You heard it from Joe Trippi : Kerry: down but not out

[Mass]

As he says, he knows what he is speaking about. However, I agree that he will need to resent some bold ideas. I hope it comes soon.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/10/AR2006111001344_2.html

Down but Not Out: John Kerry

The former presidential nominee was doing quite well until the "botched joke." Democratic losses in the House or Senate would have made a comeback impossible, so no one was happier than Kerry last Tuesday. The senator from Massachusetts is going to need to present some bold ideas to regain relevance in this field; I'd start with Iraq. And for those who want to count this guy out: He has come back from the dead before. Trust me, I speak from experience. Handicaps? It's all up from here or he's out.

[rox63]

1. JK needs to kick some serious butt for the next 6 months

For the next few months, he needs to be a Senate powerhouse, and make sure that he gets credit for it in the media and in the blogosphere. He may have to leave the campaigning for the weekends and recesses during that time. But I think if he does that, any damage from the recent media & DLC swift-boating (aka the 'botched-joke' controversy) can and will be rectified.

[JI7]

2. i think getting credit for what he does is something he needs to work on

this has been a problem going back to the 2004 Primary and General Election. he has done so much in things from environment, veterans, homelesss, small business, women's rights etc throughout his life. yet none of it was really highlighted.

i understand the need to keep things simple and not get too much into "policy speak" but there are ways to do that while still bringing up his accomplishments.

i had a few ideas but i don't want to post them here.

[ProSense]

3. Here is CQ on the Dem candidates:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2958792&mesg_id=2958792

This is all they have: a failed smear!

[TayTay]

4. I agree.

I wish Sen. Kerry would come out with a series of public speeches that clearly articulate his position on the Iraq War, maybe the environment and then, perhaps, health care in a public forum. Maybe get some of these speeches on his web site or on C-Span so casual observers could be directed there to look for them.

You know, he should then do a speech stressing just how important National Security is and lay out a Plan to help. (Gee, he could even give an easy to remember mnenomic, like say, the 5 Rs.' That would be great.)

Then, maybe it's just me, but I think he should pivot and talk about jobs and the economy and the inherent unfairness in the tax structure. I really think he should talk again about how the system favors outsourcing and how that is wrong. I would love to see something about 'exporting products, not jobs.' That would be just nifty!

:sarcasm: Sigh!

[karynnj]

7. You know - isn't there a historical hall in center Boston

that would be an ideal backdrop. :)

[rox63]

11. Yes, he has done all these wonderful things

But most of this country's voters don't know about it. Their latest impression of him is from the media/DLC 'botched joke' smear.

During the election-night tv coverage, I kept switching between MSNBC and NECN, because I wanted to catch coverage of both local and national races. And my heart sank when NECN (New England Cable News, for those from other areas of the country) showed the results of a recent poll that said only 28% of Mass voters thought Kerry should run for President again. I don't know if this is because so many of our elected officials end up leaving us for bigger jobs, or because they didn't believe he could win, or any other number of reasons. But I really would like to know what's behind that result.

All that said, I really want him to be president, and look forward to supporting him enthusiastically if he runs.

[ProSense]

12. It's this:

The survey information is according to the poll of 655 Massachusetts voters conducted for AP and television networks by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International. Results were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 6 percentage points, higher for subgroups.

Nearly half of voters surveyed identified themselves as Democrats. A small majority of Massachusetts voters in 1998 also said Kerry wouldn't make a good president.

Snip...

The voters who said Kerry would not make a good president voted about evenly for Massachusetts Gov.-elect Deval Patrick and Republican Kerry Healey. Voters who said Romney would not make a good president overwhelmingly supported Patrick.

Lindsey Peterson, 25, said Kerry should run again if he wants to, but she wants to check out other candidates before making a decision.

"He seems pretty sincere. It seems like he's gotten a little more authoritative since the (2004) run. That's a quality you need to become president," said Peterson, of Somerville.

