Advantage: Kerry (John Kerry isn't going to repeat the mistakes of the Mondales and Dukakis’s)

The American Prowler ^ | 2/10/2004 | Paul M. Weyrich

[nickcarraway]

One thing the Bush campaign should understand: John F. Kerry is not going to repeat the mistakes of the Mondales and Dukakis’s

Polls are now showing that John Kerry, the likely Democratic nominee for President, can defeat President Bush. Some of those polls show that Kerry's lead is now into double digits.

Bush-Cheney campaign operatives tell supporters not to worry. Kerry is the fourth Democrat to run for the Presidency from Massachusetts since 1980, the other three being Ted Kennedy (who was defeated by Jimmy Carter in the primaries), Paul Tsongas (who lost out to Bill Clinton, despite winning in New Hampshire) and Michael Dukakis (who lost to Bush 41 in 1988). All the others were liberal like Kerry. The all went down the drain. Kerry will too. They also point out that as late as August of 1988, Dukakis had a 17 point lead over President Bush's father, yet it all turned out fine in the end. As Sean Hannity is fond of saying, "Let not your heart be troubled."

Indeed, I recently received e-mail from a friend on Wall Street who reminded me that Bush has not had a primary challenge and the only Presidents who have been defeated in modern times were those who were seriously challenged in the primaries.

It is quite true that polls at this point don't mean much. It is also true that the American people don't focus on presidential elections until after Labor Day and that is when the match ups count.

But here is something else which is true. Beginning in 1972, millions of swing voters chose Republicans precisely because they believed that the Democrat candidate for President was weak on defense. That did in George McGovern. Jimmy Carter actually came off as tougher on defense after Gerald Ford insisted in one of their debates that Poland wasn't a Communist country. Then, after seeing Carter in office for four years, voters chose Ronald Reagan. They went back to Bush for two main reasons. They saw Dukakis in a freshly pressed suit, sitting in a military tank and looking ever so awkward as he pretended that he was pro-defense -- only calling attention to the fact that he wasn't. During a debate a CNN anchor asked what he would do if his wife were brutally attacked. He gave a theoretical answer that demonstrated that he could not be trusted to defend the country. The reason Dukakis was initially ahead was that he supposedly initiated the Massachusetts miracle, bringing unprecedented prosperity to that state. Many liked what they heard. Had Dukakis played things differently he might have been narrowly elected. Bush won with less than 54% of the vote.

Right now, voters are beginning to get a vague picture of Kerry. They like what they see. He seems to be always surrounded by veterans. They probably have heard that he saved a man in Vietnam who is now campaigning for Kerry. They may have seen Kerry suited up and out on the ice with Hockey players. Hockey is no game for the faint of heart. They perhaps read that Kerry won lots of medals for bravery in Vietnam.

The Bush people seem to think that they can just paint Kerry as a liberal like Ted Kennedy, and suddenly millions of voters will flock to Bush's side. I have news for the Bush team. It won't happen. Kerry has already inoculated himself against the charge that he is a Walter Mondale style tax increaser. Kerry has said he will keep the Bush tax cuts that helped the middle class. But he will repeal the tax cuts for the rich to help pay for expanded health care coverage. That pitch has a lot of appeal to the swing voters.

If the Bush campaign allows the Kerry-the-hockey-playing-war-hero image to be emblazoned in the minds of the swing voters for very long, by the time politics gets serious in September, it won't matter what Bush and company say. That is unless Kerry is stupid enough to give some Dukakis-like answers in the Presidential debates. My bet is that Kerry is smarter than that.

And yes, Kerry did things that anger some veterans, such as throwing other people's medals away and testifying as to the supposed atrocities of our servicemen. But if those charges are thrown around in September, most swing voters will say, "That's just ugly politics."

A campaign that depends upon your opponent to screw up in order for you to win is not a campaign that is likely to prevail. Like the football coaches who play the tapes of their opponents over and over again, you can bet that Kerry has studied what Kennedy, Tsongas, Dukakis, Mondale and even Al Gore did wrong. He is unlikely to repeat their mistakes.

