Kerry: The Democrats' Albatross

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | March 4, 2004 | Dick Morris

[SJackson]

The front-loaded primaries have delivered an untested candidate who is too far Left for America.

The Democratic Party slit its throat Tuesday night, abandoning 12 years of pragmatism to indulge in a nominee who's very unlikely to win.

While John Edwards closed the gap that separated him from John Kerry, the front-loading of the nominating process proved too drastic to permit second thoughts. Once the Democratic voters had discarded Howard Dean and embraced Kerry, they did not have the dexterity to rethink Kerry in the light of the Edwards alternative.

Too bad for the Democrats: Edwards would have been a much stronger candidate in November than Kerry will be. He is not the extreme liberal that the front-runner is and has not had 20 years in the Senate to demonstrate how out of touch he is with American values and ideas.

The hurried judgment forced on Democrats by Terry McAuliffe's impatience has led to a miscalculation in which the party has put forward a weaker nominee than it might have, had the primaries lasted for more than a few weeks.

John Edwards, as a Southern moderate, has a charisma and style that Kerry lacks. His smooth-talking trial-lawyer appeal to a jury of voters would have made quite a contrast with President Bush's inarticulateness and awkward use of language. A debate between Kerry and Bush will be a clash of the verbally challenged.

But by nominating Kerry, the Democratic Party has chosen to embrace its left wing, eschewing the lessons it so dearly learned in 1980, 1984 and 1988. By marching to the beat of its activist minority, the party has once again put itself outside of the pale of mainstream thinking.

When John Kerry joined the extreme Left in voting against the first Gulf War in 1991 or in opposing the Defense of Marriage Act - a bill backed by all but 14 ultraliberal senators and signed by President Clinton - he showed himself to be out of step with the center where most voters live.

George Bush's inability to appeal to voters on issues other than the War on Terror opened a door for the Democrats, but John Kerry will have difficulty fitting through it.

The lieutenant governor of Mike Dukakis will not wear well before the American people. His votes on taxes, terrorism and the death penalty will demonstrate that he is another in a long line of Massachusetts liberals who appear at first blush to be winners but who soon fade into also-rans.

Kerry has missed more than a third of the votes in the Senate during the current 108th Congress. This year, he has missed almost all of them. Voters will not be tolerant of a man who picks up his paycheck and doesn't do the job.

Bush is doing exactly the right thing in pouncing on Kerry the moment the polls close on Super Tuesday with negative ads that define him as the extreme liberal he is. Already, according to pollster Scott Rasmussen, 51 percent of voters feel that their taxes will go up if Kerry wins.

In the coming weeks, Bush will hammer at Kerry until we look back and wonder why we ever thought the Massachusetts senator could have won in the first place.

By then, of course, it will be too late. The nominating process is so frontloaded that the Democrats will be stuck with the flawed Kerry candidacy for months as he slowly twists in the wind.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dick Morris is a former adviser to President Clinton.

[Preachin']

"John Edwards, as a Southern moderate...

What a lie. The DLC variety of democrat believes in using the lie that some dems are moderate. It is simply not true. They just keep their intentions to themseles by not being overtly liberal. If we follows the voting record, or the list of contributors, the truth come out.

[Always Right]

Dick Morris is correct here and correct on the need for Bush to destroy Kerry on his voting record NOW. People pile on Morris for the strategy he laid out in the other article, but he is dead on, and its not often I agree with Dick's analysis.

[anniegetyourgun]

Saw Estrich on Fox this morning - she says she can almost feel it in her bones that Kerry is gonna win. She's also absolutely convinced that he will take Edwards as his running mate because that John is the future of the party.

Just think - we'd have two Johns on the D ticket. As in: they are going "TWO LOOS."

[Always Right]

What a lie. The DLC variety of democrat believes in using the lie that some dems are moderate.

Well it is a lie, but Edwards could have passed himself off as a moderate, unlike Kerry who has too much history of being a liberal.

[Preachin']

It won't be long before the media get in lock step and characterize Kerry as the moderate. That's why they need to rely on Kerry's military experience.

[anniegetyourgun]

Bush v Kerry debate: Kerry criticizes Bush on Iraq war. Bush looks over and asks, "oh, were you there for that vote?"

[OpusatFR]

The liberals will attempt to morph him into a moderate.

Remember, they are masters at rewriting history to fit their agenda. They will keep repeating the same lines and ignoring their own record because it works; dems equal dumb.

Bush has to secure his base and then the indys. He doesn't need to waste time with the hardcore socialist democrats.

Morris is like some Trojan horse. He's generally wrong, but amusing.

[litany_of_lies]

Anyone who is overconfident needs to go to presidentelect.org, click on 2004, and look at their current electoral map.

It shows the Electoral College race 286-252 Bush. This is WAY to close for comfort, and is enough to make one very concerned if Hillary is Kerry's Veep candidate. Guess what? They win if they take (wouldn't you know it?) Florida.

