What next for John Kerry?

[T_i_B]

UK Guardian article.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1161246,00.html

The Bush v Kerry campaign starts more or less now. The Republicans will set out their candidate's good points and the Democrat's bad: the Democrats can be counted on to do the same.

Early on, the battleground will be marked out. Mr Kerry has repeatedly told Mr Bush that if he wants to make national security the main issue he should "bring it on". That may explain why the president has taken a keen interest in banning gay marriages in recent days.

Of course, the Democrats have their own favourite issues (the budget deficit, a foreign policy that has estranged the US from many allies, etc.) to undermine Mr Bush with, Mr Kerry calls them "mainstream American values" as he attempts to portray the president as an aberration. He is also likely to point out that he has more actual war experience as a soldier than the man who calls himself a war president garnered in the Texas national air guard. Other issues and events will crop up - a congressional report due out in May into the intelligence before the September 11 attacks may harm Mr Bush; the capture of Osama bin Laden could help him - but for a large number of voters the election will be a referendum on the president. And many of them want to vote no.

The Democrats did not tear themselves apart too much in the primaries. Part of the remarkable, and unexpected, unity some commentators are now ascribing to the party is down to the amount of time the original nine hopefuls spent attacking Mr Bush. It was only in the latter weeks of his campaign that John Edwards, the only other contender, took to openly criticising Mr Kerry.

[liberalnurse]

1. The feeding begins.

I say, let them eat cake and kerry is the icing.