Laura Bush has an approval rating of 74% (Gallup Poll). Teresa Heinz Kerry has an approval rating in the 30s — with this, the influences for one candidate are almost certainly positive, while for the other, almost certainly negative.
So – why doesn’t the Kerry camp stick Teresa on the shelf and be done with her? Teresa doing nothing means doing no harm at this late date – and putting her out there will only draw continuing comparisons to the highly popular Laura Bush. In addition, I doubt very seriously that the perceptions voters have of Teresa will change much over the next week or so, short of Teresa adding “Mother” to her name, and there is always that chance she will lose track and say or do something ----- atypical. Is this what the Kerry camp really wants, Teresa on the campaign trail. I can’t believe it. I have to wonder if she is still out there only because of her personal relationship with the Senator. Has Kerry taken a hard position on this matter?
I don’t think anyone is likely to vote based on the prospective first lady. The one place that this might not be true is in Pittsburgh (in the battleground state of Pennsylvania), where Therea is deffinately an asset, having given a lot of money to various projects there as a philanthropist and being the ex of a well known senator.
Of course, a few well informed people realize that through her “big ketchup” special interests will only increase their tasty yet insidious grip on our nations future. Unfortunately, these people are in the minority.
Remember that these numbers aren’t as bad as they seem, because the unfavorable ratings are really low too. 35% favorable doesn’t mean 65% unfavorable. It’s more like 30% unfavorable. Because a lot of people don’t have any opinion at all on Heinz-Kerry.
I don’t think anyone really cares that much about the wives of the President (or the challenger)…certainly not enough to let it influence their vote. I don’t even think most people care about the VICE President or VP candidate, nor does it really influence their choice of who they will pick.
But I find it interesting that a partisan of “the party that stands for family values” would be suggesting that the other party put their Presidential candidate’s wife on the shelf.
I guess because only a male-chauvinist-pigf**k would do something like that to their own wife, and it would probably, and rightly, reflect incredibly poorly on them.
Yet – IF Teresa it’s determined by the Kerry camp that Teresa isn’t helping but hurting Kerry’s chances, it would stand the test of reason that they would restrict her access to the media and locations – as the linked article in the OP suggests. And IF she has the potential to play especially poor, which she does — given the statements of the recent past ---- and she does this this close to the election, it very well could have a significant influence. An election that could be decided by the bat of a butterfly’s wing.
She’s a Marge schott waiting to happen. I actually fell off my chair laughing when I heard Senator Kerry praise her (for her librarian gaff) by saying he admires a women who speaks her mind. His problem is that he can’t hire anyone capable of telling her to shut up. She would bitch slap the first person who tried.
So far she’s been contained so I’m guessing her contribution to the campaign will be softened for the remaining 8 days. I predicted her own brand of politics would get her into trouble but it looks like she might just make it after all.
Remember how the left went absolutely nuts over Nancy Reagan and her astrologer? Well, she doesn’t hold a candle to Teresa’s new-age nuttiness. One of Kerry’s inane proposals is a federal Department of ‘Wellness’. That has Teresa’s fingerprints all over it. The other day she offered her remedy for arthritis - it seems you have to get some white raisins and soak them in gin for two weeks. Then you have to eat exactly nine of them. Not eight, not ten. This will help arthritis.
My prescription would be something like this - get a bottle of gin and nine white raisins. Soak the raisins for two weeks. Now throw the raisins away, and drink the gin.
Mrs Kerry appears to be a breath of fresh air. I can’t believe she will influence the vast majority of voters either way, though I suppose there might be one or two who react strongly to her that might be swayed by their feelings about her.
Did Hillary deter voters from voting for Clinton, or attract extra votes? And if so, might the numbers on either side have cancelled each other out? Ditto for Nancy Reagan.
I was just trying to alert everyone to an upcoming double standard. Nancy’s astrologer, who had no actual effect on anything, was lambasted by the left as an example of how ridiculous Reagan’s presidency was. But now if Kerry was elected, and Ms. Kerry’s newAge beliefs inspire a Federal Department of ‘Wellness’, will we hear the outrage? Or will she be endearingly eccentric? Or will we see a new renaissance in new age philosophy?
Most of the hue and cry over Nancy’s Astrologer[supTM[/sup] involved speculation that the President’s decisions might have been overly influenced by hokum.
While Tipper Gore was not a factor in my decision not to vote for Gore, I really really don’t like her. I don’t like Hillary Clinton either. Too young for Nancy Reagan, don’t remember much about Barbara Bush, and don’t have any feelings one way or another for Laura Bush.
The potential First Lady was not a factor in my voting in this election.
This is a common belief. Raisins do contain anti-inflamatory, though I doubt the dosage is anything compared to regular meds. Still, if it helps her deal with arthritis via placebo effect or whatever, more power to her. It’s not like she’s going to be surgeon general or anything.
Do you have any other evidence of Theresa’s wacky new age beliefs?
I think everyone was pretty much rolling their eyes at Nancy on that one. She was the only First Lady that I can recall that Democrats didn’t like.
“Wellness” is not a new concept. Just google “Wellness Center” and you will see that “New Age” groups have no monopoly on it either. Much of it has to do with preventative measures.
I like Mrs. Bush a lot and I don’t think she’s a Stepford wife. (If she were, she would never have given George an ultimatum to clean up.) But I think Heinz Kerry is fascinating. I like it that she won’t change and that she has a mind and will and mouth of her own. I like sassy women.
I don’t care about First Ladies, but I do care about VP’s. Back when Perot was running for president the first time I voted for him after watching the Vice Presidential debates. I liked the plain way Stockdale spoke. He could answer questions in simple and direct fashion, unlike those smarmy weasels Gore and Quayle.
Four years ago I intensely disliked the idea of Tipper Gore being the First Lady because I can’t stand her. I worried we’d have a Federal Department for the Destruction of Evil Music. I wasn’t voting for Gore anyway, but it was a big extra strike.
Anyway, in my other post I meant to thank Tigers2B1- if he hadn’t posted Mrs. Kerry’s entire name, I would have had no idea who he was talking about. :rolleyes:
Yes, I was going to post about that, too. Not trying to keep the idea that she’s some almost-FRENCH furriner who speaks with an accent out there or anything, nosireebob…
.