the IWR with the same eloquence as Robert Byrd? What if Kerry had voted accordingly? Kerry would be the leading candidate for the Presidency today.

[JohnKleeb]

57. I agree with you there

sigh my candiate has been on the forefront of all those issues and yet people disregard him because hes unelectable, last thing I am thinkin about is whether my guy is unelectable, I am thinkin about whether he has good views and which he does, and etc. I am sorry IG, its just :shrug: I am sick of seeing my candiate not be supported by people because they are too concerned with perceived electablity.

[IndianaGreen]

61. Kucinich is the candidate that most closely represents my views

I plead guilty to being among those being concerned, but not obsessed, with electability (a rather subjective topic). I was a McGovern supporter, in fact, I had the honor to meet George McGovern in person a couple of years before he ran for President.

Nay-sayers denigrate the McGovern campaign as being "too liberal" for America. I think that is an extreme oversimplification. In many respects, McGovern is a lot closer to Wes Clark and John Kerry than he is to Kucinich (or Dean for that matter). McGovern was a bona fide war hero. A highly decorated bombardier who distinguished himself with valor. It was his war record that made McGovern question war, yet McGovern was far from being a pacifist.

How did Nixon, who spend the war years playing poker at a Navy yard stateside (in NY I believe), be perceived as stronger on defense than McGovern? I don't know the answer to that question, but I am sure that even if the Democrats were to nominate Clark in 2004, that he would get cast in a similar light as McGovern was by a media that is nothing more than the mouthpiece of the Establishment. Clark may not be portrayed as a pacifist, but we may hear again the uncorroborated stories about his lack of "integrity" making the rounds. We might even see troops saying on TV that Clark was a bad soldier.

As McGovern in 1972, a war hero Democratic candidate will be shown to the public as being unstable, untrustworthy, or as a pacifist radical.

Don't count on the media being on our side in 2004. As Jello Biafra once said, we must become the media!

[5thGenDemocrat]

66. Hi, IG, Hello Mr Kleeb

Two minor corrections:
McGovern was a B-24 pilot, not a bombardier.
Nixon served in a backwater of the South Pacific -- not stateside. I don't remember which island offhand, but I do have several Nixon biographies upstairs, should I get a request for specifics.
I hope everyone's having a good weekend.
John
Has already chosen his candidate. It's not Kerry.

[dreissig]

68. Another Wheeler Dealer

Kerry never struck me as a person of character. He was always shading things one way, then the other. Since there's no shortage of people like that in Washington, what makes Kerry think he's uniquely qualified to be president? He's just a face in the crowd.

[Carolina]

102. well put

and exactly my sentiments. Not voting on the Medicare bill was just the final nail in the coffin for me especially after everything else. How does he dare speak of saving medicare as being a moral issue and then not go on record with a frigging vote. I have no more use for him.

[RobinA]

24. I Wonder That Too

Kerry is the cover story on this month's Atlantic. The article is very interesting and the Kerry it paints (using his own words) is not the Kerry we see as candidate for nomination. He's kinda like Gore in a way. There's somebody very interesting and complex in there, but for whatever reason, Candidate Kerry/Gore thinks he can't be himself. Maybe they are right, considering a guy with half their IQ is now living in the White House. Maybe these Eastern smart guys just can't get elected in these times. It's a shame, because how many guys like Clinton, smart as all get out but able to sound like Elvis, are there out there? Not many, I'd guess. Come to think of it, Dukakis was intelligent also.

[kaybea]

110. "Maybe these Eastern smart guys just can't get elected

in these times." Here is the crux in my view. However, Clark too, though he's from 'heartland' Arkansas, will face the same smarty-pants charges.

The self-consciousness of image/appearance one sees with Kerry and did see with Gore is born of the knowledge that the voting public will judge itself against a candidate like them and feel inadequate, a sentiment already expressed in this thread, among tried and true Democrats to boot.

The truth is that people of great accomplishment don't make others feel inadequate. People do that for themselves. That feeling comes from within.

In the words of one of the greatest Democrats of all time, Eleanor Roosevelt: "No one can make you feel inferior without your permission."

"In these times" people give permission. Readily. And after they do, they really don't like it. The candidate will pay for it dearly. Like Gore did--unsupported by his base in his attempt to seek justice.

