1988 (For some strange reason, John Kerry can't stop thinking of the Dukakis campaign!)

John Kerry's Blog ^ | September 14, 2004 | John F. Kerry

[bigeasy_70118]

At my latest campaign stop, somewhere near Lambert Field or (was it Houlihan's Stadium?), Steve Winwood's seminal anthem of the disgruntled left "Roll With It, Baby" played on the loud speaker. All of sudden I was remembered 1988, which reminded me of the Dukakis campaign. Now I can't get the Dukakis campaign out of my head. There's no rhyme or reason for it either. I am really not sure why I can't stop thinking of the Dukakis campaign. I hadn't thought of it in years but now it's all I can think about. There doesn't seem to be any real reason for the Dukakis campaign to pop into my memory like this but it has and I have no clue why. Nothing in 2004 reminds me of the Dukakis campaign. In fact, I don't see anything on today's scene that is even remotely comparable to the Dukakis campaign. Nothing at all. So why is it that I just see Michael Dukakis driving a tank around a field in upstate New York? That's an image I hadn't thought of in years! But here it is ensconsed in my memory. Why am I only thinking of the Dukakis campagn?

Maybe if Mrs. Landingham fixes me a Pimm's Cup, I will stop thinking of the Dukakis campaign.

[bigeasy_70118]

I agree wth Kerry. I am not sure why he is reminded of the Dukakis campaign either. His Presidential run is far worse.

[Mikey_1962]

Maybe because his BUNNY suit is burned in my mind

[concerned about politics]

I've heard Cambodia seared his brain - or something like that.

[newgeezer]

And to think, with all this Rathergate stuff, I was almost ready to consider "blogs" in general as something other than a waste of resources.

Thanks for bringing me back to reality.

[daviddennis]

That blog's pretty darn funny! I was pleasantly surprised by how well the idea was carried out.

D

[longtermmemmory]

Congressman Billybob had an excellent post on why Kerry is suddenly acting like dukakis and how the forged memos can be tied to Kerry.

[GeorgeW23225]

Poor John Kerry is George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis, all rolled into one.

It isn't a pretty picture, is it???

Why is it, the democRats have a death wish?

Don't get me wrong. I love the fact that they nominate such obvious losers. I just can't figure out why. Is it self loathing??

Does anyone have the answer???

[jdege]

McGovern ran as an anti-war Democrat, and lost every state but one.

Mondale ran as a higher-taxes Democrat, and lost every state but one.

Kerry's running as an anti-war, higher taxes Democrat, and ... ?

[ChadGore]

[daviddennis]

This is a question I'm intrigued by myself. The Democrats don't seem to have much of a bench. I didn't see anyone in the convention who was Presidential material with the possible exception of Barak Obama, and he needs lots more experience. Certainly Hillary Clinton couldn't win on her own without a hefty dose of Bill, a fact that I'm sure gives her heartburn every night.

If you look at the nine would-be Presidents who started the journey towards the Democratic nomination, I don't think any of them were adequate Presidential material. Lieberman might have been OK but he couldn't make the nomination thanks to his pro-war views. I also think he might be a bit too nice and naive for the tough job. Dean is at least someone with recognizable views and the ability to excite people, but not even the hard left thought he could win.

Mark Steyn dismissed Kerry before he was nominated and wound up giving away a boatload of books, one for every percentage point he won in New Hampshire. But in the end, I think Mark was right. He is just an exceptionally poor candidate.

They are nominating these people, in short, because they don't seem to have any good choices. Maybe most Democrats really don't want the stress of the top job.

I think John O'Neil would have had a good shot if he'd run against Kerry. He can at least hold his own in debates. He is a Democrat, after all, and an Edwards supporter, but my impression of him is that he's much tougher and more seasoned. Of course now he's burned his bridges, but with such a pathetic field he would have been a surprisingly strong opponent.

D

[GeorgeW23225]

This is a difficult question to answer, isn't it??? There are so many variables.
But, the bottom line is this. Their problem is the party "base". The "base" is so far removed from the American mainstream, that it makes the "sensible" choice of a viable candidate impossible. The other problem is this. The "base" of the democRat party is so filled with hate it blinds them. They know what they're against, but they have no clue what they are for. That is exactly why Kerry is boxed into a corner right now. He has to be very careful not to upset the "base", while attempting to appeal to the rest of the Country. Plus, the fact that he is a kiss-ass, pandering, socialist doesn't help.

IMHO, the democRat party will not exist as we know it, after this election. They have become a "large" 3rd party. Nothing more.
I truly believe the realignment has begun, with a major shift in minorities to the Republican party. And, the democRats have only themselves to blame. (Plus a little help from boy genius, Karl Rove)

Defeating John Kerry is more fun than a human being should be allowed to have!!

And a BIG thank you to the democRats for making it possible!!

[UsnDadof8]

There's no rhyme or reason for it either

He's referring to his campaign strategy here obviously.

[UsnDadof8]

Did John Kerry really write this, or is it from The Onion ?