Can anyone explain to me why Kerry is losing to Dean in Mass?

[Sean Reynolds]

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/localRegional.bg?articleid=30

In the last poll Dean was at 33% to Kerry's 24%. How can a guy from Vermont, be beating a guy from Massachusetts IN Massachusetts? I don't understand this, I thought Kerry was a popular senator.

[Hep]

1. Yeah I can explain it

Kerry is out like New Coke.

[molly]

2. Young - immature - idealogical - uninformed voters?

[Sean Reynolds]

3. 33% of all Massachusetts is that way?

Hm, that's a lot of people. Could it be that the liberals in Massachusetts feel Kerry has sold 'em out?

[molly]

9. How would Kerry "sell them out"?

it could be something just as simple as that the primaries haven't happened yet. I spoke with someone today who didn't even know how many DEM candidates were running. We are miles away and we have miles to go.

[Sean Reynolds]

13. Hm, maybe his vote for the Iraq war?

Read the article, it says Dean gets most his support from people that call themselves 'liberal'.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[adadem]

60. Yes he did n/t

[trumad]

5. Young - immature - idealogical - uninformed voters

as opposed to old, stuffy, ketshup eating snobs.

[blm]

10. Get real, trumad. You know the way it REALLY works.

BushInc. NEEDS Kerry out in the primaries and used every wedge they could in the media to do it. Dean benefitted from their constant and positive attention for much of last year, while Kerry was disparaged regularly.

Here's your reason....the BCCI trial in England starts Jan. 13. BushInc. NEEDED Kerry off the national stage before it heated up again because it all links to 9-11. Nice of so many Dems to accomodate the needs of the BFEE.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=977792&mesg_id=977792

[HFishbine]

20. Funny

Kerry had a national audience yesterday, and didn't mention a thing about it. Are you sure he's not waiting until he's the king of the world?

[JVS]

26. Yeah, and he doesn't want a Hussein trial where the ugly truth will come..

out that the Republicans are the ones who supplied Iraq with any possible WMD's. Kerry is covering for his pals

[Monte Carlo]

28. That's nonsense. Hussein will get a trial...

... Kerry knows this, and knows that he belongs there. This tinfoil hat stuff is getting out of hand.

[JVS]

29. Then why is Kerry opposed to a trial?

[Monte Carlo]

31. He's not opposed to a trial.

He just said that Dean's crazy if he needs a trial to know that Saddam is guilty. We're not talking about some obscure perp, here.

[JVS]

35. He seems to want to minimize the need for a trial

You need a trial just so that things go officially on record.

If Kerry wants to make hay of the issue one way it can go against him the other way. Choices have consequences.

[Monte Carlo]

39. But there will be a trial.

Saddam will get his day in court (fixed or not), and he will either be locked in a box for the rest of his life or just killed outright. When Dean, the Democratic front-runner, brings these questions up, he makes them issues, makes them battles. We have very little time to waste in the public forum for details about Saddam's guilt.

[JVS]

41. You are just mad that Kerry is in bed with Bush

He could have been a contender, now he's nothing

[Monte Carlo]

45. I must be.

Maybe it's that whole Skull n' Bones thing. Thanks for talking.

[JVS]

My Pleasure

[blm]

48. If Kerry was in bed with Bush, he'd be winning.

The GOP controlled media picked their Dem nominee last spring.

[Cheswick2.0]

58. Dean brings these things up and makes them issues?

I am sure it is the ketsup eating appeasers who are always bringing this up.

[Monte Carlo]

89. Yes, Dean keeps bringing these non-issues up and makes them issues.

...by the very fact that he's talking about it. He's no longer the underdog, so he'd better learn to stop himself from saying something stupid.

[Cheswick2.0]

106. nope

but thanks for playing!

[blm]

64. That's nutty. Kerry never said that and you are spinning his words

to draw a conclusion that is patently absurd.

