Kerry heads back to thwart Dean's regional challenge

[Freddie Stubbs]

Suddenly an underdog in his own backyard, U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry today begins a breakneck fight to reclaim New Hampshire from an upstart fellow New Englander.


Fresh from a campaign kickoff in front of a warship in South Carolina, Kerry returns to hometown turf - where allies admit they worry a primary loss to Howard Dean could be a death knell.

Dean strategists, relishing the latest poll that shows the former Vermont governor beating Kerry by 21 points, want a quick TKO.

``Kerry has a huge advantage here. If he can't turn that into something, that will mean something,'' said Dean New Hampshire adviser Debbie Butler, a prominent Democrat. ``If he's not catching on with the people who know him second best, that's trouble.''

more: http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/national/dean09032003.htm

[joeybee12]

1. I WANT to like Kerry...

...but have difficulty doing so. I have always agreed with him on most positions, but his vote for the Iraq resolution still sticks in my throat--he can try to justify it now, but what he says seems more like rationalization, rather than an explanation. It makes me think he's like most politicians--he voted for it after weighing the poltical benefits, not whether it was the right thing to do. It was a major miscalculation, and he is still not admitting that we've done a horrific thing by leveling a country that was not a threat to us, and that makes me look elswhere.

Anyway, I've been a fence-sitter, but now I have to say I'm a Dean supporter. Most people I know are now leaning that way. A friend who has been a contributor to Kerry is now sending money to Dean.

[ibegurpard]

3. My sentiments as well.

Other than the fence-sitter part.

[CWebster]

2. "If he is not catching on..."

How can he? If Dean's backbone of antiwar support springs from his stand on Iraq, how can Kerry expect to win over the base he needs to win the primary by promoting his militarism? Either he is severly misguided or has ego issues about being fawned over for the glory of war.

Either way, it makes him appear the fool.

[ProfessorPlum]

4. I don't think he appears the fool

nor do I begrudge him the opportunity to talk up his military record - his record of service was incredibly hard-won, and could easily have sent him home in a body bag.

But I do agree that he should admit that the war was a huge mistake, and he regrets having supported it. That would go a long way to getting that issue off the table for him.

[Egnever]

6. Agree with you 100%

"But I do agree that he should admit that the war was a huge mistake, and he regrets having supported it. That would go a long way to getting that issue off the table for him"

I like kerrys record on many things and could support him easily bassed on that record.

He had an oportunity durring his MTP interview to change my thinking on him when russert asked if he regreted his IWR vote his answer was NO.

He lost me forever there. I regret his vote. I wish with all my being he had not made it. The fact that he did and after listening to his anouncement speech yesterday seems to still think it was the right thing to do. Leaves him dead to me politically excepted as the only choice against bush.

I think his campaign would turn on a dime if he could only come out against that vote admiting it was a mistake instead of trying to defend it.

[ProfessorPlum]

7. again we risk conflating the IWR vote with support for the war

the IWR actually limited Bush's authority to wage war, and as such was probably a good thing. The vote is not as important as Kerry's support or non-support for the invasion, but everyone, including the media is using "he voted for the war" as a shorthand for actually supporting the war.

Though he stayed mostly quiet about the invasion once it began, he did at least once say that he supported it, during the first debate. That to me is a much bigger problem than the vote itself.

[Egnever]

10. Again I agree

It is not so much the original vote itself. It is the continuing attempt to defend that vote that loses me.

I was very involved when this vote was coming up. I would say I was bettter informed on the situation than many of our elected officials at the time this vote was being made. There were alternatives to the IWR out there that were much more limiting.

I watched this vote go down I know the real reason they voted for it at the time was to get it off the table more than anything else in order to change the focus of the 2000 elections. Not because it was the best bill but to get it off the table. This is where the dems fell short.

Sure it limits bushes war ability a little but hardly stoped him from rushing right in and doing what he was clearly intent on from the begining. It was a mistake to support it. All kerry needs to do is admit that it was a mistake.

It was a mistke to vote for it.

He will never get the nod as long as he tries to justify it.

[ProfessorPlum]

12. that's the problem for me as well.

Defending the invasion is a non-starter for me.

As far as IWR goes, though, do you really think the Democrats could have held out for a better bill in the Republican-controlled Congress? It seems to me that if there was any good in the IWR, it was due to the Democrats fighting for it.

[CWebster]

8. philosophically

I find it abhorrent. Kerry enlisted at a time when the country's young were violently opposed to the sacrifice they were forced to undergo - and for what? Even Kerry testified that war crimes were commonplace. Jesus Christ, this is the nature of war---there is nothing noble or decent or good about it. Good men are pushed beyond their limits and do things they would otherwise not. It is ugly and shameful and for years after 'Nam film and culture attempted to heal the wound while a generation of men, many traumatised and addicted to drugs filled out the ranks of the homeless---abandoned by the culture that now repeats the cycle.

[ProfessorPlum]

11. I agree war is abominable

the young men of that generation were faced with a horrible choice that I hope is never faced by anyone in this country again. I don't think it is right for us to judge their choices from this vantage point. And the way we continue to treat our veterans is really shameful.

[DJcairo]

5. Because all Dean supporters don't live in NH

Simple as that, and the fact that most Americans including most NH voters have a more naunced feeling about the Iraq war. It's not simply a question of knee jerk pacifism to them. Not in light of Sept. 11. Don't forget that NH is an open primary. You don't have to be a Dem to vote in it. That fact seems to have escaped the Dean people.
Also, the popular Gov. Shaheen, her husband is working for Kerry. Hers would be the most coveted endorsement yet for Kerry and he may very well get it.

[KaraokeKarlton]

9. I wouldn't jump to that conclusion

NH and VT work together on quite a few things. Jean Shaheen and Howard Dean worked together quite closely on several things. They worked together on lowering drug costs for both states, for one thing. I also have to add that if Shaheen was THAT popular shw would have beat John Sununu in 2002, but she didn't. NH voters are fickle. The main thing NH people supported Shaheen for was her hard work on NH schools, and they appreciate that. But to call her "popular" is a bit of a stretch. She is respected and most have a positive view of her, but her endorsement in NH wouldn't change any votes. Kerry is too liberal for NH Independents...and his recent NRA statement is going to be his end in NH. NH, like Vermont, Maine and Pennsylvania are big on the 2nd Amendment. Kerry shot himself in the foot on that one and it's going to end up costing him big time.