I think Kerry blew it...

[Guaranteed]

He had a chance over the last few weeks, with the deteriorating security in Iraq, to really slam Bush. Bush was on his heels, but Kerry chose to hold back and hope that Bush destroyed himself. I don't think Bush will be as vulnerable as he was this past couple of weeks again in this campaign.

And now with the bad polls and stuff....I think Kerry blew it. He should have capitalized and taken control. He could have been the guy that people were looking to for guidance and support, but he didn't step up.

Kerry just doesn't seem to understand that Bush isn't going just to give up leadership of the country. Kerry is going to have to TAKE it from him, and there's going to have to be a fight.

[mobuto]

1. Wrong

The last thing Kerry needs to do is appear to be trying to gain political capital from the deaths of American soldiers. He should be doing as little as possible to distract from the news in Iraq - its hurting Bush on its own.

[Guaranteed]

2. That's not what the polls are saying.

He needs to step up. It's the president's job.

He's not acting like a PRESIDENT.

[MsUnderstood]

6. I think it is too early

I think it is too early to come out swinging at Bush.

If a negative campaign is going to be run (I would assume yes) then Kerry needs to continue calling bush on his negative ads and wait til closer to the election to bring out the attack against Bush.

Most people don't like the negativity in politics already and will lean toward Kerry because Bush was negative and misleading. If Kerry jumps in he will give Bush an avenue to attack him.

[Guaranteed]

10. But by not jumping in, people aren't being given an alternative.

If Kerry doesn't show that he's willing to get in there and get dirty with the issue, if it looks like he's afraid of it, people aren't going to turn to him as a possible leader and they won't trust him with it.

[NMDemDist2]

9. will evrybody just chill about the polls already?

The 1992 race was no different as all three candidates led the field at one point between April and November. In fact, in May of 1992, Ross Perot actually led with 39%, while Bush came in at 31% and Clinton had just 25%. A month earlier, Bush was sitting at 44%, while Clinton had 25% and Perot 24%. However, by July Clinton had pulled ahead and remained there until the end.

http://www.moore-info.com/Poll_Updates/2003%20Presidential%20Polls%20Oct%2003.htm

[Not Me]

19. I agree...don't get wrapped up in today's polls

Especially when the margin of error makes them dead heats.
But more importantly, there are two things that are going to help Kerry:
-Iraq and the economy.

Neither are going to help bu*sh.

[Webster Green]

22. Unfortunately, what the polls are saying is.............

A lot of people will support the chimp regardless of how incriminating the evidence against him is.

Smirky could get caught with a car load of dead hookers and a trunk full of smack, and would still be tied with Kerry in the polls.

Have another glass of Kool-Aid, America!

[Guaranteed]

26. They're not being given a leadership alternative. nt

[AlinPA]

30. The polls at this stage tell me that Bush* spent a hell of a lot

on ads and still hasn't hurt Kerry much.

[w13rd0]

4. Weren't you one of our resident...

...war supporters?

[mobuto]

31. Nope

I never supported the war.

Not that I understand what the question has to do with the topic at hand...

[Ilsa]

3. I think Mobuto has it right.

I wouldn't have wanted to hear anything that sounded as if Kerry was taking avantage of that situation (soldiers dying) either. It really is a delicate balance when the events involving the war turn like that. Kerry needs to keep hammering * on the economy, Shrub's weakness.

[question everything]

37. Kerry does not need to take advantage of the situation

but he could go around it, saying that the war in Iraq does nothing to terrorism. He does not have to show the 9/11 events, he can show the long lines in the airports during "orange alert."

Mostly, as I have stated before, he needs to dumb down the message. The sad reality is that too many voters like to have their info spoon fed with simple sound bites. Too many do not understand Kerry with his high intellectual delivery, they can relate more to simpleton Bush. I am afraid that we may observe a repeat of high-brow Al Gore whose earnest debates went above the heads of most voters.

Seems that Newsweek completely missed the recent poll when it said, in its "Conventional Wisdom"

CW can't figure out why Bush's poll numbers are slipping. The man's never made a mistake!

