Why Kerry Will Crash And Burn In November (GOOD READ!)

Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 3/06/04 | Kyle Williams

[goldstategop]

Why Kerry will crash and burn in November

John Kerry cleaned house on Super Tuesday, winning all states but one. Coupled with those wins and the welcome he's received in other primaries across the country, Kerry is now the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee. The only speculation is who will fill the vice presidential side of the ticket.

Aside from that, there is good news for the Kerry campaign found in the polls. A recent Associated Press survey confirmed many other polls, reporting a close race: President Bush at 46 percent and John Kerry at 45 percent.

In addition to that news, Kerry has received endorsements from unions, organizations, senators, congressmen, celebrities and countless others, and his campaign seems to be rolling along at a good speed.

Yet, whatever the good news Kerry is getting at this point, it's not going to matter in November. I'm predicting that John Kerry is going to lose, and he's definitely not going to lose by election 2000 margins. There are many reasons why we won't see a President Kerry:

First, he's not a very attractive guy. Although he reportedly pays $150 for a style and shampoo and, as some say, shells out the money for botox, the guy is not going to grab voters who base their decisions on looks.

Furthermore, the guy is boring. As Peggy Noonan wrote, "When he speaks … Mr. Kerry is boring. I don't mean he doesn't make you laugh, nod or swoon, I mean he doesn't make you think. … Mr. Kerry's crowds seem to put up with his remarks and wait patiently till they end so they can begin to cheer." These things all point to a real lack of charisma – something that is deeply needed in a presidential candidate these days.

The second reason is two fold. First, he has an atrocious voting record in the Senate. John Kerry has been a no-show from his job for at least 128 days over the past 14 months, missing 292 roll-call votes last year and every one of the 22 roll-call votes this year. All told, he's missed 64 percent of his job in the Senate.

Additionally, his record on political issues has been horrible. He voted for the Patriot Act, but now he bashes it. He voted for the war in Iraq, but now he's against it. He's had an awful voting record on national defense. He voted for the No Child Left Behind Act, but now he speaks out against it. He's criticized President Bush's action in Iraq, but also criticized Bush for not intervening earlier in Haiti. He voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, but now supports exclusive man-woman marriages. The list goes on and on.

Third, he campaigns on no real issues. Yes, he does campaign on his Vietnam service in seemingly every stump speech, but his lack of an agenda on present-day domestic issues is going to hurt his campaign.

The only thing that can characterize his campaign – and the Democratic Party as a whole – is being against President Bush. The only thing that defines the Kerry campaign is attacking everything the Bush administration has done over the past term.

Fourth, the Kerry campaign offers no optimism. Instead of simply saying, "America has been doing well, but I think we can do better," Kerry continually downplays our achievements and generally lies about the economy and unemployment – it's a very pessimistic view of life.

A doom and gloom, "sky is falling" attitude has never been accepted by Americans. We are an optimistic people.

Lastly, because of Kerry's campaign being anti-Bush, they are overflowing with hate-filled rage against the GOP and the current president. The campaign offers no hope, no assurance of getting through these times; rather, they attack the president, blaming him for everything that has gone wrong since he took office.

As we saw with Howard Dean, America doesn't buy into a candidate that expresses rage and hatred. They do, however, buy a candidate that offers hope and stability. This truth will work hard against John Kerry and will help President Bush.

Right now, America doesn't know the real John Kerry. That's why his poll numbers are high, just as they were with Howard Dean. When America found out about the real Dean, he faded away. As with Dean, as America gets to know the real John Kerry, he too will surely fade away.

[Lady Jag]

I've been found out
Now what do I do?

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Journalism sells one thing above all else--the idea that you need to know "what's going on"--and that you can know that, for free, just by paying attention to them.

Your need to know "what's going on" depends on the idea that "what's going on" at any given moment is important--which contrasts with the idea that the Bible and the Constitution are far more important than any cause celebre', and thus is an inherently anti-conservative concept.