Yet, for all of my sympathy of Kerry's cosmopolitanism misperceived as snobbery, he isn't my candidate for the primaries. I will gladly vote for him in the general election, though. And not as a lesser evil.

[AP]

25. Rumours of my death are greatly exaggerated

If Kerry were really done, people wouldn't feel the need to post threads like this which are trying to hold down the top of the coffin and drive a few nails in with their past tense evaluations.

[Zynx]

28. Kerry is done. We are just gloating about it.

So there. :P

[AP]

52. He's not dead as a candidate, but, like seven others, he was

never going to win the nomination in the first place, in my opinion.

He's not dead as a candidate and could still have a huge influence on other candidates' prospects. That's why people want to write him off now. It's not because they know (like I know) that suddenly he doesn't have a chance to win. It's because suddenly some people think they can get him written off earlier so that he can clear the deck for their candidate who might not have a chance at all with a competitive Kerry.

I say Kerry isn't dead enough so that he won't be a problem for a certain other candidate.

[Snellius]

30. Clark also pulled rank on him

Kerry had based so much of his early campaign on his credentials as a war hero, his experience in Vietnam, as someone who could relate to the military, that when the General entered the race, he had a hard time finding a new hook. That and the way Dean stuck in the knife over his vote on the Iraq Resolution. I wouldn't count him out, though. He has an enormous sense of personal destiny, which explains a lot of his drive as well as his haughtiness. He really believes in his cause and will fight to the end.

[blm]

31. People stupidly assumed Dean was antiwar and Kerry was prowar without

examining their actual positions which were so much closer than Dean let on to his audiences. The press never bothered to scrutinize Dean's actual stance and his original support of Biden-Lugar, which wasn't different enough from the IWR for Dean to be called antiwar while labeling Kerry as prowar.

Ignorance of the press and those Dean supporters who believe even today that Dean is antiwar.

Dean took advantage of that false perception and ran with it. Deceptive Dean. Democrats will suffer when all his deceptions are played out before their eyes if he gets the nomination.

[IndianaGreen]

32. The point is that Kerry VOTED for the Iraq War Resolution

Haven't you noticed that none of the Congressional candidates have caught fire with the rank-and-file, save for the one that voted against IWR (Kucinich). Even in Gephardt's case, his support comes from union bosses grateful for his opposition to NAFTA, but there is no passion there.

No matter how you slice it, when it counted Kerry failed.

[Padraig18]

34. Kerry didn't 'deceive' anyone.

He was just a gullible FOOL for believing anything * told him to convince him to vote for the IWR! At least my senator had some sense of Constitutional duty and showed intestinal fortitude and voted against it.

Kerry is just another Washington insider HACK.

[blm]

35. Dean DID deceive many who believed his stance was opposite of Kerry's

when it was fundamentally the same.

He used the ignorance of his audiences to promote himself as antiwar while excoriating Kerry as prowar. Some people even KNEW he was being deceptive and went along with it anyway. Shame on all who participated in furthering that deception.

[Padraig18]

36. Shame on Kerry....

... for abandoning his Constitutional duty.

[blm]

38. No shame in preserving the UN and preventing war in Iran and Syria.

Kerry voted for a RESOLUTION that had use of force as a last resort. YOU support a man who said he would have voted for Biden-Lugar which was fundamentally the same.

Your sanctimony doen't add up.

[Padraig18]

40. Kerry abandoned his Constitutional responsibility.

Nice diversion on your part, though. I give it a solid "B".

[Octafish]

51. Kerry lived up to his Constitutional responsibility.

Sen. Kerry did what he thought best to protect America. Sometimes that may even mean doing something that the Little Turd from Crawford wants.

[Padraig18]

80. No.

Congress has the power to make war; Kerry and all the other Bush enablers devolved that *Constitutional obligation* upon the little pissant from Crawford, something I do not consider a dsicharge of a senator's Constitutional obligation. I thank God that *my* State is represented by someone with principles--- Dick Durbin.

[Eloriel]

50. No, dear, it's you who are using the ignorance of DUers

about Biden-Lugar to deceive.

I'm going to post a new thread about it. Let's clear this up, for once and for all.

Eloriel

[sangh0]

62. Your thread shows little difference between B/L and IWR

try again

And it funny how you criticize politicians for not reading the bills they vote on, while in your thread, you admit that you haven't read B/L.

