Did the good folks in Iowa get the primaries off on the wrong foot / track? Is there a growing sense of urgency to dump Kerry and pick a different candidate during the convention that at least has a remote chance of defeating Bush?
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0417/mondo1.php
From your cite…
huh? Who “screwed” Dean but the caucus and primary voters (or perhaps Dean, himself)?
I certainly don’t feel a growing sense of urgency. And when someone with an R after their name pisses me off, I just remember the hordes of people who were willing to write off Clinton in '92. And how that ultimately turned out.
Waste
Seems as if James Ridgeway feels that there was a falling out of sorts between Dean & the Dem party leaders prior to the Iowa caucus, but you would have to ask him for a full explanation.
Hmm, let’s see here. In the beginning of March, Kerry had momentum and a slight poll lead, but $2.4 million in the bank versus Dubya’s $110 million.
Now Bush has napalmed the battleground states with $50 million worth of advertising, while Kerry has been essentially silent, raising funds and letting the Iraq news deflate Bush’s balloon.
Current status? According to Ryan Lizza at the New Republic, the two are still essentially even. But Kerry is now $60 million richer, and Bush’s cash on hand is down to about $75 million.
And all of this while Bush’s minions keep trying to rehash Kerry’s war record in some kind–any kind–of a negative light. Actually, with the ‘controversy’ over Mrs Kerry’s tax returns, among anything else they can dredge up, they don’t really care what sticks to Kerry, so long as something does.
But the polls haven’t changed all that much, and it seems that Kerry hasn’t even really begun to conduct his campaign for the swing voter. And Bush’s approval ratings hover around the 50% mark.
(The opinions expressed in this post are blatantly cribbed from talkingpointsmemo.com.)
Last I saw, the polls were pretty close; I guess it depends on what you consider remote.
Dump Kerry for who, exactly? No one else is even close.
The only “dump Kerry” voice I hear are from the Republicans, who have to puff up minor matters or flat-out lie to try to paint Kerry as some sort of ultra-liberal flake. Which is odd, given that if Kerry really is as unrealiable as they claim he is, I’d imagine they’d be thrilled to have Bush run against him.
rjung, we can agree on something! Of course the republicans are thrilled to have Kerry as an opponent. My question is whether or not their is significant erosion in the support of Kerry from the Dem /lib side? Are the Dem’s having buyer’s remorse?
Do you have any evidence whatsoever for this? Not counting various columnists, of course, I’m talking about a decline in his poll numbers among Democrats, perhaps weakening fundraising . . . anything at all, really.
There’s always buyers remorse for any candidate once you realize that they aren’t perfect, that they have issues they can exploit.
Bush’s gains have mostly been in states he’s already likely to win anyway: preaching to the converted. In the key states where Bush has blown millions to litterally and unamibguously lie about Kerry (can anyone even try to defend the “gutting intelligence” and “voted 350 times for higher taxes” bullshit?), they’ve made barely a budge.
Look, Karl Rove essentially confessed pretty unambiguously to a crime punishable by at least five years in jail plus hefty fines (confirming the identity of Val Palme to the press, and that’s not even accounting for the possibility that he leaked it in the first place). But so far, nobody has said boo about that either.
Oops, that last paragraph belonged in rjung’s latest thread. It’s off-topic here, please don’t hjiack with it.
Frankly, I have heard no such talk from anyone. I mean not a peep. I listen regularly to Al Franken on Air America, visit moderate and liberal blogs, and I have honestly heard nothing remotely suggesting that anyone wants to “dump” Kerry. I have to say that my best guess is that this is wishful conservative thinking, perhaps driven by fear. Or by Fear Itself, who can be very compelling.
Quite the contrary. I decided to ask the question when I noticed a writer for the Village Voice making the Dump Kerry plea in his column. While I’m not familiar with his work, a review of his past articles does not picture him being on the conservative side of the isle. The voice may be low, but is there a growing dissatisfaction? I would certainly think that the republicans would not want to think that they have spent a sizable chuck of their funds running ads against the wrong candidate.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30291-2004Apr21.html
Yep his supporters are backing off. They are just leaving money before they go.
:rolleyes:
The Village Voice is fine as far as they go, but hardly a representative of mainstream liberal thought. I could point you to five or six blogs who were bashing Kerry as a war-loving, Bush-loving, pandering-to-business buffoon during the primary season. Now those same people practically worship the guy.
As for him “deflating”, let’s get a dose of political reality for a moment. If Lieberman had won the nomination, then Karl Rove would currently be telling us that Lieberman was totally wishy-washy and inconsistent in his views. If Edwards had won the nomination, National Journal would have cranked out a study to prove that Edwards was the most liberal member of the Senate. If Clark had won the nomination, they chickhawks would have found some loser willing to claim that Clark didn’t deserve his military honors. Kerry is not “deflating”, and no one has learned any unpleasant facts about his that they didn’t already know. It’s just politics; learn to live with it.
Look at it this way. During spring and summer of 2000, Shrub spent a truckload on attack ads against Gore. He led Gore in the polls by about ten percent throughout most of the year. Only from August onwards, when both candidates were airing ads, opinion shifted to Gore and he eventually won the vote. In 2004, Shrub is again spending a truckload on attack ads, but this time the two candidates are staying roughly even. So once we get to Fall, when Kerry spends money to make sure his message gets heard, what’s going to happen then?
Or, to paraphrase Spider Robinson talking about Robert Heinlein: Democrats are so outraged they are attempting to drown him in money.
I will ask again: Dump Kerry for WHO? WHO are we supposed to be dumping Kerry for? I mean, are there alternatives? Dean? Sharpton? I mean, the subject seems like the masturbatory ventings of some chronic liberal malcontent that the pubbies have siezed upon in deluded hope that Kerry’s vulnerabilities are within the Democratic party. I see abosultely, positively NO evidence for this. It’s the swing voters that BOTH Bush and Kerry have to worry about. For anyone to assert otherwise seems to me like somebody trying to blow smoke up our asses.
The clamor for dumping Kerry has doubled before my very eyes. Never heard of it before now, and tumult is building. This scandal could rank right up there with the furor over his torrid sex life. Next thing you hear, the Pope is going to kick him out of the Catholics. Then there’s his vote in the Senate to begin negotiations with Osama for surrender terms.
Pretty rough sledding. Then all that money coming in, he’ll probably blow it on drugs and fast women. Be a burnt out, Keith Richards kinda candidate.
Then maybe, time to talk dumping.