[WOSG]

"Kerry is and was the Democrat who could easily be beat. Yes he is easier to defeat than DEAN. If Dean had not been taken down he could have easily moved to the center. Dean was a better speaker, and had far less political baggage than Kerry."

You are correct, although once Dean screamed, it was clear he too could be made unelectable.

Had Dean kept his mouth in control, he could have had a media makeover ... in fact, they were in the process of that , with the "dont you know he's really not that Liberal" line.

Kerry is the better candidate because Dean shot himself in the foot too much to be able to keep running.

[VadeRetro]

The liberal press will work hard to hide the truth.

They always do that, but they've really got their work cut out with this guy.

[BrucefromMtVernon]

A lot of the people I know disagree with President Bush on economics, but we're sticking with President Bush on account of the democRAT flirtation with the "funny stuff".

[stylin_geek]

Bump.

[bornintexas]

"The liberal press will work hard to hide the truth"

"They always do that, but they've really got their work cut out with this guy."

No truer words were spoken on this entire thread. Look at all the propping up they already had to do. And he is just even with Bush. I really think it's going to be Bush BY A BUNCH. The middle is not really interested in this election. And the ABB crowd doesn't have enough votes to overcome Bush backers. Kerry is tooooooooo negative and people are already sick of him and his pessimistic attitude. This is not what Americans want.
And I don't believe the media when it tells me Americans are not interested in their safety concerning terrorism.
Also, just for funnies, I heard an interesting stat the other day on Brit's show. You have to go back many many many moons to find a close back to back presidential election. Hopefully, God willing and the creek don't rise, history will be good to us.

[VadeRetro]

And the ABB crowd doesn't have enough votes to overcome Bush backers.

There will be a large ABK crowd by the time most of the country learns what we know now. It will take time, but it will happen. Some of this stuff, like the separate peace the VVAW signed in Paris with North Vietnam, cannot be immunized against.

[CGVet58]

tator, you make sense - it's my feeling that if kerry blows up too soon (before the convention), the leftists will write in Hillary as the god-queen on the white stallion coming to save their party.

[RightWhale]

Nader is all 30-year old slogans, so is Kerry. All nine-ten. Maybe even 60s. They already got all they are going to get and they know it. They would do better to run Barbra Streisand/Howard Stern.

[cjmae]

Bill Clinton taught the party well. Just go about your business like nothing is wrong and eventually it will all go away.
This seems to be the donkey philosophy.

[cjmae]

I wish Hillary was on the ticket, then we could get rid of her too.

[Clintonfatigued]

That's an interesting point. Even third-party candidates who poll poorly have swung states from one candidate to another.

In 1976, Eugene McCarthy only polled 1% on election day. But he siphoned enough liberal votes to cost Jimmy Carter Oregon, Maine, Iowa, and perhaps Oklahoma, and narrowed Carter's margin in many other states, very nearly giving Ford the presidency.

In 1980, John Anderson had no effect on the outcome as a whole, and not a great deal on the national margin. But did win enough votes to cost Carter Massachusetts, Arkansas, Tennessee, Mississippi, and perhaps South Carolina and Kentucky.

Maybe Nader can be helpful again this year.

[CommandoFrank]

I think it is very possible that Kerry may be the leftwing equivalent of Bob Dole, but without the charisma and character.

LOL...Great!

[foreverfree]

bump

[ConservativeMan55]

Bump!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[joesbucks]

Sure, there are folks who are better off than they were 4 years ago. But collectively, are we? Most people aren't. I just received information the other day that our site will be notified soon of closure. I know because it got brought up in a meeting that in reality I shouldn't have been invited to. Approx 100 people sometime this spring or summer. Sadly, it will include my spouse too. Over 100,000 in income gone betweent he two of us. BTW, it (the income)has gone down the past few years with cuts and so forth. And the Sunday paper this morning looks a little bleak.

So are we better off? No. And we are two vs one.

I'll still be voting for GWB. Unlike Reagan after 4 years, we aren't better off, as most people, than 4 years ago.