As for Romney, she said, "I don't really like the guy.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/11/08/mass_voters_dont_want_kerry_romney_for_white_house

Sort of kooky, 6 point margin of error is high. The article makes the results seem weird.

[wisteria]

5. This suggests he has reached bottom to me and can only go up.If

this is intended to suggest that, I not totally in agreement. I do agree though that some new ideas are needed. He may have a hard time jockey the limelight away from Biden though. You can bet on Biden taken advantage of his leadership position on the FRC.

[Mass]

6. Of course Biden will, and you cannot blame him for that. People are not going to disappear

just to let Kerry be the nominee. They is going to be a fight for this place. He is going to continue fighting, and do not expect people to do Kerry any favor.

So, of course, we can continue consider that Kerry is a god and that everybody should worship him, or accept that he is human and that some people are going to need to be sold.

I personnally consider that Trippi saying that is a good thing. There are not that many people from inside DC who are ready to say that Kerry is not dead. And frankly, around me. there are a lot of people who like Kerry and still think he is dead.

So, yes, it is not ludicrous to say that he will need to do something to have a serious chance. I am not sure that this is about Iraq, where Kerry is already a serious player. I think it is more about a speech that will link his ideas together in a general vision of where he wants to go and why (and this is only my opinion, not something that is a absolute truth. I am not god either), but obviously, he will need to do something, just as he did something in 2005 and that worked well.

[ginnyinWI]

8. the more the merrier. I seem to remember that JK

is always energized by a good competition. And he usually surpasses our expectations. :)

[SouthernBelle82]

36. Oh for sure

Just look at 2004. He started off with people, mostly in the media, writing him off and going to Dean and all that but he came out the nominee and won in places other power houses didn't win at. So Kerry can do it.

[politicasista]

9. "Some people are going to need to be sold"

That's the truth. Including a Biden supporter I used to spread the Kerry word to, and those who are on the fence.


:patriot:

[TayTay]

10. Mass, what is this about?

If it is just about John Kerry, then indeed, time to pack it in. If it is just about strategy, then it is time to pack it in.

Sen. Kerry has always done best when he is arguing for something that is beyond himself. That is what he does well. He has done and will continue to do this on Iraq. The speeches that I have heard that are the best ones are the ones that deal with what is wrong with We the People.

This is what he needs to do. It doesn't need to be over-strategized or over-plotted.

[TayTay]

13. I think there were a lot of reasons for why this was so awful

Sen. Kerry is a serious man. He is perceived as a serious man. When he was caught on this occasion it was in something that could be portrayed as 'inauthentic,' as someone not speaking as their own best self. The image in the public mind, perhaps cemented by those debates in '04, was as a person who does think thing through and who does present thoughtful positions on causes that are worth thinking about.

This 'pronoun-gate' thing got traction because someone who isn't being themselves, as the public perceives it, is open to mockery. We know it was unfair and based on an untruth. It partially got so much traction because of that.

What should the good Senator do going forward? Be himself. He is a serious and thoughtful man. If we had had serious and thoughtful men and women in charge of the country in 2002 and 2003 we might not have had this Iraq War, we might not be in such fiscal trouble and be carrying a national debt that equals out to ove $28,000 dollars for each person in the US, we might not be giving away our heritage of civil liberties for the false pretense of security that isn't actually there.

John Kerry is a person who say once before that there was a war going on and saw that people were dying for a lost cause. I have heard him deliver those lines now about a dozen times, but it still seems to visibily pain him when he says that "half the names, half the names on that Vietnam Memorial Wall died after our leaders knew this was a policy that wouldn't work." That's his own best self, the person who indeed sees wrong and tries to stop it. If I were cheeky enough to offer advice, I would just offer that, be who you are, be that moral voice. There are so few people who are willing to do that, that it really does stand out.