[blm]

69. You can spin it all you like, but the facts are there.

DEAN DECEIVED supporters into believing he was opposed to use of force when his actual support of Biden-Lugar wasn't FUNDAMENTALLY different than the IWR and we would still be in Iraq today.

[Scott Lee]

114. Deans stance IS opposite of Kerry's

And no continual stream of senseless memes and disinformation from your side will dilute that fact.

Kerry's pro-IWR vote will be the 100 lb stone around his neck that sinks his campaign soon. Bet me.

[mlawson]

33. It doesn't matter. I predict that he will 'take off' next Spring.

I still say he will be the nominee. He is the annointed one.

Just as Mondale was, in 1984. :-(

[Carolina]

103. when pigs fly

he's pissed off too many people in too many ways to be the nominee. His votes, his persona, his defensiveness about Dean, his campaign disarray ...

The Mondale comparison doesn't fit. Mondale was a former VEEP like Gore and thus Mondale was anointed much like Gore was. Not so with Kerry. In fact, that's part of his problem; he thought he was the anointed one because he was deemed the presumed frontrunner early on. Instead he's floundering. He won't win NH, SC or Iowa. He's going down. Think Titanic!

[THUNDER HANDS]

39. Rove took Kerry out

With the Iraq war vote. I said it the day it happened that it was a political trap. Kerry fell into it and he's never been able to climb out.

Partly because he's too concerned with verbally dancing around the issue of why he voted for it.

Partly because his ego wouldn't let him believe he wasn't the frontrunner anymore until it was too late to get back in front.

[mlawson]

41. Why would they want him out???

I really do not consider Kerry the most dangerous Dem for them to face in 2004. I can think of at least three who would be far more formidable against bush.

[THUNDER HANDS]

42. why wouldn't they want Kerry out?

Kerry is a liberal who could slide into a moderate's role rather easily. That's very dangerous to Bush Co.

Dean is a moderate who slid into a liberal's role almost automatically. I don't know if he'll be able to slide back to being considered a moderate.

Clark is an unknown wildcard. So who the hell knows what's going to happen with him.

Edwards is the darkhorse and always has been. I think Edwards is the one Dem who's GUARANTEED to be on the ticket in 2004 - whether as the VP or the candidate himself.

If I had to rank who Bush fears the most, it'd be in this order...

Clark* (if he gets rolling)
Edwards
Kerry
Dean
Clark* (if he doesn't get rolling)
Gephardt
Lieberman

[Ksec]

45. Kerry is a mystery

Hes the best candidate that isnt 'popular" I mean I understand he has his people , but when you stand back and look at his attributes hes got em all. War hero, experience out the wazoo....Im sure hes thinking WTF do I do? How? Why not me? What do you people want????

[fujiyama]

46. I have liked him

ever since he first went after Bush* when he first took office. Right then there was talk as to who would run for in '04 and Kerry always turned up in the conversation. Kerry seemed the strongest -- able to take Bush* on the environment and other policy issues (especially at the begining of the admin.), stellar liberal voting record in the senate, and a great resume including military service.

9/11 and the aftermath came and passed by and the administration pushed for war with Iraq. By this time it was almost certain Kerry would take a shot at the presidency and he bought in to all the lies the administration told -- about the crowds cheering the soldiers with flowers, that the US would have a cakewalk, etc. In retrospect, Bob Graham, also an experienced senator (with a more moderate record than Kerry), had seen the intelligence and made a wise deciion in voting against it. His argument against the war wasn't the usual leftist rhetoric either. He simply said, this is a distraction from the real war on terror and that is why this is unjustified. Gore also came out and said this.

Kerry has also never really regretted his vote for the resolution. I think if he had admitted that he made a mistake, many would have forgiven him. Unfortunately he only made things worse by offering an extremely convoluted and confusing defense for his vote for the resolution. If he was as concerned about international cooperation and making sure the administration wouldn't abuse power, he really should have known that he shouldn't have voted for what was by most accounts, a blank check.

This coupled with the fact that there was so much hope invested in him -- that with his own personal experience in Vietnam --knowing the hoorors of war -- he would not allow the nation to get bogged into an unecessary and unjustified war.

At that same time, the obscure governor from Vermont was starting to get some attention, by vocally opposing the looming war in Iraq. Then several months ago Clark showed up, making Kerry's unique military experience, not as unique.

Eventually, Dean made a lot of headway, eating into Kerry's fundraising and support base.