[blm]

109. Have you tried reading the WHOLE FTN transcript?

Kerry was saying you didn't NEED to have a trial before you KNEW Saddam was guilty. That's ALL. Stop spinning. Especially when Dean has the WORST civil liberties record of ANY of the candidates.

"Ms. WALTER: I'm sorry. That if indeed he is the nominee that you've really opened up a great line of attack for Republicans and the piling-on effect here could really impact him as the nominee negatively.

Sen. KERRY: Please, this race against George Bush is going to be a tough race. If you don't think Karl Rove and George Bush aren't sitting there waiting for these statements to be held accountable when they run, if he's the nominee, you're kidding yourselves. I mean, the fact is that we didn't open any of this up. Howard Dean made these statements. Howard Dean is the one who said he doesn't think we're safer with the capture of Saddam Hussein. Howard Dean is the one who said he didn't know whether or not he could have a jury trial--or he might have a jury trial before he calls him guilty even though Saddam Hussein himself announced he's guilty. Howard Dean is the one who said we need the permission of the UN to do these things. This is a campaign about the presidency of the United States of America.

Ms. WALTER: D--do you...

Sen. KERRY: And we Democrats need to choose the strongest nominee possible to go up against him. If he can't answer those questions adequately now he's not going to be able to answer them when George Bush and Karl Rove go at him."

[MercutioATC]

54. Yeah, that's it. Kerry's positions and campaign strategy had NOTHING to

to with it...then again it COULD be supporters who insist on using :tinfoilhat: phrases like "BFEE".

Kerry's where he is because of Kerry (and his campaign staff). Did Graham drop out because of Bush? Are all of the candidates polling in the single digits "victims"? Sometimes the conspiracy theories go a little to far to make sense.

[blm]

67. Yeah...and the media was FOR Gore, too.

That's why he is in the White House today.

[MercutioATC]

72. What does that have to do with your original post (that I replied to)

???

Are you seriously stating (as you seem to have stated above) that Kerry's poor showing is solely a machination of the GOP and not a result of the way his positions and campaign in general have been received by voters?

[blm]

94. They have been received by voters through the MEDIA .

Go check out Frank Luntz' focus groups on the Dem candidates from March and then every one after and then get back to me with what you learn.

Manipulation 101.

[MercutioATC]

110. Dean's campaign is 550,000+ strong and he has over 160,000 MeetUp members

...that's not the media. That's grassroots support.

Dean aside, the media's comments about Kerry aside, do you really feel that Kerry has run a campaign thus far that should have him in front by now? Even here at DU, there have been a considerable number of posts disagreeing with Kerry's positions and the way he's handled his campaign. That's not the media...that's a group of Democrats who are more politically active and better informed politically that the majority of the general population.

Look at Newsweek's cover this week "Doubts About Dean". Look at Time's cover "Who is the Real Dean?". Are these examples of the media attacking Kerry and bolstering the images of other candidates?

Kerry's deserved the coverage he's received, for the most part. Dean has, too. Hell, they ALL have. It's a cop-out to accuse the media of destroying your chosen candidate when he's run a campaign the way Kerry has.

[jeter]

87. bml, still sticking to your old excuses

Yes. It's Bush's fault that Kerry is running second in his home state. Because the Bush campaign are terrified of Kerry for some unknown reason.

It beats the alternative explanation. The one where Kerry is just a bad candidate.

[cindyw]

15. How about Experienced - responsible - well read voters.

n/t

[Scott Lee]

23. LOL! You have identified the problem the DLC is now facing.

well done.

[Cheswick2.0]

56. old tire ketsup eating appeasement wing of the Democratic party

n/t

[Mass_Liberal]

46. preach it trumad

preach it.

[JVS]

24. What, they don't want to get drafted for Kerry's war?

How childish they are!

