Why I am afraid of Kerry getting the nomination

[EstimatedProphet]

I don't intend this as a flamewar, so please don't take it that way.

I saw Kerry's victory speech after Iowa, and I swear, it looked more like he lost than won! There was so little energy there, especially given the fact that a week before the primary there was little to no suggestion he had any chance of winning. Dean's losing speech had 10 times more energy than Kerry's!

What I am afraid of happening is: if Kerry gets the nomination, will he be able to swing the undecided votes? I believe Dean could. I KNOW Clark could. I sincerely hope Kerry normally comes off better than he has, from what I have seen (which I admit is very little). I will vote for Kerry if he gets the nomination, and I do not mean this post as another Rovian attack on the Democratic leader just because he's ahead. But, Kerry supporters: does he have the drive and charisma to pull in the people that usually stay home? If not, we're in trouble, because if we have someone who inspires a big "who cares?" across the majority of the US (like, for example Gore did), * will win and darkness will fall like never before in this country.

Again, Kerry supporters: I don't mean this as an attack. I would like for you to give me hope.

[jpgray]

1. There was a NH poll that had something like 85% approve of JK personality

If someone has the link, I would appreciate it. I think what I have in the subject line is accurate, please correct me otherwise. Anyone remember that recent poll?

[IndianaGreen]

10. They don't know Kerry as we do...

They don't know about his lies, his vacillations, his ties to Skull & Bones, his support for Bush's Endless War and PATRIOT Act, and they haven't been reminded of his 100% gun grabbing voting record.

[jpgray]

Iowans knew the candidates quite well

Look, I support Kucinich, and he'd be the only one who'd get my vote if I were voting solely on issues.

But Kerry is one of the best guys on issues/electability, along with Howard Dean (I haven't vetted Clark or Edwards yet). I've sent each of these guys $250 because neither is perfect, but either would make a fine president.

[IndianaGreen]

25. Kerry will keep PATRIOT

and the First Amendment Zones, which he will need when we demonstrate against his imperialist foreign policy.

[LBJBestEver]

37. Fortunately your view represents a minority of our Party.

thank God

[gate of the sun]

38. Sad but true Indiana Green

He will keep the Patriot act.....and the imperialist foreign policy will continue.

[LBJBestEver]

40. Yeah, even though he just said he WOULDN'T an hour ago.

I wouldn't want facts to get in the way of your leftwing conspiracy rant, though.

[gate of the sun]

49. an hour ago he finally decided he would

get rid of the Patriot act? or end the war which one? Sorry I wasn't up on the latest I don't watch TV but get my point. don't be so condescending......it was just an hour ago

[cthrumatrix]

45. I don't want a washington insider with his voting record on the patriot

act and the war....enough of this

[flpoljunkie]

57. Kerry won in Iowa across all voting categories, age, income, gender...

Kerry's support was broad-based in Iowa, and is shaping up to be likewise in New Hampshire. He also won the union vote in Iowa.

[CalebHayes]

14. Give him a break. He has been a great senator for a million years.

[NewHampster]

19. Seems more like two million to me

[intheozone]

32. Exactly, and it makes me wonder if

he is part of the problem rather than the solution.

When he spoke against war with Iraq and then voted for the IWR, I told myself I could not support him for president. If he is the candidate, I don't know, as of today, i just don't know that I could vote for him. I definitely could not vote for Bush or any repub, but I just don't feel (as of today) that I would want to vote for Kerry. I am totally uninspired by and somewhat suspicious of him!

Hopefully, if he becomes the candidate my feelings will change.

edit to correct typo.

[Cocoa]

20. lol

Skull and Bones. :-)

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

51. Jesus Christ!

Long knives!

[nathan_avery1985]

54. wait a second-- Wellstone voted for the Patriot Act!!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the Patriot Act.

BUT--

Just about every single liberal senator, including the late Paul Wellstone (perhaps the icon of progressivism in the Senate voted for the Patriot Act. I don't know what made them all do it, but they all did it. And when Kerry's voting on the same side as Wellstone, Kennedy, Boxer, and Byrd, we really have to question whether or note he's being an "imperialist."

[newyawker99]

55. Hi nathan_avery1985!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[BootinUp]

17. I think that was a NH poll shown on CNN yesterday

[jpgray]

18. OK, I'll edit the subject--thanks (nt)

[leyton]

33. If that's true, we may be in good shape.

Bush's strongest point is his personality; lots of people like him personally but don't like his policies. We can match him on the policies; we need to match him on the personality. We need Kerry or Edwards.