It really is unfortunate. I've given up hope on him. Recently it seems that out of desperation, he's attacked the other candidates in an increasingly irritating fashion, and he's tried numerous PR stunts like the hunting photo op and more notably the motorcycle thing on Leno.

Plus, many of those that supported him decided to shift to someone they pewrcieve as being more electable, a real outsider, that also had military experience.

[IndianaGreen]

48. Excellent post, fujiyama!

You have made an excellent presentation and I couldn't agree with you more.

[mzmolly]

47. He was/is too much of a politician, he played 'the game' and lost.

far as I can tell.

[Adjoran]

53. What went wrong

is that he's run a poor campaign to date.

He went on the defensive about his IWR vote when Dean started gaining traction with his antiwar statements. He failed to capitalize on the frontrunner status while he held it, and hasn't been effective running from behind.

Kerry's biggest problem has been poor political instincts. That is a serious problem when the opponent has such a well-oiled political machine.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

54. Excellent assessment

I agree 100%.

[JCMach1]

56. He went against the voting base of the party with his IWR vote...

He was playing the polls and looking past the primaries to a presidential race where he would have to appeal to independents and moderates.

That strategy failed miserablely.

The voting Democratic base is now even more against the war than when the vote took place and Kerry is done for.

[blm]

64. Dean deceptively used IWR as a wedge issue when he was for Biden-Lugar

Dividing Dems with BULLSHIT and doing it knowingly. And why didn't the press ever talk about Dean's deception?

>>>>>>>>

Huh?Did Howard Dean actually support a war resolution giving Bush authority to attack Iraq? The answer is: pretty much. As Gephardt's crack research staff helpfully points out in a piece of paper delivered to reporters at the debate, The Des Moines Register reported on October 6, 2002, that "Dean opposes the Bush resolution and supports an alternative sponsored by Sens. Joseph Biden, a Delaware Democrat, and Richard Lugar, an Indiana Republican. 'It's conceivable we would have to act unilaterally, but that should not be our first option,' Dean told reporters before the dinner." Back in mid-October a Burlington newspaper quoted Dean as saying, "I would have supported the Biden-Lugar resolution."

>>>>>>
Then he explained his interpretation of Biden-Lugar: "The Biden-Lugar amendment is what should have passed in Congress, because the key and critical difference was that it required the president to come back to Congress for permission. And that is where the congressmen who supported that resolution made their mistake was not supporting Biden-Lugar instead of giving the president a blank check."

This statement caused Kerry to almost jump through his television monitor. It was his turn to make a correction. In what would be the final volley of the Biden-Lugar war, Kerry patiently explained, "the Biden-Lugar amendment that Howard Dean said he supported, at the time he said he supported it, had a certification by the president. And the president only had to certify he had the authority to go. It's no different from--fundamentally--what we voted on."
By my reading of Biden-Lugar, Dean is indeed wrong that Bush was forced to "come back to Congress for permission" to attack Iraq.

The resolution required Bush to do one of two things before going to war. First, he had to get a new U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq. (This was the key difference between Biden-Lugar and the resolution Congress actually passed.) Obviously Bush got a U.N. resolution. It's a matter of some debate whether the resolution authorized the attack. The Bush administration and Britain say it did. Most of the rest of the world says it didn't. But Biden-Lugar had one more rather large escape clause for Bush to go to war even if he didn't get a the U.N. resolution.

According to Biden-Lugar, all Bush had to do was "make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that the threat to the United States or allied nations posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program and prohibited ballistic missile program is so grave that the use of force is necessary, notwithstanding the failure of the Security Council to approve a resolution."
Isn't this exactly what happened? Bush went to the United Nations. He failed to get a clean resolution authorizing force. Then he "determined" that the threat from Iraq's WMDs was "so grave that the use of force is necessary." At the time Bush complained that Biden-Lugar would "tie his hands." He preferred the Gephardt resolution that had no strings attached. But in the end, assuming you interpret the "make available ... his determination" clause literally, the war resolution Howard Dean supported would probably have led to exactly the same outcome--a unilateral war with Iraq.
>>>>>>>

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=dispatch&s=lizza112503

[JNelson6563]

73. you are mighty fond of the TNR article aren't ya?

