Replies

When Kerry began to rise after Iowa, I kept telling friends there was no way this guy could win. He looks like a funeral director on a bad day.

He is dour, his face is long, and all the lines in his face go down. A smile is a foreigner on his face. He has no laugh or smile lines, just frown lines.

You compare him to GW Bush who seems to always have a smile, grin or a twinkle of one ready to pop out, except when he is genuinely troubled or concerned, and it is a no-brainer.

Kerry is utterly lacking in the Living Room Factor. The more you see him, the more painful the experience becomes.

Americans won't vote for a pessimistic President who is dark and brooding. And, Kerry is even worse than just morose. He is an elitist snob.

I thought at the beginning that GW would be hard to beat by any of the Democrat dwarves who were running against him. Kerry has only strengthened my opinion.

The only thing that can save the Democrat ticket now is Hillary on it as the VP. Kerry may be forced to take this woman and she will upstage him all the way. They will still lose but not by losing nearly every state. With Hillary on the ticket they will carry more states than Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. She will make it a credible race. She will also bring in the money the Clintons have stashed in those hard to track PAC's run by their friends.

It won't hurt her one bit and will set her up for 2008.

I have had a discussion with a friend of mine concerning this Living Room factor and I believe you are right, as well as he. Even though televison had been around for more than a decade before the 1960 election, it was really then that this medium became the major influence on the voters. I have said this before but if you look at every presidential race starting in 1960, it seems that the Candidate that looked the best won the title.

Granted, other factors played a part in some races – but overall, the best looking candidate between the two won. IMO, of course.