There are some bad days, as well as good ones, to come when the Democrats take over the Senate. There will be people who want to sweep things under the rug, despite past rhetoric about taking on the Bush Administration. There will be people who don't really want to go after Big Energy companies, or Big Health Care Cos and so forth. They will be getting fat checks from them and will try and persuade the country that there is no purpose to going after this, that it is all water under the bridge and we should only look cheerily forward and not to the past. I guarantee you this will happen.

We need authentic voices to stop this. America cannot sweep everything under the rug. We have to investigate and we have to show that this country is big enough and strong enough to look inside and correct the things that are wrong. Not every politician can make that case. It takes a serious person to do that. They will be attacked relentlessly for it too, because it is, in the end, about the money and about preserving the present power struture. We need authentic voices, we need them badly.

If Senator Kerry decides to run again nationally, and I would not blame him in the least if he did not, then he will be attacked mercilessly. This is becuase he will be a threat to things as they are currently run. If the Senator decides not to run, then he will still be attacked because he will pursue an agenda in the Senate that uses his particular abilities as a prosecutor, combined with that mixture of someone who genuinely feels that issues of accountability and morality belong on the national schedule. That is authentic, that is what Kerry does well, and that is why he will be attacked. That is also his own best argument for himself. And for going forward.

Go clean house. And remember, there are people in your own party who don't want this done. Have fun!

[ProSense]

14. They will have no choice!

Democrats have two years and the voters want accountablity for the lies, failures and crimes, and they want out of Iraq. This next election will be a referendum on those issues and the Democrats' performance. Senator Kerry is still the best person for the job. When the issues become the focus, they all will be attacked, Kerry more than others, but you already stated the reason. I agree!

[rox63]

15. You are right - JK is at his best when he's being himself

I hope the voters have learned that having a president who acts like some sad parody of the common man was a terrible choice. Especially when it was nothing but a marketing scheme, and they got snookered by it. There's a lot of damage to be undone, now that the Dems have some power to do that.

I would love to see Senator Kerry heading up one of the much-needed investigations into the * admin's malfeasance. It plays to one of his biggest strengths, and his skills are perfect for the job. But could he do that while running for the 2008 presidential nomination? Running for president is now a 4-year job, and he could potentially have a lot of senatorial stuff on his plate.

[wisteria]

16. I disagree, to a point. yes, he should be himself, but I just don't see

this misstatement as terrible. I don't think it wasn't the real JK delivering the line, he was tired and flubbed a line. I also don't see how defending oneself from a smear is awful. Now, I will say,I think the press conference was a bit much and his choice to attack Limbaugh, which is usually left up to his staff people,wasn't presidential, but he wasn't running for president at this time and every candidate in a tense race has been known to us poor judgment at least once, but I don't see it as awful. He lost his temper because they were again trying to discredit his dedication to our soldiers. I think that is what I remember the most, his defense of his dedication to our soldiers, and these comments as I remember them, president Bush needs to apologize to the American people. I think that all resonated with people and they will remember that frankness long after they remember he flubbed a line.

The worse of this was that it all occurred when everyones nerves were on end. No one reacted rationally.

[JI7]

17. too much defensiveness is not good

i think the criticism of his not fighting back against the swift boat liars was part of the reason he responded the way he did.

in reality they did not matter that much. and he did respond to them. it was the media that played them up. he couldn't do much about it. a better way to deal with them woujld have been for the party to condemn them and condemn the purple heart bandaids things. but they did nothing. they defended Clinton on the blow job. but they couldn't defend ?Kerry against attacks on his service.

the debates showed people what Kerry was all about. if he had spent the debate time being defensive over the swift boat liars i doubt he would have gained the support in the polls he did . they would not have really heard or seen what he is really about.

defending is usually up to the supporters.

if Kerry talks about what he is for, what he has done for veterans and what he will do. that in itself will help deal with the criticism he has gotten over those botched remarks.