That riech-wing rag doesn't have a whole lot of nice things to say about Kerry either. I'm sure when they are posted you won't be decrying thier credibility....;-)

Julie

[dreissig]

70. Poor Political Instincts

That's one way to put it. In fact Kerry is tin-eared. Bush Sr. was politically tin-eared too, and Jr. isn't much better. That's why they keep him away from the press.

The Democratic candidate should prepare for the debates the way Kasparov prepares against the chess machine. Draw Bush into uncharted territory, make him think on his feet. He can't do it!

[oasis]

55. I smell Karl Rove manipulation.The Dem candidate poll numbers are juiced.

This includes those polls which keep Bush's approval just above 50%.

[MaineDem]

58. Don't read polls; do your own research

At Thanksgiving dinner yesterday we were talking about the Dem candidates. No one other than my husband and me had any clue who was even running. And these people aren't total idiots; the election just hasn't been a priority for them. These are Democrats, for the most part, too.

I don't think anything is a foregone conclusion yet. Heck, the campaign other than in Iowa and NH is basically just starting.

Read the campaign literature and not the newspapers. Make up your own mind on which candidate has the best ideas... Which candidate has the best credentials...Which candidate will make the best President..Which candidate can beat Bush.

It's not over like some reports seem to indicate. Far from it; not one vote has been counted yet. Give it time.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

60. Before I went to hear Kucinich

I was looking at Kerry with interest. He certainly has presidential gravitas and a sterling record as a liberal, but on a personal level, he just doesn't get it.

Reports of coming to cities for fundraisers with the local bigwigs and not taking time for or even notifiying local rank-and-file Dems, looking stiff and uncomfortable when talking to fellow Vietnam veterans on CSPAN, talking like the spoken version of a political science paper. Frankly, he seems to have lost the common touch that a presidential candidate absolutely needs.

This doesn't mean being stupid. Kucinich manages to quote philosophers and poets while still sounding like a regular guy from Cleveland and projecting personal warmth.

I can't imagine that Kerry was always like this. If he had pulled that aloof aristocratic act in the jungles of Vietnam, he would have been fragged.

It's too bad. With a more engaging personality, he would have been a top runner.

[Bandit]

63. I like Senator Kerry and would vote for him in a heartbeat but

He like every other White US Senator turned their backs on the Black Caucus when they brought up the issue of the 2000 election. The entire Senate dropped considerably in my esteem. They showed no courage what-so-ever. The election was stolen and it needed to be attacked as such. Then the first major tax cut came after the first month of the Bush* administration. They put forth the most far fetched proposal so they would get what they wanted but the Democrats gave them their first proposal without any haggling at all. Senator Kerry was part of the Democratic Majority and yet they let Bush* have his way on virtually every thing put forth. Power corrupts and I hate to say it but it appears there is quite a bit of corruption in the US Senate that Kerry is a part of.

[dreissig]

72. Power Corrupts

There's no reason to vote for Kerry. He's not one of us, he's one of them. As President, he'll be out of control. If we have the opportunity to get a real Democrat in the White House, let's go for it.

[paulk]

74. He's not one of us?

You can support him or no, but saying that Kerry isn't one of us is just plain stupid. Do you know anything about him? His voting record, for instance? He's one of the most liberal Senators we have!

[sangh0]

75. They don't care

supporting their conservatice candidate is more important than defeating Bush* and promoting liberalism

[Bandit]

76. Who is they?

Why is it that a large portion of your posts are attacking other DUers? Why don't you state what is good about your candidate and let it go at that? I don't recall ever reading one of your posts that have been of a positive nature. I am extremely liberal. I haven't yet decided upon a candidate but I don't bash any of them. Why do you?

[sangh0]

77. "They" are those who treat liberal Dems like Repukes

like the comment about how Kerry is "not one of us". Bullshit.

BTW, I happen to agree strongly with what you said about Election2000.


Why is it that a large portion of your posts are attacking other DUers?

Could that question also be considered an attack on a DUer?

Have you read ALL of my posts? If not, how can you describe "a large portion" of my posts?

Why don't you state what is good about your candidate and let it go at that?

I do that almost every day. I support and defend all of the Dem candidates, except Dean.

I don't recall ever reading one of your posts that have been of a positive nature.

Have you read any of my Sharpton posts?

I am extremely liberal. I haven't yet decided upon a candidate but I don't bash any of them. Why do you?

The only Dem candidate I've seriously criticized is Dean. I have also criticized Lieberman and Gephardt (for "standing shoulder to shoulder" with Bush* on IWR) but I don't make a habit of it.