[JohnKleeb]

30. Kerry's war?

This is Bush's war, it was he not Kerry who did the lying, Bush not Kerry who did the insulting of the anti war protesters, Kerry screwed up by voting AYE but this by no means is his war. I think you all forget that an anti Iraq war person can support Kerry, Ive looked at some of his congressional endorsements, and many of them including Ted Kennedy voted against IWR, I am merely saying that many people who opposed the war don't totally depise Kerry, Its my opinion that the "top tier" candiates were all for a middle ground, IMO that is they werent totally for a war like say Bush or fully against it, its a shame that Kerry voted yes though because ironically I think many of his strongest critics would be supporters. I think I would be supporting him if he had opposed it no problem. Heck if DK withdraws, I think he may be my guy, but I am undecided now because I have been impressed with Senator Edwards as of late.

[JVS]

33. His war in the sense that it belongs to everyone in government supporting.

it.

He helped make it happen and he's going to experience negative results for it.

[Monte Carlo]

36. Why stop there? Have you ever bought gasoline?

I mean, just as an academic thought experiment, why stop at the Senators? Isn't this whole war over oil and energy dollars? How much of our gas money goes to Saudi-backed terrorists and fat, bloated capitalists?

[JVS]

37. I voted Democrat so that stupid shit like this war wouldn't ride

Problem is that some Democrats don't seem to think that it is important enough to stop Bush.

[Monte Carlo]

42. Stopping Bush cannot be our only priority...

... if we expect to run this country. A high-priority, yes, but not the only one. Bush's antics aside, there has been a pressing concern about how to deal with Saddam in this country, and sometimes the only way to keep him contained and maintain diplomatic control was through the threat of force, much like Clinton did during his time. We could not just throw this concern aside because Bush wanted to exploit it.

And besides, other than Iraq, Kerry has been there leading filibusters against all sorts of nasty legislation and nominees. He's one of the good guys, remember that.

[JVS]

47. Stopping the war was worthy of top priority!

What the hell did we gain by caving to Bush on that one?

[Monte Carlo]

51. Containing Saddam has always been a top priority, too...

... and again, we could not just abandon that just because Bush wanted to exploit it. We cannot allow our enemy to define us. Clinton was one of the toughest world leaders on Saddam.

[JVS]

52. He looked pretty well contained before the war

Where is the proof that he'd become a more menacing threat. And if he was so bad, why didn't Clinton take him out? Or why not just have him assasinated instead of dragging us into war and costly occupation?

[Monte Carlo]

92. That's because of the threat of force.

... because WMD's and wars of aggression were made too risky for him by that policy. Don't waste your time with rhetorical questions.

[JVS]

101. Do you support the war?

[Monte Carlo]

102. No, I don't.

No one supports war just for war's sake. But we cannot be unwilling to fight in this slightly-mad world.

[JVS]

105. I never advocated pacifism. I just think that Clinton's way of dealng....

with Hussein were better than Bush's ways and that Kerry should not have enabled Bush.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blm]

65. This should be edited. That kind of talk isn't allowed.

.

[dsc]

99. nothing like blaming the voters

I hope for Kerry's sake he isn't doing this.

[Monte Carlo]

4. Lost what?

Polls are polls - an observation and not much more. This thing is not over yet, no matter how much some people would like it to be.

Kerry IS a popular Senator. He's won some tough battles here.

[Sean Reynolds]

7. But Kerry should be KILLING Dean!

It's his home state for hell sakes!

[Monte Carlo]

12. Well Kerry has had some problems, hasn't he?

That's not to say thing cannot change. Exactly one poll will count in this race.

[Clark4Prez]

6. Looking past?

It seems to happen in collegiate sports all the time. A top rated school will play MiddleofNowhere State and get their tails kicked.

The reason is that they were so sure of victory, they didn't worry about them and looked past to the next game against a big rival. I can't say for sure that this happened to Kerry, but, I would bet that some adviser said, "We have Mass locked up, let's work Iowa and NH.

[Sean Reynolds]

8. Well I think the same happened in NH as well.

A year ago Kerry took NH for granted, no one thought Dean would actually win it. Now he's falling fast; Clark close to beating him.

[molly]

14. Sean, HD will NEVER be our president

get used to it.

