Resisting the most basic inclination of Liberalism, Dems followed the lead of reason this year rather than emotion -- picking the stolid but seemingly-electable Kerry over the true love of their heart, Dean. At the time, a lot of Republicans predicted buyer's remorse. Such was the Dems' desire for victory that they've kept grousing to a minimum, keeping their focus on Bush. But the brave front seems to be cracking in the face of poll after depressing poll.
"It’s too late to make a difference, with President Bush cruising toward re-election and rolling over the pathetic, disorganized Kerry “campaign,”. . ."-Bob Dreyfuss over at TomPaine.com
"How I wish that John Kerry had grown up in my old neighborhood in the Bronx. It drives me crazy that he doesn't have the street smarts to call those GOP bums out. . ."-Robert Scheer's Column Left, in TheNation.com
"John Kerry is in trouble because the Bush campaign has seized control of what psychologists call the "frame" of this year's presidential contest. . . Kerry has about two weeks to break the frame before the election freezes into a lock."-Robert Kuttner at Prospect.org
" Spirit-crushing foolishness from my candidate, John Kerry. The nation is trying to figure out how to fight global terrorism and he's talking about having "not just a Department of Health and Human Services, but a Department of Wellness." How about a Department of F***ing Perspective?"-Mickey Kaus at Slate.com
Toss in the Democratic sources chatting up reporters about campaign infighting; Clinton attempting a resucitation of Kerry's campaign from his own hospital bed; and the fact that more Kerry voters say they're voting against Bush than actually FOR the Democrat. This is a party which is souring on its nominee.
The recriminations and rationalizations are starting early this year. If Kerry loses, as he's poised to do, Dems will blame his loss on a lackluster candidacy, just like they did with Mondale, Dukakis, and Gore. "Weak campaign skills" is a lot easier to swallow than "party-wide intellectual bankruptcy."
Posted by Discoshaman at septembre 17, 2004 03:03 AM | TrackBack
The thing is, their strategy was almost right anyway. Dean would have gotten stomped in a general election. Mainstream America would flee from him. But it turned out that their "electable" candidate was personally unappealing AND had greatly inflated his one supposed accomplishment (i.e. his war record). They were right to go for the more "electable" guy--just wrong in thinking that Kerry was him. Had they nominated Gephardt, Edwards or maybe Lieberman, Bush would probably be in real trouble right now.
The good news is, four years from now, under the guise of "not making THAT mistake again!" they'll nominate someone like Dean only kookier, and will lose the general election by 25 points.
Posted by: John R. at septembre 17, 2004 06:22 PM"someone like Dean only kookier,"
But who will look somewhat better in a Donna Karan suit. ;-)
Posted by: pentamom at septembre 17, 2004 06:51 PMLike Hillary?
Posted by: The Duchess at septembre 17, 2004 07:38 PM