[IndianaGreen]

78. Kerry also stood "shoulder to shoulder with Bush" on IWR

You won't get an "A" for consistency. Your hardburn with Dean is that he is leading Kerry in all the polls, even in Massachusetts.

Kerry is toast!

I am looking forward to reading your posts after Kerry makes his speech announcing his withdrawal from the race.

:P

[paulk]

85. No, he didn't

Not on the level with Gephardt and Lieberman.

Be real.

[Carolina]

104. an excellent point

because by not fighting then, they proved themselves to be the chumps and pink tutus we all now know too well.

The Congressional Black Caucus stood up because the selection smacked of disenfranchisement among many other things (lying, cheating stealing, cronyism ...). All those representatives needed was the support of ONE Senator. Imagine if every Dem in the body had cried foul. Do you think for one moment the Repukes would have rolled over if the shoe had been on the other foot? F--- no.

That's when we started losing, and I daresay that is why we are the precarious situation we are in now with literally everything hingeing on the 2004 election.

Sadly our Senate Dems have shown no guts, no unity and no real opposition where it matters: WITH THEIR VOTES. That is why the nominee will not be a Democratic U.S. Senator.

[Demobrat]

65. He let us down when we needed him.

I went into mild shock when Kerry voted for the war. And since then, he's done nothing to redeem himself. In the meantime, there was Dean saying everything that needed to be said. Of course I turned to Dean, and it turned out I wasn't alone. Thank goodness.

[Meshuga]

71. The IWR was the problem...

Dean would not exist if it weren't for the IWR vote. Kerry would be the only front runner now.

[opihimoimoi]

79. Kerry is a victim of the VRWC and their trolls and moles. He got

groped, grinched, and gored.

I will still vote for him should he somehow win the nom but at this point, its moot.

[Octafish]

90. You're a good man, opihi! Never give up the ship!

You know — from way back when the Boston folk visited — he is the Real Deal. Too bad so many have worked so hard to poison the well on DU and around the 'net. It's clear the Little Turd from Crawford is hoping to face anybody before Sen. John Kerry. Why? Because Kerry would kick the Little Turd clear back to Crawford!

Come, we go to Mario's Italian Restaurant. Best steaks in Motown.

[Carolina]

105. no, Kerry

is a victim of his own misguided calculation.

[Gloria]

82. He was originally my first choice....he was very good slapping down

O'Reilly, even before the race started.

Something is just missing. I'm wondering how that bout with cancer just as things were starting did something to his psyche....His caution has been so obvious.....

[Nederland]

83. Conventional Wisdom

I guess I buy the conventional wisdom that Senators generally don't make good Presidential candidates, especially if they've been in the Senate as long as Kerry. Yes, Kennedy is the big exception, but Kerry is no JFK, regardless of his initials.

[David Zephyr]

84. Stepping All Over His Own Dick.

He has run the worst campaign in modern history.

[absyntheNsugar]

86. Personally I chalk it up to his Manager

He should have been forcing Kerry onto every show including the dating game - he didn't.

[Terwilliger]

87. Isn't this the guy that says we should "get over" the 2000 theft?

Folks...I don't see that I'm going to vote Dem in 04...there's nobody again.

[kclown]

88. Vote for war. Dean's biggest advantage has proved to be

he never got a confidential intelligence briefing.  

Of all the people who did receive such a briefing, Kucinich is
the only candidate who didn't believe it.  He is the best
candidate on the issues, but I know he won't get the
nomination.  

I suspect that most of us have already decided to go with
anyone but Bush, so the campaign doesn't matter much.  Insofar
as we need to vet our candidate, we need to recall the 2000
campaign.

1. Gore failed to marginalize Nader like Bush marginalized
Buchanan.  We have to treat with the Greens to the extent
necessary.  I hope it won't be very necessary, i.e., the
Greens will not give Nader 3M votes.

2. We can't allow our candidate to fall into the clutches of
the people who decided what color suit to wear.  Bush is where
he is because he was perceived as less phony.  Bush is plenty
phony, but he can only be attacked as such by a genuine
candidate.

3. So I'll vote for Dean, but he has got to clear up the Iraq
position.  Kucinich has his solution.  U.S. out, U.N. in.  And
if the U.N. doesn't want in, U.S. out anyway.  