[fedupinBushcountry]

25. But

what really brought the whole botched joke even more into play was Hillary and her rant on how inapprpriate he was. How dare she, why is no one up in arms about her kiss up to Bush. This makes me angrier then anything. She spoke out of line, and she knows it, my God what was she thinking, that's when the story grew.

I'm sorry but she owes JK an apology, BIGTIME. She stood up for Bush and his swift boating of JK. Everyone of his biggest veteran candidates stood up for him and that made a big difference, but we didn't hear their response blasting across the airwaves. I will never ever trust her again. PERIOD.

[JI7]

26. of course, that was her goal, it was about 2008 for her

you ask what was she thinking ? she was thinking about the Primary.

the best to deal with it would be for people like us to call her out on it if we see her at a campaign event.

and of course she has a bunch of flubs of her own. like the comments about Gandhi and gas station and the plantation commments.

[wisteria]

27. I agree.n/t

[karynnj]

39. What I still don't understand is that her comment

seems "inappropriate". Hillary is well-educated enough to parse what was said - and it doesn't diss the military. (unlike thw comment her dear husband wrote in the early 70s saying he loathed the military) She has known John Kerry for at least 14 years - she knew better.

[JI7]

40. i believe it was intentional on her part, she knew it wasn't inappropriate

but it was about 2008.

and i was just thinking about her husband's "loathed the military" stuff. Kerry was one of the few who defended Clinton on the draft dodging stuff. and this included against his own friend Bob Kerrey who was running against Clinton.

that's why while i can understand them being political about 2008, on this particular area it makes me sick.

[ProSense]

18. Agree!

This misstatement is nonsense and the relief and amazement people are feeling about the win has amplified the desperation of the act. That is certainly not coming through in the media reports. People are really disgusted by the RW ploys. As far as Limbaugh, this is the guy Bush granted an interview to after the smear. Kerry going after Limpy as a member of the RW media is no different than Clinton going after Wallace. Kerry was angry, and justifiably so.

[wisteria]

29. You are right on that point about Clinton. I wondered about that myself,

why it was ok for Clinton to point a finger and get angry at Wallace, but Kerry wasn't suppose to defend himself. The only thing I come up with is timing. kerry was smeared to close to the election and everyone was wound up and nervous. If it would of happened any other time, it would not have been big news.

[sandnsea]

37. He was tired - yep

That's when he makes these kinds of mistakes. Almost every one of these speaking mistakes come after he's been on a hard push, and is usually planning 2-3 days off. But anyway, I agree with you. This was a swift boat, plain and simple. I think it's a 2 part problem, one is that rural states don't understand how bad the media is and the second is that we don't have unity to defend each other when the media attacks. I wish Nancy Pelosi would make that a rule, we've got to go after the media so they can't get away with this anymore.

[whometense]

20. You've been thinking about this a lot.

Me too.

I think what you say makes perfect sense. There has never been a time in his public life that Kerry has not been under attack. He's not a man who stands comfortably in the middle, who goes along to get along. Never has been; never will be. That quality makes a lot of people feel uncomfortable.

I would completely understand as well if he decides - for whatever reason - that he doesn't want to run again. And I wouldn't second-guess him either. What I do know is that, whatever he decides, it will be for the best of reasons, and not because he caved to pressure or was afraid, no matter what others say. He has nothing to prove to me.

Did you see my Veteran's day post? I've been thinking for days now about Kerry's comment about the Vietnam Memorial - it keeps reverberating in my mind.

[ProSense]

19. Letter to the editor from a Vet

Letter: Kerry is friend to veterans

Saturday, November 11, 2006

As a Vietnam veteran, I have seen firsthand John Kerry's unrelenting support of and genuine fondness for veterans.

