Some reasons Kerry lost

[varwoche]

The closer an election, the more reasons there are for the outcome, i.e. if someone loses by 1 vote, a sneeze may have made the difference. Along those lines, here are three hyper stupid things that may have cost Kerry the election:

1) gay marriage flaps in MA and CA
2) his retarded Mary Cheney comment -- even if the comment itself didn't tip voters, it dominated the news cycle for several days down the critical stretch
3) swiftboat vet smear job

 

[Jocko]

Taking on Carville and the rest of the Clinton posse under the misapprehension they were there to "help" him.

Formulating such complex and apparently contradictory positions on issues most Americans see as simple and binary.

That pussy-assed excuse for a salute at the convention.

Three words: Ter es a.

Committing treason by meeting in Paris with the North Vietnamese without any official sanction.

Betraying his fellow veterans by repeating composite lies formulated at the winter soldier meetings as if he'd witnessed the alleged acts himself.


....and so on.


Varwoche, don't make the mistake of believing Kerry lost because of minor flubs and things beyond his control. He was an abysmal candidate on every level - the sooner Dems figure that out, the sooner they'll have a chance at something resembling a recovery.

 

[Patrick]

swiftboat vet smear job

No, it was his stupidity, or rather that of his handlers, for making a BIG DEAL out of his 4 months in Vietnam 35 years ago, in a foolish attempt to convince the american people that that would be enough to allow him to handle the Iraq war and the islamofascist war. Even if his account was true, it would have been viewed as appalling as the only "qualification" by any intelligent american concerned about the threat. But it was made worse, when the swiftboat veterans raised serious doubts about his truthfulness. Further doubts were raised by his inconsistency on the war, and memories of his opposition to the gulf war, which surely passed his "global test". The nail in the coffin was when asked what his intentions for the iraq war, he comes up with a mysterious "plan", which included such incredible features as "bringing in our allies" which even 12 year olds know would only allow thenselves to be "brought in" to pick over the battlefield, won by coalition arms, for postwar contracts - not any "help" except for themselves.

The bottom line in the mind of most voters: "In the most important issue at hand, this guy has no clue and is waaayyyyyy out of his depth."

 

[BPSCG]

Cursing someone charged with the responsibility of taking a bullet for him if necessary probably lost him the vote of every single undecided Secret Service agent. And probably a few who had decided to vote for him.

"...before I voted against it." I read that when the RNC guys caught that on their TiVos, they literally started high-fiving each other.

 

[varwoche]

Varwoche, don't make the mistake of believing Kerry lost because of minor flubs and things beyond his control.

I agree, there were issues above and beyond the three I listed, some of which you touch on. I was intentionally listing what are (imo) the banal reasons that he lost.

 

[DavidJames]

I agree, there were issues above and beyond the three I listed, some of which you touch on. I was intentionally listing what are (imo) the banal reasons that he lost.

The childish and myopic rants of those above aside here are my comments...

1) gay marriage flaps in MA and CA

I think the Christian/conservative turnout generated by all the various same sex marriage proposals was key for Bush. People here are in denial, but the Christian/moral values vote was the differentiator. The conservative skeptics can't come to grips with the fact that they are on the fringe of the Bush "mandate". Their support amounts to a rounding error of the final vote tally.

3) swiftboat vet smear job [/B]

I think this also played a very key role in bringing out the Bush vote and maybe making some Kerry "fence sitters" fall the other way or not vote at all.

More importantly, however, was Bush's ability to convince enough voters that the war in Iraq really is part of the "War On Terror". He then was able to plant enough seeds of doubt about Kerry's commitment and capability (with the help of the swifties) to execute the WOT. It doesn't take much to plant those seeds of doubt and fear is a huge motivator. The safe vote becomes the incumbent.

A couple of soldiers around here have been died in Iraq recently and interviews with their families bear out the first part of the above. In each case, the families talk about their loved ones dieing in defense of our country. They have been convinced that invading Iraq was necessary to defend America. I certainly understand their feeling about their loss and I recognize that nobody wants to think their son or daughter died fighting a worthless cause. (I expect some to respond that I think the WOT is a worthless cause, making my point perfectly).