If Kerry is seen on a level playing field with Bush where defense and the war on terror are concerned, then those swing voters will likely be with Kerry due to domestic considerations.

Yes, we have robust economic growth, but that economic growth is simply producing record profits for some major corporations. It is not producing many jobs, and even if the economy starts to produce jobs along about summertime it can't possibly begin to make up for all those jobs lost on Bush's watch.

If Kerry's image is to be changed, the Bush team will have to do so before it becomes so emblazoned in the mind of the voter that late inning charges won't do the trick. But when you have a political group that thinks otherwise, most likely little will happen. That, in the parlance of some contemporary sportscasters, leads to this conclusion, "Advantage: Kerry. "

[Fledermaus]

What polls show Kerry with a double digit lead over Bush Paul? Name them!

I haven't seen one unless you are counting your inside the beltway fancy restaurant frequented by big government liberals poll. You know the one Paul, you have a private table in the back.

[goldstategop]

I agree. John Kerry may be a lowlife but President Bush has yet to lay out a case for re-election and he shouldn't count on the presumptive Democratic nominee screwing up for him. Whatever one thinks of the French looking (and thinking) Cheri, what's clear is he's not a lose cannon like Nikita Dean was. Which is precisely the reason the Democrats are flocking to him en masse: he represents to them the best chance of beating Bush.

[Fledermaus]

He's worse than a loose cannon. He's scripted and predictable and will stumble when his record is brought up. Then he'll explode.

Maybe not like a cannon, but like an M-80 and it will be pretty loose. He'll stick his foot in his mouth eventually playing to the base the way Dean and, just the other night Gore, did.

For him anyway.

I've heard from so many Dems that think he can compete moneywise it's not funny. They NOW (not back when he did it) think that his opting out of the federal matching funds and spending limits is good. It was bad when he did it.

Either way, he's not going to raise the kind of money Bush will have and he can't rely on the DNC or soft money and all the 527's in the world aren't going to help without Soros pumping them full of millions to even get to the point they can raise money.

Kerry could spend $75 million (he can't raise it) between now and the convention and Bush could ask his supporters to add that much to the already $200 million he'll have and they'll do it in a heartbeat. He's not even close to tapping out his donors.

Heck, I haven't given Bush a dime this year. I could and might to squash Kerry.

[#3Fan]

He's already made Dukakis' mistake of being born in Massachusettes.

[goldstategop]

He's also tied to Uncle Ted's hip.

[LdSentinal]

Some of those polls show that Kerry's lead is now into double digits.

Which poll would that be? That's right. None.

BTW, George McGovern was a war hero in World War 2 and got his liberal ass handed to him by Nixon in 1972.

[#3Fan]

He's also tied to Uncle Ted's hip.

He's too liberal for Teddy's blood. :^)

[dc-zoo]

He doesn't need to make the same old mistakes. He has his own set of new silly-ass mistakes which have already begun.

[dawn53]

They probably have heard that he saved a man in Vietnam who is now campaigning for Kerry...They perhaps read that Kerry won lots of medals for bravery in Vietnam

This quote gets the award for the BIGGEST UNDERSTATEMENT of the day.

[Eldorado431]

Kerry will not get away with his Past Behavior. There is much more to Kerry then throwing somebody else’s Medals over the Fence. John Kerry has to answer to the Facts about his Vietnam War Protesting Days. He has to explain why he was in a Group that was funded by Communist, Why he was walking side by side with Communists Protesting the Nam War while Brave Troops were still there Dying? John Kerry has to explain his position on the World Court. Does he support the USA signing on to the World Court? If so, does he support our Troops being subject to the World Court for doing their Duty as American Soldiers?
Shaun Hannity asks if Kerry will continue to fight the War on Terrorism as President Bush is doing. I add will Kerry sell out Our Great Country to the UN? Will Kerry continue to repeat his statement that Terrorist Threats are Exaggerated? Will Kerry continue to build up our Military so we the people can be Protected? Will Kerry be another Appeaser like Bill Clinton?
It is my Thinking the Veterans Against John Kerry will get their information Promulgated Nationwide soon as possible and their information is need to know information for every voter. Soon after Kerry is Nominated by the Leftwing Democrats I expect to see on the news the Veterans Against John Kerry stating the facts on John F. Kerry the War Hero, {Pardon me, John Kerry the Communist Sympathizer.)

[GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY]

And yes, Kerry did things that anger some veterans, such as throwing other people's medals away and testifying as to the supposed atrocities of our servicemen. But if those charges are thrown around in September, most swing voters will say, "That's just ugly politics."

And claiming that Bush is less of a man because he was only in the National Guard isn't "ugly politics."

Come on now. The talks of a Kerry victory in November based on polls in the second week of February is about as assenine as talking about at team up 7-0 after their first drive in a football game. There's still way too much time left on the clock for this kind of liberal glee.

This fool should also study history a little bit more. Almost all of the challengers were up in the polls at this part of the election cycle because no one knows very much about them yet. It's kinda like you're seeing a woman for a while and meet someone new. The new girl's gonna seem nice, the type that wouldn't nag, etc. Eventually, you'll see that she has flaws too, and may well retreat back to the known woman (unless the current gf finds out and then you're in for a world of hurt, but I digress.)

[NYCVirago]

Paul Weyrich has always been Mr. Negative when it comes to the Bushes.

[nathanbedford]

Kerry is very dangereous. He will get all the money he needs. He will look more presidential than the President and more patriotic than the President. Before it is over his riverine heroics will attain the grandeur of PT 109 because the media will enshrine the former as they did the later.

Kerry is less likely to commit gaffs than Bush and well be much better in debate than Bush.

He will look to pick off Ohio Mo. Ariz, leaving the South to Bush but maybe contesting Fla.

This is going to be a very tough campaign. Bush dares not make any mistakes because Kerry is very unlikely to.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. Kerry may be a liberal but he's not going to leave himself exposed in the open for Republican plucking.

[Poohbah]

Advantage: Kerry (John Kerry isn't going to repeat the mistakes of the Mondales and Dukakis’s)

True.

He's going to make all-new ones.

And that Senate testimony, where he claims to have witnessed war crimes, is going to haunt him during the entire campaign.

[Poohbah]

And yes, Kerry did things that anger some veterans, such as throwing other people's medals away and testifying as to the supposed atrocities of our servicemen. But if those charges are thrown around in September, most swing voters will say, "That's just ugly politics."

That testimony can be used very effectively.

Simply ask him if he was telling the truth before the Senate...

...and then ask him why, if he witnessed all of these things, did he not file charges against anyone who committed these deeds...

...and then ask him if he would surrender himself to the International Criminal Court he supports on charges of accessory, or if he would become an international scofflaw.

[tkathy]

IMHO, Kerry will run a wiley, tough, dirty campaign that will put Clinton to shame. It is a mistake for all the pundits to go into the past continually. This is our first post 9/11 pres election, and nothing before 9/11 will be relevant.

[nathanbedford]

Consider how counter intuitive the situation is: Bush has won two wars with precious few casualties; he has kept the homeland safe; the economy is roaring back. Yet Bush is on the defensive.

Elections are lost on the defensive.

Meanwhile, Kerry is innoculating himself on the issues of national security.

He actually has Bush on the defensive over war records.

Bush is on the defensive about spending

Bush is on the defensive about jobs.

I simply do not understand where all this mindless bluster on these threads comes from. Bush better get on the attack and damn soon.

[dirtboy]

And yes, Kerry did things that anger some veterans, such as throwing other people's medals away and testifying as to the supposed atrocities of our servicemen. But if those charges are thrown around in September, most swing voters will say, "That's just ugly politics."

And protest against the war with Hanoi Jane. And give aid to the enemy. And vote against just about every defense and intelligence intitiative during his time in the Senate. And parse the meaning of his votes against the first Iraq war and for the second.

Sorry, Paul, but Bush's team will make mincemeat of Kerry without breaking a sweat. Throw in the fact that Kerry is an arrogant gold-digging jerk and the charges will stick. The only reason Kerry is up in the polls now is because the Dem primaries were in the news. Now that the opposition is sunk and the story as well, no one will care until the conventions.