It was Kerry who forced the VA for the first time to recognize the medical consequences of Agent Orange and PTSD. It was Kerry who guided the Congressional charter of the Vietnam Veterans of America through a reluctant Congress. It was Kerry through his GI Bill of Rights who forced increases in death benefits for families of troops killed in action, and forced an increase in base housing continuation for widows of troops killed in action (from an unimaginable 90 days to one year). It was John Kerry who, early on, pushed for body armor for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He may not be able to tell a joke, but John Kerry is the best friend veterans have ever had.
JOHN HURLEY,
Wellesley

[politicasista]

21. Nice letter

I remember a few days ago, my dad told me that next time, Kerry should leave the jokes to Al Sharpton, or Chris Rock or other comedians. :shrug:

[ProSense]

22. I don't think the

frenzy over a failed RW smear is likely to silence Senator Kerry. As it stands, in the past week alone, other politicians, including Bush and high=profile Republicans, have made really despicable comments. Kerry's criticism of Bush was distorted and he doesn't need to change who he is as a result!

[politicasista]

23. I hope it doesn't silence him

But it created the stereotype that he is "error/gaffe-prone," which he isn't. And the myth that because it happened to him, it won't happen to anyone else, which is false.

[ProSense]

28. The stereotype is

currently media repetition. IMO, this too will fade because it's not based on any pattern. They kept playing up the flip flop meme even though the incident had long been clarified, that's what the media does---the media and detractors. This was a RW attempt to smear Kerry more than a gaffe. If people want to focus on a pattern of gaffes, there are plenty of them out there:

For the BG:

Now, Kerry has to hope that a big Democratic victory wipes away his sins -- or at least leaves them on a par with those of some potential 2008 rivals. After all, Hillary Clinton has issued her own share of groan-inducing quotes, starting with a crack about not wanting to stay home and bake cookies. Former Vice President Al Gore, the party's 2000 presidential nominee, was treated roughly by the Republicans, and John Edwards was fairly toothless as Kerry's running mate in 2004.

Karyn made this point:

Hillary once made a gaffe with a joke that had someone asking of Ghandi if he the man who ran a gas station down the street. Compare that joke to Kerry's. Her was delivered as written and it is offensive. Kerry's -even as given- should NOT have been offensive, as it is not untrue - as intended - the worst you can say was that it was not respectful of the President. The Republicans also tried to spin Hillary's plantation comment.

[politicasista]

31. It is media repetition and..

which is another reason (in addition to TayTay's post) why this story is/was so awful. Kerry didn't do anything wrong except tell a joke that left out the word "us" and was taken out of context.

Before all this happened, Kerry was gaining, if not, already had momemtum going into the final week of campaigning if not 08. Remember all the 08 talk? Now, it's the opposite.

The outcome feels like we won, but we lost our candidate in the process of winning. Now he is going to have to work harder to get that momemtum back. As the others have said, I too will support whatever he decides to do.

[TayTay]

34. I don't think we lost

I think it was a bracing wakeup call that '08 is here, it's going to be nasty and the 'Dem on Dem' carnage is going to be awful.

That, plus the money involved this time is going to be gawd-awful. sigh

[politicasista]

35. I know we didn't, it just feels like it the last week or so

You're right, 08 is going to be really nasty and ugly.

[whometense]

24. Here's another one, from Maryland:

http://www.times-news.com/opinion/local_story_314110006.html

Bush/Rove attack on Kerry reveals Iraq truth
Ed Kelly, Cumberland

It hit me like a lightning bolt. For years I have strained my brain to understand why we invaded Iraq; The REAL reason. Now I know why.

One of the Ten Commandments is: You shall not bear false witness. This commandment forbids misrepresentation of the truth in our relations with others. Clearly, the Author of the Ten Commandments saw lying in order to smear another person's reputation as sin.

John Kerry mis-spoke. John Kerry did not insult the military. There is a big difference. President Bush and his political consultant Karl Rove know that John Kerry mis-spoke. President Bush and Karl Rove know that John Kerry did not insult the military. But, President Bush and Karl Rove lied. They lied when they said that John Kerry insulted the military and that he owed the military an apology. President Bush and Karl Rove lied right in your face. They were intentionally willing to break one of the Ten Commandments for votes.