It's a very difficult to voice opposition to the war in Iraq while dodging the pathetic attempt to be characterized as hating the country or siding with terrorists or against the soldiers, etc, etc. Tactics we've seen on this board which mimic those used by the Bush's reelection team (and the extended Bush team).

What also amazes to me is that the inclusion of Vietnam actually hurt Kerry. Bush was able to turn a Kerry advantage into a disadvantage, not with facts, but with rumor and innuendo. Thanks to the swifties and die hard supporters of that failed "action", it became a negative.

 

[varwoche]

Taking on Carville and the rest of the Clinton posse under the misapprehension they were there to "help" him.

Call me naive, but I find these H.Clinton conspiracy theories beyond ridiculous.

 

[TragicMonkey]

It's a very difficult to voice opposition to the war in Iraq while dodging the pathetic attempt to be characterized as hating the country or siding with terrorists or against the soldiers, etc, etc. Tactics we've seen on this board which mimic those used by the Bush's reelection team (and the extended Bush team).

Ahem. "Appeaser!" Lol. Sorry, thought I'd get it in first. Someone was going to, eventually.

It's difficult for me to understand the "my country, right or wrong" thinking, but it's almost impossible for me to fathom the "my country, always right" thinking. I'm not against the war (although I do think it was started too early), but I don't comprehend the immediate vicious attacks on people who express concerns. Since when is honest doubt a crime?

 

[varwoche]

I agree, there were issues above and beyond the three I listed, some of which you touch on.

I need to correct myself (quickly!). While you touch on several valid points...

1. True, the salute was hyper-lame. And since the dem convention produced no bounce, I suppose the salute could be the horshoe nail. (Seems like a stretch.)

2. Kerry pissed off a lot of people when he returned from Vietnam. It's definitely not a good thing to have a sizeable block of voters who hate you from the get-go. We'll never know if this alone would have been determanitive, without the slimy medal-scamming allegations piled on top.

3. Teresa didn't help matters; she may even belong on the list of banal causes. (Though that says more to me about "red states" than it does her.)

4. True, nuance is bad (politically).

... the rest of your rhetoric(?) is way over-the-top.

 

[crimresearch]

At the risk of stirring up the AoI, I'll repeat the points made by the African-American paper, the Mid South Tribune, when their editor explained why the Democrat's supposed 'lock' on minority voters was no longer a given.

http://www.blackinformationhighway.com/Presidential Endorsement.htm

"In clear conscience we cannot endorse the Democrat Party nominee, Senator John Kerry, for the following reasons (Elaboration will follow):

1). The war in Iraq.

2). Same-sex marriage

3). Black economic growth

4). Democratic Party takes the Black Vote for Granted"

Nothing in there about Swift Boats, or Bob Dole, or Teresa Heinz-Kerry.
Plenty in there on Democrats making decisions that are coming back to bite them in the butt.

Bottom line, the Democrats abandoned part of their constituency...not the other way around.

 

[Batman Jr.]

Probably what he should have done was to have made no concessions as to what he believed and relied on the "base strategy" approach as Bush did. He tried to appeal to everyone by fashioning his language in such a way that it made him just end up appearing universally reticent in the end. Politicos who'd followed the election closely were able to see the core of his viewpoints, but others—and these others are in the very substantial majority—who rely on sound bites played in endless repetitions and campaign ads to formulate their decisions just got lost. Kerry had to have remembered that to most, memorizing multiplication tables means stretching your intellectual capacities to their limits, and that's stretching it in a very profligate sense.

His campaign also didn't make clear enough the current administration's machinations to get people to fall behind Bush in the war on Iraq.

 

[Jocko]

Call me naive, but I find these H.Clinton conspiracy theories beyond ridiculous.

All I'm saying is that he was up when they came in, and plummetted afterward, and the ulterior motive you've been hearing about isn't all that far-fetched.

Suppose John McCain had won the 2000 primary and was struggling in the general election. Do you think he'd give his ear to the staff of a party rival?

 

[Patrick]

Kerry had to have remembered that to most, memorizing multiplication tables means stretching your intellectual capacities to their limits, and that's stretching it in a very profligate sense.

Yeah, I almost forgot -- it's this kind of arrogant elitist sneering that lost Lurch lots of votes. Keep it up - and keep losing -- loser.