Bush (thumb down) He's 5-feet-11 in a 10-foot pool--over his head in global complexities and showing it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4767765/

[lastknowngood]

5. Your right after he wrapped up the nomination he took a month

off and when he came back he was agreeing with the shrub more often than disagreeing with him. When will the Dem's learn you can't beat a pit bull by acting like a poodle. What I would give for a democrat with a spine, but nooooooooooooooooooo the doctor was "unelectable" so let's pick this electable looser and that way we can still act nice while the repugs rip us to shreds. If we don't lose 7 senate seats and 25 house seats this fall I'll be amazed. Get a backbone or get out of politics!

[Old and In the Way]

7. Yeah, I guess I'll have to vote for George Bush now.

Coming from someone who's been a big advocate of Kerry here, I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked!

[Guaranteed]

13. Oh, come on, where's your resolve?

You're such a doom and gloomer.

[Old and In the Way]

23. Not at all.

Kerry is letting Bush beat himself. The Iraq War is blowing back at Bush and there's really nothing Kerry needs to do there. Focus on the domestic issues and continue to campaign so people can see what a real President looks like.

AND, BLG, you're the one that's obviously distraught with Kerry's performance, 7 months before the election. Bush has spent $50MM in March/April trying to build up this loser and it's not making a dent on people's thinking. Kerry's not losing any sleep, you probably shouldn't either.

[blm]

8. WHAT bad polls? Zogby, Newsweek and ARG have Kerry beating Bush.

You only believe polls from Gallup and WP?

Surely you jest.

[Guaranteed]

11. That's three polls now in the past two days. nt

[Old and In the Way]

25. Part of the talking points, blm.

Focus on the negative, disregard the positive.

[sangh0]

12. I think BullGooseLoony blew it

He had a chance over the last few weeks to make an argument about how Kerry's not addressing the Iraq issue is hurting Kerry, but instead, all he did was make predictions without factual support.

[Guaranteed]

14. LOL what predictions?

You keep saying that over and over, but I haven't made any predictions.

Would you mind telling me what the HELL you're talking about?

[sangh0]

15. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x505342#505364

[Guaranteed]

20. Okay, quick lesson here.

Prediction: "I believe that John Kerry is going to win the presidency in 2004."

NOT a prediction: "People want a strong leader, and will follow a strong leader."

Prediction: "Bush will push for a full retreat from Iraq before the election."

NOT a prediction: "Bush would be smart to get out of Iraq before the election."

See the difference? One's a predicting a FACT of the future, the other is an opinion.

[sangh0]

24. Bad lesson

"People want a strong leader, and will follow a strong leader." is a prediction

"Bush would be smart to get out of Iraq before the election." - implies a prediction, but not an actual prediction

See the difference? One's a predicting a FACT of the future, the other is an opinion.

When it comes to politics, predictions are almost ALWAYS predictions.

[Guaranteed]

16. He shoulda hit him.

Don't know what it is with Dems that when they're given a free shot at their opponent's chin they hesitate....

[bowler_4_columbine]

17. It's a long way to November

Forget the polls. Kerry should not say anything that he'll want to take back this early in the race. The repubs will twist his words and make him out to be anti-American. He's doing just fine. The time to attack will come. Personally, I can't wait to see Kerry slam Bushs' head on the political sidewalk so we can all hear the hollow sound it makes. Kinda like rapping on a coconut with a ballpeen hammer.

The damage all these tell-all books will take time to sink into the collective American conscienceness. In November, Americans will realize that Kerry is a better man.

:spank:

[Guaranteed]

21. They're not realizing that because he's not giving himself

the opportunity to show them that.

[blm]

35. GREAT post, bowler.

Salute, compatriot...I feel exactly the same way.

[RoyGBiv]

18. I Disagree

If he had really hit him hard in the last few weeks over what was happening in Iraq, he would have opened himself up to a massive backlash. Rove knows far too well how to play that game, and Kerry would have lost it. I can see the headlines now: While Soldiers Die, Kerry Plays Politics.

In addition, we have no idea exactly what will be happening in Iraq six months from now. Kerry would do well to make few pronouncements about anything involving Iraq that's not based on solid, sustainable information. If he goes on record with anything right now, a few months down the line when the entire situation has changed and he has to alter his pronouncement, he opens himself up the waffling charge.

