I just don't understand the Kerry surge

[DaisyUCSB]

The only thing that could possibly explain it is good tv ads. I get people getting nervous about Dean and him collapsing, but I don't get what makes people believe that Kerry's more electable than Clark, and now Edwards.

Sorry, but being able to say, "who knew that Ted Kennedy is the more conservative senator from Massachusetts" and the golddigger charges, and the waffler charges, are going to set in, because the vast majority of people only know his cover and not his book, and I just don't see how a case can be made that their are issues or personality or biographical traits about then Clark, and now Edwards, that excede Kerry in how effectively they can be used by the right both in the presidential race as well as the congressional races to hurt democrats.

Kerry can win, absolutely, but what convinced democrats, because it's clear that they have been convinced, that he's the strongest candidate to take on Bush and win back or not lose more of congress

[Paulie]

1. The machine got behind him

Too many others were out to limit the ones in power in the party. They could NOT let that happen.

It's a shame too... probably the only thing I agree with Dean on... sigh.

[ibegurpard]

4. They would rather risk losing to Bush with one of their own.

than risk losing their influence.

[Peeance Freeance]

2. He was the ABD candidate in Iowa.

Now he's the only one left strong on foreign policy. Democrats need that.

[Octafish]

3. Kerry is the best qualified candidate.

The lion's share of Democrats agree.

[DaisyUCSB]

9. being qualified,(in the traditional way) isn't the same as being electable

Cruz Bustemante was more qualified than Arnold to be governor here, but that doesn't matter now.

[Carolina]

28. touche, Daisy

and Al Gore was infinitely more qualified than W...

Kerry is certainly qualified, and we may examine Kerry's record and think that the good outweighs the bad. But most people only look at what the "news" presents to them. And the news media working with the Rove machine will not talk about qualifications. Bush's butt will continue to be covered while all Kerry's warts and inconsistencies will be exposed 24/7.

Qualifications do not = electability

[mountainvue]

36. I don't think that's a fair comparison, though.

The whole recall was gerrymandered, IMO. People were voting against what they thought Gray Davis stood for as opposed to what Arnold stood for. Some people got turned on at the thought of The Terminator running the state. Arnold had no qualifications for the job and I think it's showing now. At least Reagan had political experience.

[Carolina]

30. and Bush can say he's qualified

for the presidency because he's already in the job and has been doing it for 3 years. And sadly, nearly half the population agrees!

[mountainvue]

37. LOL

I guess we'd have to quantify "doing."

[spooky3]

5. From the exit polls, it looks as if Democratic voters believe that a long

time in the Senate is the best qualification for the job.

[Rationality]

14. Uh oh...

Senators make the worst presidents, and I say that because they always leave a paper trail of votes that the opposition can use to tear the guy apart. I think the same applies to Congressmen. State officials and governors do not have this problem.

[NV1962]

15. The other JFK was a Senator too... - n/t

[Dookus]

16. Make the worst presidents

or the worst candidates?

A lot of Presidents have been Senators.

[Rationality]

38. Yeah, candidates

That's what I meant. Thought I fudged something up in that...

[WiseMen]

20. WRONG! Evidence is Senators make poor Candidates but Great Presidents

[Burma Jones]

6. He's Got the Good Old Boy Network Behind Him

That's what makes him electable.

[Carolina]

31. yeah that good old boy system

sure helped former senator and then incumbent VP Gore in 2000.

Seems to me that good old boy system helps Bush MORE in the GE.

[Burma Jones]

35. Yep

Here's a list of those I've backed:

Clark
Bradley
Tsongas
Hart
Biden
Udall


So, I suppose I'm just not part of the Old Boy network...

[DuctapeFatwa]

7. I think he offers reassurance, continuity, the status quo, but without the

abrasive qualities of bush. The voting class likes the comfort of knowing that while there may be some very visible cosmetic changes, and some rewording to make things sound more attractive, they don't have to worry about any significant change in policies

[Tinoire]

39. Bingo. Wish I could write like you DTF. You did it again! :) n/t

:loveya:

[NV1962]

8. Four things

1. There's an uncommon broad resolve to toss the monkey out: "whoever it takes" - that is the "boo bonus" for the front-runner. People want this over and done with, and whoever appears as the winner among Dems will get their vote.
   