 

[Jocko]

Probably what he should have done was to have made no concessions as to what he believed and relied on the "base strategy" approach as Bush did. He tried to appeal to everyone by fashioning his language in such a way that it made him just end up appearing universally reticent in the end. Politicos who'd followed the election closely were able to see the core of his viewpoints, but others—and these others are in the very substantial majority—who rely on sound bites played in endless repetitions and campaign ads to formulate their decisions just got lost. Kerry had to have remembered that to most, memorizing multiplication tables means stretching your intellectual capacities to their limits, and that's stretching it in a very profligate sense.

His campaign also didn't make clear enough the current administration's machinations to get people to fall behind Bush in the war on Iraq.

Ah, so 55 million Americans are wrong, and Kerry was right all along. Gotcha. Do me a favor, keep on thinking that way. I'm sure it will work in '08.

 

[BPSCG]

Ah, so 55 million Americans are wrong, and Kerry was right all along. Gotcha. Do me a favor, keep on thinking that way. I'm sure it will work in '08.

Actually it's 60 million and change.
[Derail]
About half a million more than the entire population of France, which is physically about the size of Texas and has approximately the population of California plus Texas.
[/Derail]

 

[Luke T.]

Wow. The word "taxes" has yet to appear in this topic.

 

[Luke T.]

When I heard it suggested, and I even posted about it on SC, that the gay issue may have tipped the balance for Bush, I was inclined to believe it.

I am less inclined to believe it upon relfection of the fact that there was a huge turnout of Republican and Democratic voters. Not only that, but Kerry and Bush are both against gay marriage, though Kerry is opposed to a constitutional amendment.

I believe the War on Terror was the central issue which gave the election to Bush. That, and taxes. Kerry may have promised he wouldn't raise them for anyone but the top one percent, but I doubt anyone, Republican or Democrat, believed him for a second.

 

[crimresearch]

Wow. The word "taxes" has yet to appear in this topic.

From the link posted above:

"And we stress again how the good Senator keeps harping about wealthy Americans paying less taxes. Our point is even if they paid more taxes, they’ll still be rich. Senator Kerry himself would certainly still be rich, if he’s taxed more. Most Blacks would like to pay the light bill and telephone bill with the ease that he does each month. So harping on what wealthy White Americans do still doesn’t solve the problem of the Black economic plight, or for the White middle class economic plight for that matter.

All we can say to him is that “the rich will always be with us.”..."

Basically, that article puts the lie to the notion that the Democrats lost because of something illicit that the Republicans did...and positions like Ted Rall's 'joking' call to torture minorities with electrodes so they will realize how wrong they were, are not going to improve things one bit.

More and more, minorities are as capable as anyone else of addressing the *issues* without being patronized or bullied, and the 'pseudo-liberal' Democrats who think that they can roll back the clock are (hopefully) in for more rude awakenings..

 

[Suddenly]

When I heard it suggested, and I even posted about it on SC, that the gay issue may have tipped the balance for Bush, I was inclined to believe it.

I am less inclined to believe it upon relfection of the fact that there was a huge turnout of Republican and Democratic voters. Not only that, but Kerry and Bush are both against gay marriage, though Kerry is opposed to a constitutional amendment.

I believe the War on Terror was the central issue which gave the election to Bush. That, and taxes. Kerry may have promised he wouldn't raise them for anyone but the top one percent, but I doubt anyone, Republican or Democrat, believed him for a second.

I never really understood identifying what "gave the election to Bush" as being any one single thing.

Anything that could result in a 3% swing, or better yet enough votes in a few close states to reverse the electorial vote, is part of the reason. There may be several reasons, the war, Kerry looking like a horse, that people thought Laura Bush was hot, who knows?

I say he lost becuase he got less electorial votes, or more exactly that once the real election is held he will get less electorial votes.

 

[crimresearch]

Just watched Tavis Smiley, and his guest Carlos Watson, also debunked some of the sterotypical apres-election myths.

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/tonight/

He specifically pointed out that many of those voting for Bush were motivated by a sense of hope for their vision of the future, be it a better economy, or the safety of their loved ones, while the Democrats pounded away at the same old negative messages.