The electoral map is for the most part pretty accurate, except for showing Illinois as in Kerry's pocket (I'd say it's leaning, but not a sure thing. The only other good news I see is that there are very few states besides Florida Kerry could steal from Bush, even in his wildest dreams (really only Ohio), while there appear to be a few pretty decent opportunities for Bush to invade what is perceived to be Kerry territory (WI, MN, MI, and even supposedly safe IL).

Anyone who thinks this is an electoral college landslide in the making couldn't be more wrong. It also appears at this point that if Bush were to lose, he could do so while having a couple of million more popular votes that Kerry.

[UCANSEE2]

1. Most of the voting public is extremely ill and/or un-informed of the facts of the candidates.

2. Kerry is taller. That is what the US public decides presidencies on.

3. Although lying has been a part of politics from the beginning, it has been aided and abetted by TELEVISION, ever since the principle of TRUTH IN ADVERTISING was totally eliminated. Once advertisers (people versed in marketing of all kinds) realized they could lie and get away with it, the door was nailed wide open.

This occurred because of EVIL, the lust for MONEY, GREED they call it.

Don't believe me. Think about it. PSYCHIC phone lines, PHONESEX lines, all became popular and legal at the same time. Then PSYCHIC TV shows were allowed. Once the public had no objections, there was no limit on the outright lying allowed.

Sure, the politics of lying or lying in politics has existed since politics existed, but I remember a time when you could trust what was on TV to a certain extent.

NO LONGER. TV is a WHORE. KILL YOUR TV.

[Psalm 73]

"The Democratic Party slit its throat Tuesday night..."

What a great line.
Morris is an odd duck, but I love his writing.

[pabianice]

Kerry's insurmountable problem is his presentation: he's the teacher's pet the rest of us hated in school. Whenever he talks, he inevitably falls into the pattern of the smartass who has to talk down to you, you poor fool, because he's so much smarter, better educated, and richer than you. By the fall, Kerry will be the butt of so many jokes and cartoons he'll need to go into hiding after he loses the election.

[shhrubbery!]

Saw Estrich on Fox this morning - she says she can almost feel it in her bones that Kerry is gonna win. She's also absolutely convinced that he will take Edwards as his running mate

I don't think Estrich was stating her true beliefs. She's not that dumb.

More likely she's trying to get back in the good graces of the party after being too honest in the last few months.

[shhrubbery!]

2. Kerry is taller. That is what the US public decides presidencies on.

Gore is taller than Bush (and don't give me the 'Gore won the popular vote' line -- with all the Dem voting fraud and refusal to include military/absentee ballots in the total, I don't believe it).

Isn't Mondale taller than Reagan?

And I'll bet Dewey was taller than Truman.

[WI Conservative 4 Bush]

pabianice,

I think you hit on something important. Many independents vote based on likability. I think Senator Kerry comes off as not very likable. On top of that, he's sooo boring. His speeches are so nuanced, that I think most people will react by saying wow this guy is such a professional politician. In the end, President Bush will come out on top, I'm pretty sure of it.

The dems are making hay out of any issue they think they can exploit. As far as I can tell, those issues are actually few and far between.

I love issues, I study issues thoroughly. On issues, the President should wipe the floor with his opponent. However, swing voters, I believe, don't base their votes on a deep understanding of issues. I think, when it gets right down to it, these all-important voters make decisions based on who they think they like and trust. We are very fortunate that President Bush also shines in these areas. Again, IMO.

[Ditto]

And I'll bet Dewey was taller than Truman.

Ford was taller than Carter.

[WOSG]

Estrich was on the Dukakis campaign. She may actually believe a Massachusetts Liberal has a chance, I dunno. but the news folks try to make it interesting anyway.

Here's my prediction: 6-12 point win by Bush. And I am being cautious, this could be a bigger blowout.
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com


I got mind-numbingly bored with Kerry after 5 minutes - and I am a political junkie. I found the black COngress-critters hoopin and hollering and telling lies about the Bush Haiti policy FAR more interesting than Kerry's historic acceptance speech. Kerry is a bore imho. The informed will reject him because he is too liberal and dangreous to our national security. The uninformed will reject him because he is a patrician bore.

[WOSG]

You hit is about right. Bush wins on key issues - economy/taxes, war on terror, culture issues - with most people. Bush also wins on the stump to the muddled middle, so long as he stays "loose" and likeable/friendly, and Kerry comes across as the flipflopping grandstanding bore that he is.

[anniegetyourgun]

I think you may be right. Never in her lifetime has she seen a Mass. lib win the White House. Perhaps she's been hittin' the sauce again.

[goldstategop]

Guess who was Michael Dukakis' campaign manager back in 1988? Methinks ol' Susan is joshing! ;-)