2. Kerry won IA and NH primaries, against all odds (compared to months before, few saw him winning there) This adds to perception of him as a "conqueror of adversity" - precisely what is needed / sought in the Bush-slayer.
   
3. Press is playing heavily into horse race reporting; with Kerry's snowball of wins rolling down the primaries, that gets him an awful lot of "front-runner bonus" exposure, which feeds into #1 - see above.
   
4. He is seen as experienced Senator, and he's able to "talk tough" - which makes his profile credible as the Bush-slayer.

[Turkw]

21. Don't forget that the media turned on Dean, just like we thought they

would eventually, just before Iowa. Kerry was the candidate that started getting a lot of additional positive coverage.

[NV1962]

27. After seeing how they "disappeared" Clark too...

I'm not that sure that it was specifically anti-Dean and anti-Clark and anti-Kucinich and anti-Edwards.

I think media rather followed the re-surge in polls -- just prior to IA -- into covering the "leading horse" (Kerry) and dumping the other contenders to the sidelines.

Either way, the "trifecta" of pollmania, the lazy and extremely headlines-drive media, and the stacked primaries system together don't contribute to the essence of democracy.

I won't deny that, at this point, I'm not unhappy with the snowball turned avalanche that is Kerry - but I'm profoundly dissatisfied and disturbed with the implications this has for the notion of transparency and accountability of government, and its necessarily corrolary participatory engagement of constituents, and the citizenry at large.

There's an awful lot that needs to be changed, I believe: campaign reform, the insane staggered primaries, fair and accurate media coverage (now there's an opportunity for a massive letter-writing campaign!) and so on... Long list.

[Tinoire]

41. Welcome aboard. It's painful to witness this isn't it?

Kind of dashes all those fairy-tales we were fed.

My mom used to tell me this was how it worked when I was a kid. I thought she was... uninformed.

Wow mom. My apologies. I should have known.

[NV1962]

47. Absolutely...

I pondered registering with "cynical S.O.B." but that was already taken, so...

:D

[mountainvue]

40. The media

will turn on anybody. Remember that line from Primary Colors? "The media giveth and go f*ck yourself." If our candidates aren't prepared for that, they shouldn't be running.

[jfxgillis]

10. First of all, don't discount the tv ads

Not the first, not the second, but the third time I saw Kerry's Vietnam ad featuring Jim Rassman (targeted for NH so I saw it very early) I went, "Wow ......." and immediately wrote to a pal in Iowa (a righty Perot voter, actually) and asked, "Are they running that ad in Iowa? Is it sinking in?"

"Yes" and "Yes," he answered.

Second, as (hate to quote it, but it's true) ABC The Note's "scorecard" said a couple of weeks ago: "Number of mistakes made by Kerry since shaking up his campaign: 0."

NOT making a mistake is critical in a primary. Crucial.

[DrBlix]

11. I don't understand it either

Are dems being pulled along for the ride? Edwards has less baggage and can beat Bush hands down.
.
Could we be seeing an electronic voting machine, media, one two punch?
.
Will Rove dig in his bag of dirty tricks and bring up more dirt on Kerry and watch him sink?
.
Is Kerry the "chosen one" (?) by the media and the powers that be "why" all the media attention?
.
I get a sick feeling in my gut on this one.
.
Of course if Kerry is nominated he will get my vote we as a country cannot survive 4 more years of Bush.
.
But I would feel much better with Edwards, he gives me hope.

[oasis]

12. Kerry was on Gore's short list for VP 4 years ago. Somebody saw

something in him then.

[Tinoire]

46. Oasis. Gore dropped him for a reason. Went with Lieberman who was

not groomed for the position like Kerry because of the known problems with young women according to some DC sources. Curious, don't you think that Gore endorsed Dean over Kerry?

Gore didn't take that sort of thing very lightly. To this day he doesn't seem to have forgiven Clinton for not having a greater sense of responsability about politically damaging sexual indiscretions. I have a feeling also that Gore has a moral problem with it.

[Dookus]

13. that's all right...

I've never understood the support for Dean. We all have different tastes.

However, Kerry's winning handily across the country while Dean's getting his ass handed to him, so I guess I'm happy more people share my tastes.

[Anwen]

17. What I don't understand

is why is every thread becomes an opportunity to gloat in Dean's misfortunes -- even when the thread has nothing to do with him.