That said, I too am concerned about the direction of Kerry's campaign and its seeming disorganization at the moment. But, I also must add that apparently he is starting to move. I've received more e-mail from Kerry's campaign today than I did in the last two weeks.

Kerry is just now getting geared up. The conventions haven't taken place yet. With all the polls within the margin of error and essentially tied as a result, they mean very little in the long term except as a guide to the direction Kerry needs to gear his campaign in the future. His basic strategy right now is to keep the attack ads against him from making too great an impact, and since the race is still even, I'd say he's done that.

There will be a fight. A good general scouts out the ground in front of him before the assault. Headlong plunges into dangerous territory just get you killed before you're able to make much of an impact. Dukakis found that out in '88.

[bowler_4_columbine]

27. Have faith...

...my angry bretheren. Bush is a dunce. It takes time for a whole country to come out of it's denial. You can't force 'em out by shoving the mistake that is the Iraq war in their faces. Remember, most people supported the war when it first started. That's why people buy into the old saw about if you criticize the war you are anti-troop and giving comfort to the enemy. It absolves them of their tacit complicity in all that bloodshed. People must be allowed to come around, encouraged to realize that Kerry can handle this terrible situation better than the intellectual lightweight we have now.

Besides, I don't think that Kerry wants to make hay out of the deaths of these brave people who are dying for our country. Despite everything we know about the stupidity of this war, the troops are simply doing their jobs. With extreme courage.

Kerry must be EXTREMELY careful in choosing his words when criticizing the war. He will be pounded with the slightest mistake. Better that he keep his mouth shut than wind up with a "Dean scream" type sound byte.

If you don't agree, please tell me, what would you have Kerry say?

"The war was a mistake." ???

How would you feel about that kind of a statement if you were on the ground in Iraq? Obviously you would feel that you're over there to die for nothing. Theres no easier way to piss off a large portion of the voters. Measured tones on this issue will produce positive results. Peoples eyes are opening. They know this is a bogus war. Just don't ask 'em to admit it out loud.

:grouphug:

[Ilsa]

28. NPR said that when Bush appears with Blair,

Bush's #'s go up. When Blair appears with Bush, Blair's #'s go down! That's pretty indicative of Great Britain's opinion of Shrub.

[GreenPartyVoter]

29. He supports $hrub's Middle East plan, supports the war in Iraq

So basically he's offering us a non-fundy version of Bu$h.

Great.

:eyes:

[Hippo_Tron]

32. I trust that Kerry knows what he's doing...

Considering Rove has spent 50 million of that war chest and it's gotten him in a deadlock. Kerry is probably up to 100 million+ by now and hasn't spent much of it yet.

[Dr Fate]

33. You always say that...

...of course I disagree.

I cant wait to have the Real Deal in office- what a refreshing change it will be.

[Nicholas_J]

34. Most people dont understand

That the election is won in the last month, and that by and large, at that poinr, when the undecided make up the mind, historically 85 percent of them make up their mind for the opposition, not the incumbent. Two articles out of two rather conservative sources have indicated recently that With Kerry being as close to BUsh as he is now, Bush is in serious trouble. Christian Broandcasting Networls polls have Kerry at 49 percent, and Bush at 48 percent with 4 percent undecided. Dick Morris today reported the same thing in the relatively conservativ New York Post, that Kerry's positioning is such right now that this campaign is going in his favor based on that historical trend, which has occured in every race against an invumbent. The opposition picks almost all of the undecided vote. Which means that Kerry would pick up 3.4 percent of the 4 percent of undecided's:

Check CBN's take:

Poll: Country Deeply Divided Over Presidential Candidate

By David Brody
Congressional Correspondent

April 20, 2004

The Battleground 2004 poll shows that if the election was held today, 49 percent want Kerry, 48 percent Bush, and only four percent is undecided.


CBN.com – WASHINGTON - President Bush has already spent $98 million in his re-election bid. That is nearly as much as he spent four years ago, and there is still seven months to go before the election.

http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/News/040420cc.asp

And Morris in the Post:

DUBYA IN TROUBLE

April 20, 2004 -- BOTH of the polling organizations that track the presidential race in daily surveys have concluded that the contest has settled into a stalemate. Scott Rasmussen reports that for eight of the last nine days, President Bush has gotten 45 to 46 percent of the vote, while Sen. John Kerry ranged from 44 to 46 percent. John Zogby shows Kerry ahead by three and reports little movement either way.
This "tie" is terrible news for the Bush camp.