[Sean Reynolds]

16. hahaha

At least he has a better chance than Kerry.

[molly]

55. You are wrong on this one -

[Sean Reynolds]

95. Oh?

Why do the latest poll numbers have Dean doing best against Bush? How is it Kerry probably has NO chance at winning the nomination? They only way Kerry has a chance at the WH is A) Dean is killed or B) He runs 3rd party.

Right now it's a Dean/Clark race, not a Dean/Kerry race.

[Scott Lee]

18. The Wright Bros. will never fly, the moon landing was faked, etc.

GAWD I love it here!

[molly]

59. OK - whatever you say - however - Howard Dean will never

lead this country because he lives in a land in his own mind that does not exist. The man thinks that he can seal his records, convince people that the book of Job exists in the new testament and that he will win the nomination and balance the budget within his FIRST 7 years of presidency. What's wrong with this picture?

[ryharrin]

68. Why do you think he couldn't balance the budget in his first seven years?

And yes, he can seal his records. Every governor does it. And about the Job thing, it was a question that got a quick answer, because it isn't incredibly important.

[molly]

76. Please detail those govenors' records sealed - I don't think

EVERY govenor does it.

If you have worked for over 20-30 years as I have, you will know hat the job market has never been this bad - especially for us hi-tech-business types. Anyone for that matter.

[Scott Lee]

85. Mark this in your calendar: President Howard Brush Dean

coming soon to a cable channel near you:

January 2005.

[aquart]

11. Maybe they feel like I do.

When I read that MY senators, two Democrats, had voted for the war, I felt like I'd been hit in the gut.

I never expected it. Never thought it was even possible.

I'm still waiting for the apology.

Maybe the Massachusetts Dems feel the same way.

[blm]

19. So, they don't know that Dean supported a resolution allowing Bush final

say on use of force?

Or did Dean and the media convince too many that Dean was antiwar and Kerry was prowar? Demagoguery can be very confusing for many people.

[Scott Lee]

22. the tire around Kerry's neck - his IWR vote

And he cannot escape it, try as he might. Facts are facts - Kerry voted for war. He did so because he handed Bushhole a blank check with the IWR, knowing full well that given a third of a chance, the Warchimp would invade and occupy.

John Kerry, you are not given a pass on this. Owne your error, and enjoy the ride down.

[blm]

49. Dean gets a pass from those dumb enough to believe he was antiwar.

And the media helped promote that lie.

[ryharrin]

69. Even if Dean supported Biden-Lugar, he

turned around on the issue quickly enough, especially after it was evident that Saddam was co-operating with the weapons inspectors.

[JVS]

71. Changing your mind is always wrong, if you're Dean.

Of course offereing tortured excuses and interpretations in an effort to justify what you've done is the epitome of integrity.

[blm]

73. IF? You mean the straight talker hasn't made it clear

that his position was actually closer to Kerry's and the others?

They protested the way Bush went about it, too. But THEY were being called prowar while Dean was labeled antiwar.

Honesty means NOTHING to the Dean camp. Nothing.

[Tadah]

113. controversy gets eyeballs

that's because Dean supporters like ignore Dean's background at the expense of taking on Bush (even under false pretenses) and 60 media travel with Dean so the allegations get lost in all the stories that they write.

[Scott Lee]

84. Dean said he was anti-Iraq war. And he is.

He never said he was anti war in principle. There is no such candidate from the Democratic side.

[auntpattywatty]

17. That's easy-Dean is a better choice

[fricasseed_gourmet_rat]

21. Because Dean doesn't look like a melting wax dummy!

Just kidding. I believe them both to be very respectable Democrats. Nevertheless, Massachusetts residents will ultimately be affected by "outside" opinion -- there are a lot of people who will abandon Kerry if he's faltering. After all, Dean is a fellow "New Englander" (well, he's really a New Yorker, but you know the drill) -- I think they'd be far less likely to abandon Kerry for someone who's less "close to home."

[Killarney]

25. Two reasons

One reason is his vote on the Iraq War. A lot of people hold that against him.

