Why Kerry Will Win (Joseph Farah Warns History Is Repeating Itself All Over Again)

Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 04/21/04 | Joseph Farah

[goldstategop]

Why Kerry will win

Joseph Farah

I have bad news for Bush supporters gloating at the latest polls showing the president expanding his lead over John Kerry.

I hate to rain on your parade, but this race is far from over.

Bush partisans are giddy over the fact that Kerry's campaign seems to be sputtering – that he can't seem to capture much attention nor generate much excitement.

It's true that Kerry is a colorless, humorless, unlikable patrician.

Nevertheless, despite those characteristics, he's within the margin-of-error range in most polls. It's astounding, really. And that's why Bush is going to lose.

I want to take you back to 1992.

Bill Clinton was in John Kerry's position. He was running considerably further behind George H.W. Bush in the polls. Then came the Democratic convention.

The Democrats are very good at putting on these shows, and Hollywood pulled out all the stops for Clinton.

Much to my amazement at the time, Clinton got a huge bounce from the show – and he never looked back.

Again in 1996, Clinton was running behind Bob Dole in the polls leading up to the Democratic convention. History repeated itself. The Clinton-Gore ticket bounced right back into a second term.

You can look at 2000 and see the same trend, and, while it's true Al Gore didn't win the White House, he did win the popular vote.

Is Bush planning to lose the popular vote again and win re-election in the electoral college? Is he planning to make it that close?

This is my prediction. Mark it down. Remember where you heard it. The day after the Democratic convention, Kerry will be a front-runner.

It gives me no pleasure to make this prediction. While I believe Bush has been a failure as a president in many ways and cannot support him for re-election, I know Kerry will prove disastrous for the country.

Many people tell me I should support Bush for this reason alone.

I can't do that. I won't do that. I won't cast a vote for a candidate who doesn't really support the Constitution of the United States, even though he takes an oath to uphold it. I will not vote for a candidate for president who increased spending – not just defense spending, but all spending – so dramatically. I don't believe we'll ever get real political choices as Americans if we keep making the mistake of supporting the lesser of two evils.

Kerry is a dangerous man – and I think he's going to be the next president.

I even believe he will weather the Ralph Nader storm.

The reason? Bush is more hated now than he was in 2000. The Nader crowd is going to go for Kerry. The Bush opposition will unite to defeat him this time.

It's bad news for America. And I'm stunned at how the Bush team is stumbling and bumbling into defeat.

These guys act like they are political geniuses. They seem to forget that Al Gore actually won more votes than Bush did in 2000.

The overconfidence is staggering.

They don't see this coming.

It's probably too late to do anything about it if they did.

Sure, things can change between now and November. Things can happen. But things can happen that will help or hurt either candidate.

Because I don't have a dog in this hunt, I think I can see it a little more objectively, a little more clearly.

It's going to be Kerry in 2004.

But, please, don't blame the messenger.

[Dave Olson]

Overconfidence is not a good thing. We have to fight like we're behind and we're gonna lose the election.

Overconfidence can lead to compacency, but acting like we're going to lose is worse. Whether it be a horse race or politics, people are attracted to winners, not losers.

[Badeye]

"Bill Clinton was in John Kerry's position. He was running considerably further behind George H.W. Bush in the polls. Then came the Democratic convention. "

The basic premise of the article is based on this unbelievably flawed statement.

Bill Clinton did not have a 19 year track record of being on the wrong side of every major issue, ala Kerry.

Thats what this article is basically trying to do, whitewash Kerry's voting record, folks. Its the entire "sub plot" of the Kerry Campaign. Whenever a vote he casts is mentioned, the leftwingnuts screech "Stop attacking his patriotism" or alternatively "You just don't understand "nuance"".

The Democrats are once again making the mistake of underestimating the public's basic intelligence. Votes cast do matter to voters.

I'll also point out, Clinton didn't tell the American People he was going to raise taxes, ala Kerry, ala Mondale btw.

And Clinton, despite his well known faults, would never have uttered the following phrase "I voted for it, before I voted against it".

The fact remains Kerry is fatally flawed as a candidate for President. The fact is, he demonstrates it two or three times per DAY. The fact is, nobody thats planning to vote for John Kerry can name a single initiative, a single piece of legislation that made them conclude "He's MY GUY FOR PRESIDENT!"

"Anybody But Bush" serves CNN's Crossfire types well, prior to the election. But it doesn't generate the enthusiasm required to unseat a President benefitting from a growing economy, a to date sucessful war on terror, who's keystone legislative accomplishment was lowering our taxes.