One of the (very few) immutable laws of politics is that the undecided vote almost always goes against the incumbent. Consider the past seven presidential elections in which an incumbent ran (1964, '72, '76, '80, '84, '92, and '96) - that is, look at the final vote versus the last Gallup or Harris polls. My analysis shows that the challengers (Goldwater, McGovern, Carter, Reagan, Mondale, Perot, Clinton, and Dole) got 85 percent of the undecided vote. Even incumbents who won got only 15 percent of those who reported that they were undecided in the final polls.

So . . . when Bush and Kerry are tied, the challenger really has the upper hand.

More bad news for Bush: Democrats usually grow 2-3 points right before Election Day as downscale voters who have not paid much attention to the election, suddenly tune in and "come home" to their traditional Democratic Party moorings. Remember, virtually every poll (except Zogby) showed Bush slightly ahead of Al Gore as the 2000 election approached - yet Gore outpolled Bush by 500,000 votes.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/22968.htm

Up until today, Morris has been predicting a large Kerry crash, but the Bush efforts have really not done much to bring Kerry down past the 10 percent edge Bush absolutely needs to assure that he will win the election.


As Kerry frequently noted, he didnt worry about how Dean was doing in December. all that counted was how he did after the actual voting started taking place. And Kerry was absolutely correct. The Bush Administrations has exhasted all of the negative attack material they can use on Kerry, while Kerry can sit back and watch and collect all of the problems that continue to develop as a result of Bush's decisions, and wait until people are ust about to vote until he let it all fly.

He would be just plain stupid to start attacking now, and lose the shock value that comes with the realsie of a new, well put togetther and well co-ordinated campaign. Also, waiting first for his meeting with Ralph Nader and seeing what goes on in that arena, and then waiting for the moment of moments, the handing over of sovereignty to a yet undefined and undelineated Iraqi Government is absolutely best thing to do. To get a real idea of what will happen come June 30th, listen to the Ayatollah Sistani. He is the only person who actually has his finger on the pulse ofvthe Iraqi people and he thinks the result will be civil war. He is most likely correct.

[Orangepeel]

36. I thought he blew it during the primary

I was wrong then and you're probably wrong now. It's a long time until November.

[Guaranteed]

38. The war was a mistake. We all know it, Kerry should just come out

and say it. It would show that he has the courage and leadership to take control of our country's foreign policy- and THAT is what people are looking for.

[QC]

39. Do people ever get tired of this shit?

There are more threads here predicting our defeat than at Freak Republic.

Could the terminal pessimists maybe give it a rest now and then? Or, failing that, can we set up a special "Gloom, Despair, and Agony on Me" forum for them?

[Guaranteed]

41. LOL yeah, I'm tired of this shit alright. nt

[Lexingtonian]

40. Doesn't negativity get boring?

I mean, where do you get this idea that some kind of massive public haranguing is actually going to do anything? Remember, Howard Dean's peak in polling among Democrats was 40%- that means that at least 75%, if not 85%, of The People didn't find it convincing.

Chris Bure on Nightline last night said that the Bush people had been hoping for Kerry to say something- anything- for them to jump on and draw attention away from Woodward's book for the last week.

I don't see meaningful polls that, on standard analysis, suggest an outcome differing much from a 52-45 Kerry win. You may want to learn about and watch Gallup polls and their offshoots, and their 7% average Republican biasing from what reputable polling outfits measure as a mean.

As for a fight, I'd say George Bush vs His Record is good enough to get us what we like. For mano-a-mano, you'll have to wait for the fall though Bush will probably duck out of debates.

I'm not sure why you need a Leader who Takes Control even when he holds no powers except those of a citizen and ability to vote in Senate roll calls. I thought Democrats didn't need someone to offer slavish fealties to and ask to be kicked by, that Democrats believe that dignity is individual as well as collective, but maybe that is to presume too much....