Second reason is that he doesn't connect with people as easily as Dean does. The grassroots support Dean has in Mass is incredible. He just fires people up. I haven't seen that kind of passionate support for Kerry.

I personally highly respect Kerry and would be proud to have him as my President. I think he's qualified and I think he'd do a great job. Yeah, he has the bad Iraq vote on his record, but he and Kennedy have done so much good in the Senate, I think that outweighs the one bad vote. :)

[KC21304]

50. You would think so, wouldn't you ?

But people are willing to give Kerry the death penalty on his Iraq vote and give Dean a pass on his centrist-pro utility-pro-business votes during his governorship and take his word that if he is elected President he will be more liberal.

Why take a chance on getting a liberal when you have one running from your own state? With one of the best, if not the best, liberal-environmental record in Washington.

It is nice to see some of the same people who complained about the press finding fault with Gore's demeanor and appearance, now bringing up those same things about Kerry.

I'm not talking about you Killarney, but the Dems in general from Ma going for Dean.

[Monte Carlo]

27. This is a tangent, but the Herald is a Murdoch-owned tabloid...

... and has never missed an opportunity to take a crap on Kerry, or Kennedy, or any other MA Democrat for that matter.

[edzontar]

32. Kerry's miserable performance in yesterday's debate explains it all.

He should be ahead in Mass by double-digits.

But he voted poorly on the war, and has been a terrible campaigner ever since.

His boring and predictable attacks on Dean yesterday did him no good at all.

I am from MASS, and used to support him.


But so far, he is blowing it, big time.

[Scott Lee]

86. He was such a joke I almost pitied him.

That hang dog, beat up look of his and the way he did nothing but try to attack Dean on everything from hell to breakfast.

When people saw Kerry on that debate, they were looking at an ex-candidate.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[molly]

107. Just you - just you

I thought he looked terrific and extremely presidential.

[Mass_Liberal]

38. Kerry is losing because

despite a lifetime of mostly good votes, he buckled when it really counted. That's why he's losing. He's not a fresh face, and plenty of people have chosen other candidates.

[flpoljunkie]

70. Yep, those who have bought into DLC Dean's "Washington outsider "

palaver, cynical anti-war posturing, and hot, faux populist rhetoric. Those who are paying attention to Dean's record in Vermont know that he is a phony. Unfortunately, most have not been been paying attention--until now.

Fouling your own nest didn't work for Nader; and it won't work for Dean.

[CWebster]

40. Man, there isn't much to be mystified about

He is a dud.

[sfecap]

43. Because...

Very early in his campaign, he and his staff seriously underestimated the desire of Howard Dean to be President.

Kerry thought he had a lock on the nomination, he "deserved" it.

He thought he would coast. He got run over instead.

Since then he's run a campaign full of amaturish mistakes, and forgot that the one to beat was *, not Dean.

[Adjoran]

44. He IS a popular Senator

But he has run a pitiful campaign so far. The two "restructurings" haven't seemed to do the trick. His fundraising is drying up.

On paper, Kerry is as well qualified as they come. And I salute the guy for believing enough in himself and his cause to use his own money for the campaign. But with Dean and Clark both drawing in 8-figure numbers in donations for the last quarter, things don't look good for the Senator.

We have had other potential Presidents in the past who also had the problem of great resumes but ineffective campaigns. Scoop Jackson and Mo Udall come immediately to mind, also Joe Biden. They just didn't get people excited enough.

[curse10]

57. The only good reason I've found for not supporting Kerry

is because I'd lose him as my senator. Mitt Romney would appoint someone in his place if he were to win the Presidency. I know more than one person in Mass who feels this way and that is why they are going with another candidate. And, I know my boyfriend will by voting for Al Sharpton unless it's close between Kerry and Dean then he'll go with Kerry. There are lots of reasons why any person is ahead or behind in the polls.

Nice try.

[Mass_Liberal]

63. I'm reading your bottom line thingy

you would vote for lieberman above Dean?