[JI7]

2. it wasn't really a victory speech, he was going into issues

he was getting specific on the issues. he wasn't really giving a victory speech there and good thing since it's only iowa. i still have questions as to whether he will win in new hampshire.

[milkyway]

27. You're right, and Dean's speech wasn't meant to be a concession speech,

which is when you concede defeat. Dean hadn't lost the nomination, why should he concede? Besides, more than an hour earlier he had gone on Larry King and acknowledged that Kerry had won the caucuses.

[JI7]

3. you should watch the cspan town hall meeting from friday i believe

they repeated it yesterday. i think you can get it at the cspan website also. but it was amazing to watch.

[EstimatedProphet]

12. OK

Maybe that will give me a better idea.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. I like Kerry's personality

I'll admit he doesn't seem to be as excited as Dean but he's a good speaker, knows what he's talking about, sometimes has great catch phrases "Bring it on", and his sense of humor is second only to Al Sharpton's (who hosted SNL).

[mopinko]

11. great catch phrases "Bring it on",

puleeze! this is the kind of shit we are supposed to be trying to rid the world of.

[milkyway]

28. Kerry looks downright silly when he says "Bring it on," like a bad actor.

[Lobo_13]

39. You think that's funny

he doesn't seem to register the deep irony in his "We need solutions, not slogans." line.

He has no discernible sense of humor. In fact, he reminds me of one of the blue bloods in "Gosford Park".

[krkaufman]

62. Makes me cringe

> Kerry looks downright silly when he says "Bring
> it on," like a bad actor.

I now involuntarily cringe as soon as I hear him starting into this soundbyte, with: "I know something about aircraft carriers...."

And it's gotten even worse lately, with a monotone, repetitious "Bring it on!... Bring it on!...", with the crowd chanting with him.

p.s. Voting Kerry, if all other Dems make me.

[TheDonkey]

5. He was sick too....

Kerry's never going to have as much energy as Dean. But he definetly knows what he's talking about and can be lively.

Check out a town hall meeting with Kerry on C-Span or even watch him play ice hockey.

[jpgray]

8. Good point, Dean does own him in energy

But there are other things I enjoy about Kerry's speaking style.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. What I don't want to happen

is Kerry trying to ride to victory on his laurels. I really believe the reason his campaign seemed to falter a while back was because he wasn't getting out his opinions about things for a long time, but just figured folks would look at his record and then decide to vote for him. His campaign took off when he went out and started talking policy. I think that, if he is the nominee, it is vital that he keep on doing this, plus hitting Bush harder and harder. This is not the time to keep the gloves on when it comes to that lying weasel.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

7. John "Bob Dole" Kerry

will cost us the election.

[mopinko]

13. ditto

[IndianaGreen]

26. Kerry is unelectable

He will be attacked by both the Left and the Right. His flip-flopping on the issues will be replayed in the media until the voters decide to trust Bush over Kerry.

Kerry is an electoral disaster waiting to happen!

[cthrumatrix]

43. ditto

[JVS]

64. You are correct

[SheilaT]

9. Kerry

voted for IWR. For No Child Left Behind. He did not vote to stop the change in overtime rules.

Most of his money comes from corporate donations.

Need I say more?

[emulatorloo]

21. Yes you need to dig further on these issues

and see where Kerry stands rather than saying they are black and white issues.

[SheilaT]

47. Well, to me they are black and white issues.

Kerry and every other senator and congressman got thousands of phone calls and emails and faxes and letters begging them not to vote for the IWR. Millions of people took to the streets to try to stop the war. Kerry was one of those (along with Edwards and Hillary Clinton, just to name two) who was bamboozled by the lies the administration told.

And anyone who was paying any attention to what's been going on in Texas's school system knew full well before Bush took office that the schools in that state were proceeding from bad to worse under his administration. It was obvious to some of us out there that No Child Left Behind was an utter sham and not even given adequate funding.

So, spare me the apologies, but Kerry doesn't do it for me.

[Loren645]

65. This guy nailed it.

"It's not hard to figure out why so many of the Democrats in this race voted for the Iraq resolution. If the war went well, as the first gulf war did, opposition would be fatal for any Democrat running for the White House. What they didn't anticipate was that it would not go so well.

