Posted on 04/21/2004 2:04:02 AM PDT by 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.
Me too. ;^)
Absolutely- I think President Bush will win- Kerry is an especially noisome candidate- but I fear this will be a more bitter, and closer election than 2000 was.
Of course Kerry could win. Nothing is beyond the realm of possibility. But then why is Kerry slipping in the polls with many things seeming to go bad for Bush? I think many Americans are looking at Kerry closely and not liking what they see. I'd bet on Bush.
He could go the route of out-of-the-box thinking and grab a woman...well, Geraldine Ferraro didn't help.
He should go to the guy that's been SO reliable to the Democrat party...Frank Lautenberg.
Farah does have an arrogant smugness with his writing and probably the reason for my visceral reatcion to his visceral writing. I can't believe that he completely left out the Perot factor in 92 and Dukakis's lead in 88 out of his own self proclaimed clairvoyance for 04.
I to don't believe that 04 will be a landslide(who knows it could be), but again JMO, things don't get serious until after Labor day and a lot of things can happen between now and Nov. 2nd on both sides.
There are two differences, one in our favor, one not.
In Our Favor
W does not have most of his father's RINO and arrogant advisors. Rich Bond and Mary Matalin are not working the campaign; Charlie Black, whose clueless arrogance stunk up many a media appearance against a Clintonista in 1992, is to some degree and that's worrisome. It's in our favor, but only to the extent that these folks and their ilk are kept far, far away.
Not In Our Favor
In 1992, the media should have been paid for the role they played in electing America's first black President. Yet, they were doing what they normally did with just a bit more gusto. Twelve years, 537 votes in Florida, the internet and Fox News later, they know they still retain immense power even if it's being eaten away, and are actively applying it against W. That's why you see Viacom's Simon and Shuster anti-W books being promoted as gospel on Viacom's 60 Minutes. The partisan media are not going to savage Kerry as they did Gore---unless Her Heinous needs it for her ascension. Either way, when CFR kicks in, they're going to be one continuous RAT advertisement.
Ahhh...geee...if so, can someone please teach the democrats that this is a REPUBLIC and not a democracy? I don't know if I can stomach another 4 years of whining about vote counts because they don't understand how our government works.
Was that the Buddhist convention?...
OK. This is my prediction. Political pundits and public opinion polls do not adequately account for the post-911 mood of voters. They missed the 2002 election and will likely miss again this year.
During a time of war America will not elect an appeaser. The election will again be close, but Kerry has painted himself into a corner with the extreme left and cannot afford to flip-flop on his anti-war rhetoric.
Bush wins.
You really have something there. I was positive that even though I despised Clinton, and had nothing but contempt for him, were I to have met him for 15 minutes, I would probably have come away liking him, as a "lovable rogue". That was his talent.
Kerry is not JFK, nor Clinton. Nor much of anything, moment to moment.
The voice of a reasoned thoughtful man. Not. Either that or he never grew up.
Would the USA be a better country if every single citizen believed in the Constitution, wanted the government to butt out, and for people to be responsible for themselves? Of course. Do most Americans think this way? Not enough yet.
They need to be weaned from the government over time. SocSec and Medicare will be reformed in term 2. Very possibly structural tax changes will occur in term 2.
And most importantly the WoT will be advanced in term 2.
For Farah to not vote for Bush is disgusting in light of the fact that he knows what a "disaster" Kerry will be. For Farah to try to influence others of the rightness of his stupid path is even more reprehensible. What is the alternative he proposes other than a magic wand and some pixie dust? He needs to rejoin reality.
WorldNetDaily, nice to have known you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.