[curse10]

74. You betcha

Dean's politics are even less intune with mine that Lieberman. It's sad, but true.

[AlGore-08.com]

61. I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the 2000 selection yet

Every time they poll on whether Smirk was legitimately elected, there is around 40% who say that he wasn't. Not surprisingly, that 40% is overwhelming Democrats. The last poll I saw on this was taken last August, and the percentage had not changed.

The day after the Florida electors weren't challenged, Kerry was interviewed on television, and he was asked point blank why he didn't challenge them. His answer was: "Nobody asked me to." Then, without hesitation, he announced that he was running for President in 2004.

Well, either his staff never told him about the thousands of letters and phone calls and emails he got begging him to challenge the electors or he lied through his teeth (Biden was interviewed after the SCOTUS ruling and before the electors were confirmed, saying his office had never recieved so much mail on a single issue, and the same was true of the other Dem Senators) or he just didn't think it would hurt him in the long run to ignore all those people.

There are an awful lot of people who are still very angry about the 2000 election, and hold the Dems in Congress to blame for Smirk's installation, as well as all of Smirk's legislative victories. At a house party in Iowa last year, Gephardt was cornered by somebody who just lost it, and railed on him that "I feel like I'm riding in a bus that's being driven over a cliff by Bush, and you handed him the keys!"

I suspect that this feeling against the Dems serving in Congress is one of the reasons that both Dean and Clark have taken off while candidates who are in Congress and "should" be doing much better (Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt and Lieberman) are struggling.

I do however think that if any of those four win the nomination, most Dems will vote for the nominee.

[blm]

66. Can you get direct quotes on that charge

that he "without hesitation, announced he was running in 2004."

It seems that Kerry was one of the few who showed up to support Gore and advocate his position during the recount. No Dem Governor showed up and advocated for Gore while Bush had plenty of GOP Governors advocating for him at that time.

[AlGore-08.com]

78. No, I can't give you a direct quote about running for President

Because it was a TV interview and I did not record it at the time. I cannot even tell you want channel the interview was on, because this was before I was documenting everything I ever saw or read.

I am 99% sure that "nobody asked me to" is a direct quote. And when I say "without hesitation" I meant that he did not physically pause, and said as part of the same sentance that he was running for President in 2004. Again, I am 99% certain that Kerry did say he was going to run in 2004, because it shocked me when I saw it and I have since spoken to other folks who remember the interview, and remember it the way I do. If it matters, Biden was then asked by the interviewer if he was also considering a 2004 run, and he said yes. I didn't include that in my first post, since Biden isn't running now, and seemed off point.

And regardless of the exact words that Kerry said in that interview, or even what Kerry did during the recount, the fact is that Kerry did not challenge the Florida electors. As I pointed out in my earlier post, neither did Edwards, Gephardt or Lieberman - - and there are a lot of folks who still resent those Dems in Congress who did not challenge the electors, just as they resent those Dems in Congress who voted for Smirk's tax plan, the war in Iraq, the patriot act and a seemingly endless list of Smirk legislative victories.

That is the point I was trying to bring up, since the question was how come Kerry is trailing Dean in Massechusetts. I'm not anti-Kerry. If the question had been how come Edwards, Lieberman or Gephardt are trailing in some primary and nobody had mentioned the 2000 selection, I probably would have mentioned this theory of mine as well.

[blm]

80. Funny, I've seen the other quote here a few times

and never the added part about running for president in 2004. Especially since Kerry would NOT say it, imo, because he was running for re-election to the Senate first.

[AlGore-08.com]

93. I can't help what other people have posted or not posted in the past

I know what I saw. And, as I said, I have spoken to other folks who remember Kerry and Biden saying that.

[blm]

82. Gore asked them not to -

shouldn't he bear that responsibility?

Maybe he didn't want to prolong the Sore Loserman perception that the GOP and media fostered?