[Dookus]

19. The thread

starter mentions Dean in the original post, and has a Dean avatar. He or she is clearly a Dean supporter saying less-than-favorable things about Kerry. I think it's reasonable to mention Dean in this thread.

One person states that he or she doesn't understand Kerry's popularity. I mentioned I never understood Dean's popularity. I see nothing wrong with that.

I hear there's a private Yahoo group for Dean supporters who don't want to hear anything negative about their candidate. Want me to see if I can find the contact information for you?

[Anwen]

25. Am I looking at the wrong post?

I think I see a Clark avatar. Anyway, that is beside the point. The original post is about not understanding the Kerry surge. And I just happen to find the multitude of not-so-nice references to Dean quite interesting. :)

You're allowed to post your opinions, of course. Am I not allowed to make an observation?

[Dookus]

26. whoops...

my mistake. I didn't look closely.

Sorry.

[mountainvue]

43. I guess it's the same

as me not being able to understand why everyone was jumping on the intern bandwagon and predicting doom with nary a shred of evidence.

[MoonRiver]

18. We don't have to understand, we just have to win.

What I'm thrilled about is the incredible turn-out and the stone cold determination of Democrats, and others, to get * out. Regarding the GE, this factor is HUGE.

[mountainvue]

45. Yes, you're right.

That's what I really admired about General Clark. He got that.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[eileen_d]

23. Is this what is meant by Kerry's "surge"?

Love this line... talk about wishful thinking
"Kerry was front-runner for the Democratic nomination to take on George Bush in November."

[King of New Orleans]

24. That is dramatic

The idea of a network sitting on a tape like that for 50 days is far less believable than the idea of Kerry having an affair.

[mountainvue]

44. What does this have to do with the original topic?

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

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

[blurp]

29. It's the primary process in general and that goes for the Repubs, too

I'm not sure what the solution is, but the primary process in this country needs serious reform.

We have very weak candidates on both sides of the political spectrum.

I know Republicans that openly admit that Bush is a complete idiot. Personally, I think Kerry has his own weaknesses. These are the best people America has to offer?

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the parties need to spend money on simply going out and looking for good men and women to serve, instead of seeing who just happens to fall into the job.

I think Bush is a perfect example of this. He's got nothing to offer, yet his simple connection to his father was enough to make him THE choice. That's ridiculous.

I really don't think people are that dumb. I think something is wrong with the way the process works that forces them to make stupid choices.

I'm just not sure what the problem is.

[shivaji]

32. Its very very simple actually.....here is why....

The exit polls clearly show what was on voter's minds when
they chose Kerry...he is "perceived" as the most electable
because of his military experience which Edwards and Dean lack,
and because of his long political experience which Clark lacks.

In this post 911 world, democrats are definitely concerned about
nominating someone with military experience, to counter Bush.

Gephardt and Lieberman fell by the way side IMHO because they
were old blood, and non-charismatic.

[lurk_no_more]

33. I really don't care why

After being declared DOA just before Iowa, I think it is a comeback to remember.

Exit polls in IA and NH pointed at Kerry being the most electable to beat bush and now the rest see the same thing.



And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[mountainvue]

34. No votes

had been cast when other candidates were perceived as the front runner. When the votes were cast, Kerry got the most which is how our system is supposed to work. He is also the most qualified for the current tasks at hand, IMO.

[Merlin]

42. Kerry has gravitas. He is presidential. He is Linconesque.

He's obviously intelligent, sometimes almost eloquent, decidedly astute politically, unwilling to roll over when assaulted, and comes across as a Presidential type.

Dean has many great qualities, but does not have Presidential bearing--yet. (But I'll bet you he'll run again in '08 or '12 and he will have by then matured). Clark has too many gotchas for liberals and loyal dems to accept (military background, recent Republican support, praises of Bush, quasi-support for the war, lack of civilian experience, uncertainty about his bedrock views) and also appears a bit tired and not quite up to the job. Edwards comes across as just way too youthful and shallow. He's handsome and dapper and well spoken. But he's not seen as particularly distinguished in the gravitas department.

So we're left with Kerry. Unless he "implodes over an intern issue" as Clark reportedly predicted, he's gonna be our guy. And he's gonna beat Bush.