Karl Rove's job is to get votes. A war would make President Bush look mighty. An invasion of Iraq would get votes. Karl Rove crafted the contract for President Bush to sell his soul. And, President Bush signed it. How many more will die? How many more will be maimed? How many more will suffer mental problems? (By the way, did Jesus ever say that Iraqis don't count?)

Ironically, when President Bush and Karl Rove lied about John Kerry, they opened the window of truth.

[wisteria]

32. See, I see it similar to this. It actually worked in our favor, bring out

the truth and placing blame where blame belongs.

[ProSense]

41. IMO,

we all need to begin responding with letters to some of these media outlets. I think short and to the point to as many articles as we come across would be better than letting then go without rebuttal!

I just sent off two:

Jonathan Chiat and this article.

[wisteria]

42. I e-mailed comments to New Week,

They ran something called "Botched". of course about Kerry, so I responded. I will do more also.

[ProSense]

43. The media is trying to

create a separate reality: prone to gaffes and not well-liked. It's utterly ridiculous! Did they actually follow what Kerry did this year, between campaigning and raising money? He has a huge base of supporters.

[wisteria]

46. That is obvious. How nasty. I would just like to know why?

Surely, Hillary's tenicles don't reach out this far. And, those comments by that Larry Sabato of U of Virginia, this is the second time I have seen them.
What a f*cking shame, they are trying to undo all the good he has done in the last two years- screw them. I hope it backfires.

[wisteria]

44. Do you have contact information on that creep, Larry Sabato?

Other quality candidates-huh? I wonder who he has in mind.

[ProSense]

45. Here:

[e-mail]

[wisteria]

47. Thank you, I wrote them all. n/t

[wisteria]

30. Very informative and kind letter. n/t

[ProSense]

38. And another:

Snip...

By 6 p.m. and thereafter, the reports amounted to a massacre of truth replaced with outright slander, viscous assumptions and malicious remarks so far more outrageous, incredulous, and harmful than a simple botched joke. There is no comparison!

The words Kerry spoke preceding the joke, clearly referred to Bush (I include Cheney/Rumsfeld, the three as an entity) as one who had not considered known historical facts about Iraq and had repeatedly refused to listen to those who had! His botched joke was a referral to “Bush stuck in Iraq” which unfortunately got our troops and the nation stuck also!

Though he botched the joke, what he said is a fact, stated with the right intentions! Kerry’s explanation at the press conference was clear not only who he was referring too but why, including Bush and crew putting our soldiers in harm’s way, not sending in enough troops, failure to provide sufficient equipment, cutting of soldiers benefits, etc.

His speech was honest, courageous, bold and unmistakably for the good of our soldiers and this nation. He ended with an attack against the smear and fear tactics that have permeated from the White House and this administration.

We all do better by not allowing ourselves to be influenced by the media using a pinch of truth, to twist, misuse, pour over the air with distortions, leaving false impressions simply to sensationalize, entertain and increase ratings.

I proudly agree with Kerry’s actual stand for we all benefit and build a better nation when we loudly say no to utter character assassinations being called genius political strategy or being received as ethical news reporting. Kerry has an outstanding record as an honorable man of active courage, compassion, integrity, and tremendous service for our soldiers and everyone across our nation.

Sherry Clay, Nashua

In time, I suspect this incident will backfire in a big way!

[SouthernBelle82]

33. I agree with Trippi

I think if Kerry keeps going with his Iraq plan (that Feingold has now signed onto) that he would be a great leader with that issue. He could also continue that bill he did not long ago dealing with the media and all of his other legislation that he's been working on. I'd love to see his "Military Families Bill of Rights" legislation get passed and signed into law. And keep in mind they call Kerry the come back kid as well (wasn't that a nickname they used for Clinton? I think Kerry is more deserving honestly looking at his record of losing and than coming back).