[AlGore-08.com]

91. So you're saying that Kerry can't act independently of Gore?

Kerry couldn't look at what happened in Florida and say "Scr*w what Al Gore wants me to do, it really looks like there's been vote fraud and civil rights abuses. I sworn to protect and defend the Constitution, and that's more important than what Al Gore wants"?

14 members of the House were able to do that.

From your remark, you obviously think Gore should not have told folks that he did not want the electors challenged - - he should have challenged them on principle instead, even though there was no way that such a challenge would have been successful, and that there was no way, short of a civil war, to keep Bush out of the White House after the SCOTUS ruling.

My point is that there are a lot of folks who have that same feeling about the Dems in Congress. I'm not saying that it's right or it's justified to blame them, but that blame does exist. And, I think that blame is one of the (many) reasons that the Congressional Dems are not doing as well as they were expected to do in the primaries. That is the point of my posts.

[blm]

62. HAHAH...Your talking points for the day revealed on Inside Politics.

Good job...now remember, Kerry is a corrupt Washington insider. Forget that he is the ONLY lawmaker who has exposed more government corruption than ANY other lawmaker in modern history. Only spread lies that he is corrupt himself...do this for Dean.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

75. Dean defeats Kerry

[molly]

77. TOOOOO funny!

a lightweight lying piece of shit defeating an American icon? I will die on that day.

[JVS]

79. Make sure to have your will written out

Because Kerry is a LOSER.

[Sean Reynolds]

81. So will I!

Good thing Kerry will never defeat Dean, the future American icon.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tadah]

83. ignorance

ummm... most likely, a lot of people don't even know who their senator is in Massachusetts. I don't know mine very well, only by name.

Dean has gotten a lot of media so people know his name.

Polls are a reflection of the media. Once such reflection is that only 33% of the population claims to know at least one Democratic candidate.

As I posted to another thread, I listened to Rush today, a rare event, and he brings up Dean's past-- it's true and will turn away a lot of voters in November, perhaps.

[zulchzulu]

90. Um, that poll was last November, dude

I'm betting the race is a lot closer. There was another poll where it was a dead heat.

A new poll or two would make this thread halfway valuable.

[Sean Reynolds]

96. Doesn't matter, dude, the point is still valid.

Kerry should be KILLING Dean in his home state; if it's a dead heat it's still bad.

[deacon]

97. because his campaign is a train wreck.

he is bewildered.

[arewethereyet]

98. it'll change by the time they get there

its just a popularity contest right now

[w4rma]

100. Sen. Kerry got cocky about his chances and ran a very poor campaign.

He thought he knew what the Democratic base wanted, but in reality he had lost touch with the Democratic base. He didn't listen to what we were trying to tell him until too late in the campaign. He has been responding too slowly to the public. When he attacks his opponents, many times its against things that many folks agree with so he gets called desperate.

[killbotfactory]

104. Because he's a typical politician

Who happens to be a liar

He needs a regime change in his campaign... er... another one that is.

[Jacobin]

108. They like him so much they want him to stay their Senator??

Interesting to read how Kerry's supporters spin his vortex-like trip down the drain-hole of presidential history.

IWR.

"We're safer with Saddam gone, and Dean's an idiot for suggesting otherwise." Okay, not verbatim but close enough.

He obviously doesn't have a clue as to which way the wind is blowing. America will NOT fulfill Smirk's PNAC agenda, with or without Kerry's help.

[David Zephyr]

111. Excellent Question, Sean.

It just about says it all, doesn't it?

I'm certain that polling will show that Lieberman is losing to Dean in Connecticut as well.

[hellhathnofury]

112. Kerry cast one very bad vote and ran one very bad campaign.

It's the truth.

[TexasSissy]

114. Kerry's campaign never got off the ground, for some reason.

Could've been his prior campaign manager, but now he has a new one, and he seems to be doing better.

Also, Dean is getting numbers from a snowball effect....people are viewing him as the "winner," since his name is all over the news. People like to vote for winners, and they don't like their votes "wasted."

But Kerry's going for broke in this race, so it'll be interesting to see how he does.