Oh well, the hardcore leftwingnuts have to say something, I suppose.....

[Kingasaurus]

I think it's just tradition, but it always happens that way.

[Bonaventure]

I don't know who this Farah person is, but he's none too sharp a political prognosticator. There are many flaws in his reasoning, but the most obvious is this: John Kerry is no Bill Clinton. As reckless as Clinton was, he was the greatest retail politician this country has seen since the Second World War. The man was a political genius. Kerry is a bland, not especially talented junior senator from a politically marginal state. There's simply no comparison.

[Kingasaurus]

"Bill Clinton did not have a 19 year track record of being on the wrong side of every major issue, ala Kerry. "

This is why Senators and Reps have a hard time becoming President, and Governors have it easier.

It's easier for a Governor to make it look like his home state is a Utopia, and he's done all these initiatives and so on, and the state he lives in has prospered under his generous hand. Experience being a chief exec, and all that.

It's much easier to throw the long-term voting record of a Senator in his face. He will always have a track record of either directly supporting or directly opposing what previous Presidents wanted to accomplish. Governors don't have to vote on troop funding - they can always lay low and then say they supported it all along. Congressman don't have that luxury. The voting record is out there.

[Badeye]

You and I both see the same thing. You just can't "unring" a 19 voting record which demonstrates Kerry has been wrong on every major issue of the past two decades.

[TexanByBirth]

Joseph Farah is all over the board when it comes to politics.

I've read WND for several years and still can't figure out exactly what he stands for and supports.

[hattend]

Bill Clinton had some charisma and Perot in '92. Kerry has neither.

[dighton]

I hate to rain on your parade . . .

Baloney.

[Dane]

Which(convention) one came last in 2000?

The demo convention because the demos(Clinton/Gore) were the incumbants.

It is an unwritten rule that the incumbant Presidents party has their convention last in the political season.

This year, since Bush is the incumbant, the Pubbies have their convention after the demos.

[xzins]

I prefer being last. It provides an upfront opportunity to counter the glow of the previous convention IF IF IF you can get the people to watch a friendly FOXNEWS version instead of the alphabets.

[SLB]

Talking about stopping Kerry won't get it done. We need to do the little things to convince voters of the wrongness of considering Kerry for any office. I'm willing to put time in registering voters, handing out stickers and anything else needed to stop the frenchman

You are the first FReeper on this entire thread to make sense. All the rest are blathering on and on about how Bush will stomp Kerry etc. You realize the mainstream voter watches main stream TV and they are courting Kerry. The way to beat him is to take it to the trenches and you seem to have come to a firm grasp of that.

[Eva]

Don't worry about Kerry winning, he doesn't have a chance. We need to worry about Hillary.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Farah slacks off in his research lately. He reviewed "The Alamo" while admitting not having seen it.

[Rockitz]

Have you researched Chile? I was thinking of retiring there myself.

[hershey]

The RATS are burning the midnight oil trying to come up with a winning spin on a possible terrorist attack here in the next few months. How to blame it on Bush even before it happens (which, God forbid, it won't), but how to tell the big lie often enough so people are afraid to vote republican -- as with the recent Spanish election. As in 'if it weren't for Bush, Muslims wouldn't have a quarrel with us'. Kerry's latest: What we need is a change in the presidency. Bush has lost every bit of credibility, wasted the good will Clinton built up over 8 years,' and on and on, ad nauseum.

[ThePythonicCow]

Well - yes - there is Hillary. I predict that the election day turnout will be unusually high when she runs.

She must lose.

[dasboot]

Chile is my top pick. My neice just spent a year there. The commies are trying (as everywhere) to bring things under the heel, but the people are just starting to live Jefferson's American dream, and will have none of it. This is my understanding.....I could be wrong.

[Lady Heron]

If President Bush and his supporters discount the bounce out of a Democratic Convention, they're dreaming. Overconfidence is our biggest enemy.

Yes there will be a bounce out of the Democrat convention, but then we will have ours and we will get a bounce and then come the debates. No, I am not overconfident, but we will win this one.

[Rooivalk]

You are the first FReeper on this entire thread to make sense. All the rest are blathering on and on about how Bush will stomp Kerry etc. You realize the mainstream voter watches main stream TV and they are courting Kerry. The way to beat him is to take it to the trenches and you seem to have come to a firm grasp of that.

---

Thanks for your understanding of my position. I plan to be out there swinging away at Kerry. If you are in LA lets talk. If you are elsewhere organize to defeat the Kerry menace to our way of life