Now, Mr. Kerry is left to explain why he didn't vote against the war, while legions flock to Dr. Dean in anger over Iraq. Opposing the war early was a huge risk. But Dr. Dean has confirmed what Lieutenant Kerry discovered in Vietnam: Fortune favors the bold."

http://www.sunspot.net/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.chapman16jan16,0,1414464.story?coll=bal-oped-headlines

[cthrumatrix]

42. nope ...Kerry is being "untouched" by the media....major red flag

[bigtree]

15. John Kerry's fortitude

:thumbsup:

[oasis]

16. The record turnout in Iowa shows that people are sick of Bush. If we

register voters and get absentee ballot request forms to shut-ins and the elderly, we'll be in good shape.

[emulatorloo]

22. He was sick that night -- see his other speeches on CSPAN n/t

[zulchzulu]

23. Yeah...no energy at all...what a load...

I was there in Iowa and saw it firsthand. Packed houses, great enthusiasm for Kerry and oh, yeah, um, he beat Dean by 20% points.

Maybe you missed the memo.

His speech in Des Moines on Tuesday night was electric. I have it on videotape.

But hey, thanks for playing.

[Cocoa]

24. maybe my personal testimonial will help

Before Iowa, I was dithering between Gephardt and Kucinich. I respected Kerry, but his campaign didn't seem to be catching on, and his wealth turned me off a little, and he wasn't quite as progressive as I prefer.

But as soon as he won Iowa, I became enthusiastic about him, relieved really at the chance we might soon coalesce around a strong candidate.

From what I've seen, polls and interviews with voters, it seems this has happened with a lot of people. We want to get this primary over and get on to a showdown with Bush as soon as possible, and Kerry looks fantastic as the guy to take him on.

[mvd]

30. And he's gotten better with the "aloofness" thing

IMO at least. He's been more focused, and he's listened well to people in crowds. I'm not as worried about him as I was in the beginning of the campaign. From what I've seen, he's attracting some Republicans - including someone in my family who's been voting Republican.

[Octafish]

29. The guy is humble.

John Kerry's record speaks for itself.

[IowaBiker]

31. Were you there?

Or did you see it on the little box?

Those in attendance found it a very good speech.

See the candidates in person instead of through the media filter and you'll get a better understanding of what is going on.


--Brian

[EstimatedProphet]

36. I saw it on the little box

like most of America. That's my point. Most of America gets its opinions of the candidates from the little box, not from being there in person.

What I don't want is a repeat of 2000. there were 2 major things that the mighty Wurlitzer played over and over again in 2000: 1) Gore made up fanciful stories like inventing the internet, and 2) gore was the stiffest man in the world.

This is my point. The evil ones made it to the White House without even bringing up issues when they could. The kinds of things that bring the undecided voters out are no longer issues-it's how the candidate looks.

I'm not at all opposed to a Kerry presidency. I am opposed to a Bush presidency. A lot of people in this thread have reassured me that Kerry isn't as stiff as he came off, and that's encouraging. I admit I haven't gotten much exposure to him yet. I am not counting him out. I just don't want a repeat of 2000.

[Sweetpea]

34. I don't know the fear.

Kerry was even leading on a AOL poll where anyone can vote. I am assuming republicans as well as undecideds were voting.

[Strelnikov_]

35. Past Ideological Credentials Don't Count

It's winning the presidency that matters. When Kerry announced, I felt he had the best chance of the candidates at that time. When Clark announced, I put my resources behind him, after researching his position/issues at the time. Over time, it appears that his positions are close enough to mine to continue my support as the candidate best able to take the Presidency at this critical time in our country.

Yes, I would have liked a Paul Wellstone presidency, or that of another progressive, which I consider Kerry, Edwards or Dean to be. However, I believe that this country is threatened by one of the most strategically
incompetent administrations in history. Tax cuts will not immediately destroy this nation, homophobia will not immediately destroy this nation. However, continuation of a policy of 'preventative wars' not supported by any of the other world powers WILL destroy this nation, in surprisingly short order. Therefore, it is essential that the current administration be removed from office, and why I feel that we must select the candidate best able to resist the coming attacks from the Rove media (RM), and therefore take the Presidency.