[cindyw]

89. I am so going to enjoy linking to this post when Kerry wins the nomination

Let's see if you smug Dean supporters will like a little gloating on the part of Kerry supporters when you are faced with eating your words. I for one will enjoy saying I told you so.

Kerry is the Real Deal 2004 &2008

[IndianaGreen]

93. Kerry is dead

I don't know whether Dean or Clark will win the nomination, but at least neither of them voted for the Iraq war. I'll take any of the antiwar Democratic candidates over the four war enablers.

I think the SC polls are interesting showing that Lieberman and Sharpton are polling ahead of Kerry. Kerry is even behind in Massachusetts!

Once Clark entered the race, and recovered from a less-than-spectacular start, Kerry was not longer the only war hero running for the Presidency. While Kerry is struggling on its vision (what is his vision?) and his message (voting for the war in order to stop the war?), Dean remains strong and Clark is getting stronger.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

100. LOL and in that comment you call

Deanies smug?

Seeing as Kerry is dropping, not gaining, in the polls, I'd say that you won't be gloating anytime soon. Kerry lost much of his support to Clark. It seems that those looking for military might dropped Kerry like a bad habit and joined up with Clark. Maybe Kerry should try bashing Clark for awhile, instead of Dean. Maybe he can woo his old supporters back, but I seriously doubt it.

[Carolina]

106. wishful thinking

'cause Kerry won't win, place or possibly even show in the first contests; NH, SC, Iowa. His own MA constituents are ticked about his aye vote on IWR and his non vote on the Medicare bill. No guts, no glory. He's toast.

I do like Heinz Ketchup, though.

[last1standing]

107. Why get nasty?

I'm a Dean supporter, but if Kerry wins I'll be proud to support him as well. Most of the posts here aren't being mean, they're honestly dissecting Kerry's record and campaign. My own opinion is that the record is pretty good, the campaign has been abysmal. That's not an attack, just an opinion. If yours differs, that's fine by me.

[Zynx]

109. You call us Deanies smug? Kerry is the smuggest of them all.

He sits there with that arrogant grin and his eyebrows raised all the time as if he thinks he's talking to a dumbass.

[Scott Lee]

116. He is one of the last (thankfully) of the Democratic Pedagarchy.

And his sinking campaign should clue in the clueless why Howard Dean is astoundingly popular. HINT: People are sick of being talked down to, and sick of Insider party entitled types running to carry on business as usual.

[last1standing]

95. Kerry's a good guy.

And he would make a good president. The reason I'm not voting for him in the primary is that I think we need someone with more fire in the belly then Kerry has. If I saw some passion in him, I'd be more inclined to look his way, but it's not just Kerry who seems to need more passion, it's also Gephardt, Edwards, and Clark. Personally, I think that if Clark was to imitate Dean's passion, he would be our next president.

Remember Bill Clinton's empathy, the way he brought you with him every time he spoke? Remember being interested in a State of the Union Address? That's what we need. I admire Kerry's record, but he doesn't seem to be able to touch people's hearts.

[IndianaGreen]

96. If you want passion, there is the passion of Kucinich

Dennis has been right 100%. He voted against PATRIOT, and against IWR. He also voted against Bush's tax-giveaways to the rich and gutting of Medicare.

Dennis has been right 100% of the time.

BTW, I support all the antiwar candidates.

[last1standing]

101. No one is right 100% of the time.

But DK is also a very good congressman. And I agree, he has passion, but my views are closer to DH than to DK. But again, I admire him and his record for the most part.

[reknewcomer]

99. An empty suit

That finally ot a haircut. Too little too late I say.

[blm]

111. "empty suit" that exposed more govt. corruption than ANY lawmaker in

modern history.

How old are you that you have no clue to the slander you are committing against the man who investigated and uncovered BCCI, IranContra and CIA drugrunning, and worked with other world leaders for 10 years to craft the Kyoto Accord?

Empty suit? I'd hate to look between your ears if you really believe your own comments.

[killbotfactory]

115. He's just been a crappy candidate

Not very inspiring, put too much emphasis on his vietnam experience for some reason, never put out a compelling explanation for his war vote and support for the war, and he hasn't been a leader against Bush.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

117. Underestimated Dean, No Apology for IWR, Bad Campaign Management...

...and on an on. Then Wes Clark came along and stole the mantel of foreign policy expert candidate.