Clark - What is the RM going to be able to carry over from the primary to use against Clark. That he voted Republican? That he complemented the administration? The real reason, the real fear, that the Republican power structure has about Clark is that he left the farm, thus negating one of their main pillars, that being that their ideology is in ascension. I am not a Political Scientist, but it is my understanding that studies indicate people follow a herd mentality, particularly in politics. That is, they tend to trend toward the position they feel others are trending to. Why do you think the Republicans have invested so heavily in controlling the media message? Why do you think the RM media is tearing down Clark for peripheral issues at every chance? Can you imagine the power of a Clark message in the GE that he once voted Republican, but that he is now a Democrat because the Republicans have left his values and the values of the American people behind. This message will resonate to the vote that DOES count in the GE, the 10% in the middle, for which the Republican message is losing it’s appeal.

Kerry – How do you think the ‘Kerry/Hanoi Jane’, ‘Kerry more liberal than Ted Kennedy’ message is going play with the 10%? Why do you think the RM is fawning all over Kerry? Possibly because they know their best chance to derail their biggest worry (Clark) is in the Primary? Again, I have no serious ideological concerns with Kerry. But this is not an election about ideology, I am afraid it is an election about the survival of our democracy. As a side note, Kerry’s standing has dropped significantly in my books due to his use of the RM gotcha ploys to his own advantage (Moore/Deserter, General/Lieutenant, etc.).

Edwards – ‘Trial lawyer/inexperienced’ attacks can be expected in the GM. However, he may have the charisma to counter these negative attacks (Kennedyesque). I still have to go with Clark as our best bet to remove the current administration.

Dean – ‘Medical waiver, then went skiing’ Need I say more? Nothing against the candidate or his message, for which I am grateful, but I feel that this attack will resonate with the 10% in the GE in a way that is not favorable to our candidate.

I hate to be so calculating, having spent a lifetime as a Progressive, but I have seen so many of my candidates go down due to a few trivial talking points leveled by the right (tax and spend liberal, Willie Horton, Invented the Internet).

In words that Our Great Leader (praise be his name to Christ) would use, I am afraid this one is for all the mothballs, uh, marbles.

One final thought. If they are afraid of Patton, why are we going to lead the fight with Monty?

[oasis]

41. Good post liondelrio, and welcome to DU.

:hi:

[fabius]

46. Patton vs. Monty

I month or so ago, I was making the case for Dean as Patton. "Rommel you son of a b***" I read your BOOK!" Not in military terms but as a contest. Who is bold, steals the enemy's playbook, turns the enemy on both flanks, blunt, and charismatic, and has the resources to win.

I can see Clark having these same qualities politically. It upsets the standard Repug applecart. He takes the initiative and doesn't just respond to RW talking points. Keeps 'em off balance. "I can't prove that Bush wasn't AWOL" LOL!

Kerry is a frontal assault Monty-style against a dug-in enemy. Of course Monty won, so that's the good thing. But we'll need a huge amount of ammo (money). If that's what the voters want, that's what we'll get.

Edwards is the "talk 'em into surrendering and make 'em like it" option. I'm beginning to think maybe he can do it, too.

[UTUSN]

44. Why?------You're a Dem and You Don't Wanna WIN? n/t

[Enjolras]

48. Everybody's afraid of somebody getting the nomination

A lot of Dems are afraid of Dean getting the nomination. I'm afraid of Edwards getting it. Of course, the GOP strategy of naming whomever the currnet front runner is as "exactly the person we want to run against", coupled with the Democratic obsession with tinfoil hat conspiracies hatched by the GOP, perpetuates the indecision.

Given Howard Dean's record as a centrist, fiscally responsible governor, and the fact that governors historically fare much better than senators in presidential races, and the fact that Dean is anything but a "Washington insider", how exactly is John Kerry more electable? This is also not a swipe against Kerry, who happens to be my second choice. That's also against DU's new make-nice rules anyway, I believe. I'm just trying to understand.

The RNC now says it salivates at the prospect of campaigning against Kerry. Sound familiar? It should. They said the same thing about Dean when he was the front runner.

[jmags]

50. In my opinion what makes Dean "unelectable"

is the fact that we are trying to oust a dirty, rotten administration who will use the whole, "be scared, don't switch wartime leaders, we must stay on the path to victory" nonsense in a much more effective way against Dean than a Kerry or Clark.

Of course Dean would be a wonderful leader in foriegn policy, as would all the democratic nominees, but in terms of perception in electoral politics, he's weak in this issue.
I have to say after a week of becoming steadily more optimistic about our chances of winning the election, some people on this thread really make me wonder what their real goals are.
We've got 4 or 5 candidates that have a very real chance in winning the 04 election. They all have tremendous qualities we could be proud of, they all have some qualities and views we may not agree with.
But make no mistake, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, John Edwards, and the rest would all change our country for the better.
Over the past week, I have talked to about 10 republicans who have been fed up with this admin to the point where they are actively listening to the democratic candidates. Of those 10, all but 1 said they would vote for Kerry, with less saying they would vote for the other candidates.
I also read on a nonpolitical message board I participate on outside of this a post that really struck home how important this election is, and how good of a chance we have regardless.
Someone on the board was posting from Kuwait, where he had just been shipped to, and after someone asked him what the political sentiment of the troops was, he answered that the good majority wanted to vote for anyone but Bush.
This election is ours for the taking, so please, whenever the nominee is finally decided, even if he is your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th or worse choice, think of how much they will contrast with Bush - even Lieberman.
Today I support Kerry, but if he does not win the nomination, I am ready to throw my dollars and full support to whomever wins to make sure America wins in November.

[Enjolras]

53. I'm just not quite that partisan

I just can't be part of the ABB crowd. I can think of a couple of Dem nominees, who shall remain nameless, that would be little if any improvement.

Remember that Gore had even better foreign policy credentials than Kerry, and far better than or Dean or Edwards or Bush. And please don't bother reminding me that Gore "won" the election. A 500,000 vote margin out of over 100 million cast is anything but a solid margin.

Sometimes I do get the impression that the primaries are sort of rigged, like the fix is in somehow. I suspect the media is complicit, if there really is a "fix", but I suspect collusion with the DNC is just as likely as with the GOP. Terry McAulliffe wants a nominee picked E-A-R-L-Y!!! I get the impression the DNC wants the nominee would like the front runner coming out of the NH primary to be anointed. No proof, mind you, just a hunch.

Any thoughts?

[jmags]

56. I think you're digging so hard for a conspiracy

that you are ignoring what reality has to offer.

Of course McAulliffe wants a nominee picked early. If that happens, then that candidate can save his money for the general election, and will not have to deal with other dem candidates tarnishing his image on the campaign trail.

I wonder what world you have lived in over the last three years to seriously think that any dem candidate would be "little if any" improvement. Obviously, were Lieberman our candidate (which isn't going to happen) he would be less of an improvement in comparison with other candidates. But even he would represent a vast improvement over what we currently have in the White House.

Would Lieberman dismiss all scientific reports on the environment in favor of industry lobbyists. Would he have weakened the Clean Air act, increased pollutants in water, kill the Superfund support, passed two tax cuts that destroyed our surplus, etc etc etc

The list goes on forever. I don't care who the Democratic candidate is, there is no comparison between him and the Bush admin. The Bush admin are that bad, and God knows what another four years of his direction on our country would look like. I couldn't possibly contribute to that happen just because the Dem candidate has flaws himself. You are putting your own hubris and arrogance on top of what is good for the country.

[snyttri]

52. Gore could unify the Party by holding national office. Other bland figures

do not have that advantage.

[Snivi Yllom]

58. I see the Dean Kerry differences as this

I think Dean has stumbled and is still learning how to campaign. he will figure it out. Plenty of time.

Kerry is a life long politician witha lifetime of political baggage and all the symptoms life long politicians have. Voters can smell this and identify it from a mile away.

[EstimatedProphet]

59. You might have something there

BTW if you're a backwards Molly Ivins, does that apply to your politics too? Hope not! I like Molly...

[THUNDER HANDS]

60. Kerry is going to charm your brain

Your heart will follow.

[molly]

61. Most voters like a mature classy man

[Loren645]

63. I know. He's the human valium.

They've been interviewing folks in the NH crowd, undecideds,
who were rolling their eyes and complaining he was boring.
And he is. Conason was right. My god, the TV
networks gave up on his victory speech in Iowa and finally cut away
as he rambled on. A newpaper today said he "rambled on for 4&1/2
minutes after someone asked how he could vote for the IWR.
I personally think it's at least partly strategy. Someone
asks something uncomfortable, stupify 'em with mumbo jumbo.
(I gues he answered it. Don't remember.)

You know, like a pol.

And he's not gonna change at this point in his life.
It's hard wired.

[GalleryGod]

67. And your guy is Tony Robbins,Right ? Clark= Zoloft.

Please! With the last minute slurs from folks with "last minute posting totals".

I think you're "Flying under False Colors:scared:" by the way.

[GalleryGod]

66. Yeah, You did.

Mr. 156 ? Where you bloggin' out of tonight?
:puffpiece: :dem: