Why is Obama so much stronger that Kerry was in the west?

[Quixote1818]

Obama puts states like Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Colorado, Nevada and even Alaska into play. That is much better than Kerry was doing out west. Kerry lost some of those states by 20 points.

What is Obama's appeal to westerners?

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

[undeterred]

1. Maybe people are a little wiser to the stupidity of Republicans

now than they were four years ago.

[madfloridian]

2. The party has been rebuilding there with the 50 state plan

The ground work started in 2005..and the Obama campaign has staff and volunteers everywhere.

[blm]

43. Exactly. DNC let western state infrastructures COLLAPSE since the mid90s. They've been rebuilt

state by state by state through Chairman Dean's stewardship of our national party organization.

Terry McAuliffe and previous chairs refused to pay attention to the states THEY WROTE OFF long ago - and that is the BIGGEST reason why Gore and Kerry's victories were wiped out by rampant election fraud by the RNC and GOP officials who spent those years gaining control of the election process at every level where the votes are allowed, cast and counted.

Too many idiot Dems who don't understand these matters will always buy into the spin by the 'corpoDems' and blame the victims - when it was a PARTY that failed them and Dem voters time and time again.

[madfloridian]

3. New Map Out West

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/2195

[Quixote1818]

7. I do think we need to give Dean a lot of credit for this. nt

[Schema Thing]

4. There's a new Sheriff in town, with a blazing saddle

and a fine sense of fashion.

[Overseas]

5. Obama really IS a maverick, self-made man.

Probably reaching lots of disillusioned voters and non-voters, tired of party politics.

[Radical Activist]

6. He's also doing better in the South and Midwest.

The GOP was very effective at painting Kerry as a Boston, Northeastern, rich elite. Those are long standing political and social divisions. Obama has a big advantage as a Midwestern candidate, born in Kansas who has a populist appeal without appearing like he's somehow above other Americans.

[Bluzmann57]

8. Maybe because a lot of people outside the east coast

don't really trust anyone from the east coast. Or at least the eastern seaboard, the Boston/NY corridor.

[CTyankee]

32. Speaking from New Haven, CT I can agree with that.

Sometimes the attitude here drives me crazy. Hell, I drive MYSELF crazy sometimes when I really examine a prejudice I have reflecting taste. Don't get me wrong, I love living in a city with an Ivy League institution in it. But hey, I hear that Missoula, MT is a great town, too and I would have never thought that. It's kind of awful that we do that (and as a native Texan I ought to know better). I never get to the west except to L.A. to visit my daughter and grandson. That's really a shame.

[Arugula Latte]

44. It's funny. I was just having that discussion about Missoula the other day.

A bunch of us were sitting around and it came up. "You know, surprisingly, Missoula is actually very cool!" .. "I know ... Who would have thought that! I mean, it is in Montana and all ..." :)

[CTyankee]

52. If Montana goes blue, it will be officially "cool" and everybody will flock there!

I'm only partially kidding. It will become a great "new" place for Easterners to visit. They'll report back in the New York Times about the local food and any organic gardeners and such. I can see it now...

[Arugula Latte]

54. Hah! The NY Times has been doing that a lot with my adopted town, Portland

It's like -- Hey, these people actually have some decent restaurants! And they're not completely backwards! And they read! And they're on the West Coast! Who knew?!

[CTyankee]

56. gawd. that's annoying. You see, this is why I hate me and my little wonderful

group of esthetes (not really, I'm pretty down to earth and my husband takes the bus to work every day).

I don't blame you for being pissed. I would be too. The NY Times needs to get with the program. They are hopeless...

[Retrograde]

74. The WSJ recently discovered

that San Francisco has some good restaurants, too! Who would have thought it - aren't we still supposed to be chasing buffalo off the streets or something? (I'm always amused by the "new" food trends the Times discovers: Meyer lemons? Can't give them away, they grow everywhere. Last week it was apricots)

Back to topic: IMHO Obama's doing better because he's a Westerner - or at least he acts like it. He was born in Hawai'i, isn't easily classified, is young and urbane, his wife has a career in her own right, he's smart and articulate - he's one of us!

[PresidentObama]

9. Two words: Howard Dean

[napi21]

10. The Pubs managed to paint Kerry as a NE elitist, and he didn't help

much with that video of him windsurfing either! The other thing I think is because Barack's home State is Ill. Like it or not, there's a stigma on people from the North East.

We also shouldn't forget that (for whatever reason) a lot of people LIKED Shrub! I don't think McNuts has that charisma, and certainly, a lot of young people think he's just too damn OLD!

[Arnold Judas Rimmer]

23. "there's a stigma on people from the North East."

Yep. That's why the Bush Crime Family pretends to be from Texas. Why they're allowed to get away with it. I don't know.

[napi21]

37. I hope you didn't take that as a slam to people from the NE! I was

born & raised in Pennsylvania. I lived there 42 years of my life! I sure know what it's like to be called a Damn Yankee since we were relocated to the south! I lived in SC, TX, & GA, and almost everybody in all three places feel that way!

[Arnold Judas Rimmer]

38. Not at all.

I know there's great people from the NE. Howard Dean, for one. Bernie Sanders. The Kennedys. John Kerry's technically from Colorado, but he's lived in Massachusetts long enough to call it home.

But me.... I'm a hologram out in space. Nobody's ever going to elect a President from the Jupiter Mining Corporation :(

[karynnj]

42. It wasn't a video wind surfing -

it was a computer simulation moving a cutout back and forth.

A real windsurfing video likely would have played better - Windsurfing is done in the west and on rivers.

Kerry also would have won had there been an adequate number of voting machines - tht in a year where when generic Democrat vs generic Republican would not have made it likely. Kerry did far far better than generic Democrat. That he made it close at that time in spite of no media help, shows that he was a very good candidate.

[jobycom]

11. Not to detract from Obama, but I don't think it's about him.

These areas have been Republican for a long time because of the belief that Republicans protected their independence and rugged individuality and all that. Bush has destroyed the trust in Republicans altogether, so these regions can finally see the Republicans as they are. Controlling, land raping, American hating, opportunistic greedy mother truckers who just want to rob them blind.

People were disappointed in Bush in 04, and didn't like the direction things were heading in, but they hadn't lost their complete trust yet. They still thought Republicans cared, but that maybe Bush was in over his head. But now, with the party supporting Bush in all his idiocy, they no longer trust that the party even cares about their interests.

Obama inspires trust, Bush has destroyed it. People will vote for a weaker candidate they trust over a stronger leader they don't, but they won't vote for a weaker candidate who they no longer even believe in. So Obama is benefitting more than Kerry did.

[Captain Hilts]

19. Rep. pollster, Linda DiVall has, for years, tried to make Rs understand that the environment...

is important to a lot of conservatives. And what the Bush Admin has done has them pissed.

My conservative friends admit, "Bush can't govern." He can't.

[jobycom]

21. Huh. I hadn't even thought of the environmental aspect.

That's some of the most beautiful territory in the world, I can see why conservation would be an issue to all ideologies.

Everyone admits Bush can't govern. We have to turn that into votes against McCain, too. There are many who figure Bush was right but incompetent, and McCain will be better. That's why we can't just count on hatred of Bush to win it for Obama. Although so far a lot of that hatred is carrying over to the whole Republican Party.

My biggest fear with Obama is the Slow Fastball Syndrome. A slugger gets a slow fastball right down the center of the plate, and sees so many different ways to slug it out of the park that he hesitates and whiffs. We have so many ways to win this one, but we have to choose one and execute the swing perfectly. That's why Obama is taking his time, seeing what McCain has, before deciding on a VP or a strategy. So far he's doing everything right.

[Captain Hilts]

31. Somehow, we're just not getting the message across of McCain being a total sell-out...

who - insert vulgar expression here - George Bush.

I think being patient is a good call here.

Conservatives, actually many of those who like guns and hunting, are often serious conservationists.

[rucky]

12. I'd give Howard Dean some credit for that.

But also, Obama is more plain-talking than Kerry was. He just communicates more clearly, but with the same insight.

[MBS]

13. both answers on this thread are correct

This is not about Kerry vs. Obama, at all.
It really isn't so much about Obama's appeal to the Rocky Mountain states (although there's no doubt of his special appeal in the coastal states of CA, OR, and WA). It's about:

1. Dean's 50-state strategy is finally paying off big-time (though first fruits were noticeable in 2006)
2. After 28 very very long years, people are finally waking up (actually, there were hints of political changes in the Rocky Mountain west -- especially, CO, NM, and AZ -- even in 2004.)

[Radical Activist]

28. No, it really is about the differences between Kerry and Obama.

I like Dean's 50 state thing too, but its a bit much to claim that's responsible for a trend this big. Dean isn't a messiah. Regional divisions go back a long way and people need to remember this the next time people start to argue that a candidate from the Northeast is electable. They aren't.

[darius15]

14. It's a mixture of 3 things...

1) The Way Bush has destroyed the Republican brand out there
2) Howard Dean layed the groundwork for the 50-state strategy, we are now seeing the benefits
3) Obama put a lot of ground organization into these states in the primaries which is now helping him

[polichick]

20. Yep. Bush-Dean-Obama

[jobycom]

22. Good answer. nt

[yardwork]

81. Plus, the west is getting younger. Younger people like Obama.

Obama's youth and vitality appeals to other young people. Demographically, the west is getting younger. Young people aren't going to vote for McCain.

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. Maybe westerners are skeptical of Kerry-like New Englanders

Whatever it is, thank goodness for Obama's ability to connect with people out there.

[POAS]

16. They are in a different timezone so they are just waking up! n/t

[Captain Hilts]

17. 4 more years of Bush and Kerry was just not that appealing a candidate. nt

[elizm]

18. Because Obama is a much better candidate than Kerry was. nt

[karynnj]

50. We are just through the primaries this year

I think Obama did an amazing job - his team is excellent and has many ex-Kerry people, who likely learned a lot in 2004. But, Kerry also did an amazing job winning the nomination - with little media support.

Obama has not had fewer gaffes than Kerry did, Kerry actually had relatively few. Kerry was FAR better in the 2004 debates - having a wealth of experience and accomplishment to speak from. The media is far more tolerant of Obama gaffes - which is a major plus. They hold Kerry to a different standard.

I think the big difference is that Obama fits the mood the country is in now - for drastic change. In 2004, Kerry ran with very similar programs on most issues, but in 2004, people were far too afraid to make the change.

[elizm]

83. Kerry did not inspire the way Obama does. nt

[MasonJar]

24. Alaska for one thing has many PUG scandals going as we write.

The Dem Convention is in Col., chosen to assist the dem candidates I am sure. Montana has been leaning more dem lately with a dem guv and senator, etc. Obama's run is certainly better timed that Gore's and even Kerry's for Western support. And do not forget Yucca Mountain! McCain wants the debris from his 45 new nuclear plants deposited in Nevada, but does not want it crossing Arizona. If you were in Nevada, which candidate would you likely choose on that scenario alone?

[XemaSab]

25. I think in every election there's a big government candidate and a small government candidate

and this year McCain's the big government candidate.

Also, I think Obama appeals to Libertarian lefties. :shrug:

[Drunken Irishman]

26. Kerry was not a strong national candidate.

I liked and voted for John Kerry, but let's be honest, he was not a very good national campaigner. He did well in states Democrats should have won and that was it.

[Frank Booth]

27. Personality and background.

There's a common feeling among people who live in western states that people from the big city look down on them, particularly people from the east coast. Many people in the west saw Kerry as haughty, felt that he acted like he was above them. I think a lot of this was Kerry's natural reserve, but it came across as arrogant to a lot of people. Bush, to his credit, would fit in in a small town in the west much better than Kerry.

Obama, on the other hand, isn't seen as an east coast asshole (though the Republicans are trying). People realize he comes from a much more humble background than Kerry, and Obama's very good at connecting with "regular" Americans. He's a likeable guy and, despite what people say, he doesn't act like he's better than the average guy.

I think another reason Obama's doing comparatively better in the west is the relative lack of racism. If not for racism, Obama would also be doing much better than Kerry in Appalachia and other parts of the country where racism is more ingrained. Nothing against Kerry, but Obama's a much better candidate.

[Radical Activist]

29. I wish everyone from the east and west coast would read this.

Especially the DNC staff. Its hard to get across to a lot of people why candidates from some regions aren't as electable. And when I try, I usually get something along the lines of, "its because those ignorant hicks down there are so prejudiced and small minded." They don't realize that with comments like that they're demonstrating exactly why Northeastern candidates don't do well nationally. People won't vote for a candidate who acts like he thinks he's better than people like you.

[Frank Booth]

30. Yep. I grew up in a small town and now live in the "big city" so I've seen both sides.

It's stunning how accepted the notion is among city-dwellers that people who live in rural areas are stupid and unsophisticated. There seems to be this idea that if you weren't dumb, you wouldn't be in a small town.

And that creates a lot of resentment among people in the small towns. It's not black people crapping on small town people, it's the wealthy people from the cities. Kerry, unintentionllay I think, fit that mold, and that's why he couldn't connect. This is also why the Republicans are trying to paint Obama as a privileged elitist, despite the fact that Obama earned everything he ever got while McCain's stardom was handed to him on a silver platter.

[YvonneCa]

84. Your sig line is one important reason...

...for the difference in 2004.

"It's the difference between journalism and something else entirely. A journalist doesn't simply repeat false claims the Republicans make. A journalist doesn't adopt the underlying premise of an attack when the evidence in support of it is false. Whatever you call the people responsible for this nonsense, don't call them journalists."

Besides the fact that many people in western states were excluded by the campaign (like California...I drove to a swing state to see Kerry)...the media didn't do it's job. They HELPED(on purpose or by default) the RNC paint the caricature of Kerry.

I agree with you that there was a 'classist' problem (as opposed to a racist one) but it had little to do with Kerry...just as an Appalachia racist problem has little to do with Obama.

I think this point is important: "Kerry, unintentionally I think , fit that mold, and that's why he couldn't connect. This is also why the Republicans are trying to paint Obama as a privileged elitist, despite the fact that Obama earned everything he ever got while McCain's stardom was handed to him on a silver platter."

He was caricatured to 'fit that mold'...and it was definitely unintentional. The media enabled the RNC to caricature him. And most people who saw Kerry in person don't buy the 'didn't connect' thing. A 50-state strategy in 2004 could have made the difference there. So could a fair media.

And on your last point...yes, the RNC is trying to do the same thing to Obama, and people really need to wake up, because the media is again enabling the RNC. JMHO.

[sandnsea]

73. That was the perception - not the reality

Kerry is a much more humble human being than Obama and would fit in easily anywhere in the west if people didn't know anything about him. The media fed people an image and dumbass hicks bought it, that's all. The only reason it isn't happening with Obama is because he's black and nobody in the west is going to believe he's privileged. If you don't believe me, think about how easy it was to paint Edwards as an elitist even though he came up working class too. It's all in people's preconceived ideas and how well they're played on.

[paulk]

33. I'm not sure that he is...

He's polling at 47% in CO - that's what Kerry got. NV he's at 42%, Kerry got 48%. NM he's at 46%, Kerry got 49%.

Those are the three states we have a shot at, and Obama is doing worse than Kerry in two of them and is tied for the other. The real surprise, so far, is how poorly McCain is doing in the west.

[Apollo11]

34. John Kerry was/is not a very likeable guy

IMHO

[blm]

47. Yeah - anti-corruption lawmakers aren't as welcome as FASCISTS and their Dem protectors.

Only intelligent PATRIOTS who care about open government and accountability respect and admire and LOVE John Kerry.

Those easily bullshitted by corpmedia and charming liars have always fucked over the rest of the country through their sheer casual idiocy.

[karynnj]

51. Kerry is a very likeable guy adn a gentleman

[Marrah_G]

77. I disagree- I think he is very likeable.

But maybe it is because I am from Eastern, Mass. Maybe people from elsewhere see him different.

[YvonneCa]

85. And you know...

...him well? JMHO.

[Fleshdancer]

35. I would guess it's a mixture of things....

The 50 state strategy, 8 years of economic ruin, the desire for change after the republicans held the WH for two terms, and I think Obama has a better speaking style.

I think overall the DNC is stronger and the Obama campaign is more prepared than Kerry's campaign. I don't know if Obama's campaign would be as strong had they not learned the lessons from 2004.

[scheming daemons]

36. Obama not a "Northeast liberal".... also a more gregarious and likeable person

[YvonneCa]

86. RNC...

...much?

[Quixote1818]

39. Makes me wonder if he should put Sweitzer on the ticket to help seal the deal out west? nt

[karynnj]

40. Different year -

Generic Democrat lost to Bush in 2003/early 2004 polling - generic Democrat beat generic Republican by double digits in the comparable 2007/2008 time frame.

Bush was at 50% then, at below 30% now.

[Quixote1818]

45. I agree, it may be that this is just our year and have little to do with

much else. Clinton did well in Montana and I think Colorado.

[blm]

41. Would you like to claim that Obama would've won in 2004? Do you really not know the diff between

2008 and 2004?

[Quixote1818]

46. The point is that the Eastern states look just like 2004

but the western states have Obama neck and neck in states Kerry lost by 20 points. It's pretty clear that the West is more attracted to Obama than they were to Kerry. Yes, I think Obama would have done better than Kerry and would have won New Mexico and perhaps Colorado.

[blm]

49. Bullshit - This is a POST-KATRINA world. A POST-SCHIAVO world. You think Libertarians liked Schiavo

dog and pony show?

You also don't seem to understand that Dean put together a 50 state strategy for the Dem party so the INFRASTRUCTURES of those states that previous chairs neglected for a decade and allowed to collapse long before 2000 and 2004 MADE EVERY DIFFERENCE in battling it out with Republicans in those states.

Clinton also didn't carry those states. You want to pretend he just wasn't likable?

Anyone who wants to pretend that 2008 is anywhere near the same as 2004 's election climate can spend a few paragraphs explaining how they believe Obama would have won and how ANY other nominee would have had a different DNC and party infrastructure than Kerry had in 2004.

[Quixote1818]

53. Your not addressing my point

Why are so many more Western states in play this time around and the east looks the same as in 2004? I am asking a question and the question is: "Why is the west attracted to Obama?"

You seem to be saying because this is a different year Obama is up everywhere. Clearly factors have helped him more out West than back East or in the South. What are these factors that make him more attractive to western folk? Kerry lost South Dakota by 20 points yet Obama is breathing down McCain's neck there now, yet Ohio is tight as hell just like last time.

PS. Clinton won Montana back in 93.

[blm]

55. How many times do you have to have the DNC's 50 state strategy pointed out to you?

Do you understand what it means? Those states LONG NEGLECTED after the GOP wins in 1994 were allowed to weaken structurally to the point where many collapsed.

With no strong Dem presence and no Dem presence at all in some states, the GOP could do whatever they wanted election after election.

Clinton and his people didn't care one whit what other Dem candidates and lawmakers needed, and cared even less for the Dem voters who were systematically having their votes cancelled at every level of the process where the votes are allowed, cast and counted - purged, canceled, stolen by the GOP bullies who controlled the election process of too many elections.

And why you also want to pretend that 2004 post 9-11 is anywhere near the same electioral climate as post-Katrina, post Iraq civil war 2008 is a mystery.

Your question is absurd. Unless, of course, you want to explain how putting Obama at the top of the ticket in 2004 would have changed everything because he's likable. I'm all ears.

[Quixote1818]

58. This is the dumbest exchange I have ever been in

because you don't listen. I agree that Dean's strategy has helped but why has it helped more in some parts of the country than others???? For god sake, a kindergartner would understand that point yet you ignore it over and over and over.

[anonymous171]

48. Howard Dean and the 50-state strategy.

[ecstatic]

57. I think because of the emotional primary contest nt

[Major Hogwash]

59. 4 more years of Bush is the biggest factor.

Colorado was turning blue clear back in 2004.
Colorado's Presidential vote was stolen for Bush.
If you examine the voting results for 2004, you'll see that every Democrat that ran for office won, but then miraculously, Bush won.

Except for one thing. People don't vote "straight-line tickets" like that and then jump to the other column to vote for Bush.

Colorado used Diebold machines in 2004.
They went back to using paper ballots this year.

[paulk]

63. re: Colorado

you don't know what you're talking about.

The 2004 election was legit. Independents outnumber either party here - they put Ken Salazar in office and rejected John Kerry. Split ticket voting - It really is that simple. Ken Salazar was a good old boy who'd already won two statewide elections (the only Democrat to do so since Ben Campbell, btw - right before Campbell switched parties) Kerry got tagged as a northeastern liberal elitist, and if you knew this part of the country, you'd know that people out here don't generally like politicians (or people, really) from the northeast.

I don't know where you got your "diebold" bullshit. No one credible thinks that CO was stolen in 2004.

[wolverinez]

60. The Bush/Cheney public lands policy

A lot of hunters and outdoorsman are outraged at what has happened to much of their stomping grounds over the last eight years. Many have shifted to Dem in attempts to save their favorite last plaes from drilling. This is the most important demographic in the rockies.

[bornskeptic]

61. Kerry lost CO by less than 5%, NV by less than 3%, and NM by less than 1%.

In light of the economic situation this year and the fact that the Iraq occupation is in its sixth year, the Democratic nominee shoought to win NM and NV for sure, and very likely CO also. That would be the case no matter who was the nominee. Obama may be competitive in MT, which is a unique state-very independent-minded people there. It will be a remarkable achievement if he can. Maybe he can challenge McCain a little in ND and AK, but I'll be shocked if he can get within single digits in either one. We can safely forget SD.

Many posters are suggesting that Kerry did poorly in these states because he was "unlikeable", or just because hw comes from the Northeast.It's curious that Kerry did better in each of these states than Gore did in 2000.

State Gore Kerry
AK -30.95 -25.48
MT -25.08 -20.51
CO -8.36 -4.67
NV -3.54 -2.59
ND -27.61 -27.36
SD -22.74 -21.47

Speaking of the West, Kerry also did better than Gore in WA, OR,ID, and WY, and also in MN and WI. That covers the entire northwest quadrant of the US. Gore finished with a plurality of the popular vote because he ran stronger in the big states:CA,NY,TX,FL,IL, and PA. I think what's really happening is that the West is tending more Democratic over time, and that who the candidate is may not be that significant. Maybe between now and Election Day Obama will convince me that he is a bstronger candidate than Kerry, but he hasn't yet. The good news is that it just looks like a Democratic year all-around.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

[Major Hogwash]

69. Excellent point! Great post.

Nevada and New Mexico's votes were stolen for Bush in 2004 as well.
Robert Kennedy Jr's article in June of 2006 in Rolling Stone magazine was eyeopening, to say the least.

[blm]

72. And some Dems in NM, Nevada and Colorado are certain those states were stolen in 2004.

Dean's stewardship of the party and his efforts to strengthen party infrastructure in more states will make the difference in 2008.

[Stinky The Clown]

62. A-Dean's 50 state plan. B-Rupubican fatigue.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

64. Howard Dean and demographics

especially in the southwest. Dean made a conscious decision not to cede a single vote or state and the increasingly diverse demographics of the Southwest can't but help a "minority" candidate like Obama. Shit, the polls I've seen cited on DU show that Arizona might go blue.

[wolverinez]

65. I like Dean a lot, but most guys out there don't like him.....

I fish and hike with many western locals, and the big issue is "drilling in their backyard". After that it's guns. Having drilling pads pop up in their favorite stomping grounds that was once where they learned about the outdoors with grandpa is playing the largest role. Also, real estate is a huge source of income for many rural people. It also forces them to vote for whoever will slow the drilling.

[madfloridian]

80. Dean was endorsed by the NRA for years.

So why use that hunting theme like he was for gun control.

[wolverinez]

82. they don't care.

Trust me.

[CrazyDude]

66. Obama is not polling that much better than Kerry nationally

However, Obama puts northern/western rural states into play but seems to be at a disadvantage relatively when it comes to industrial states.

[opihimoimoi]

67. He has prepared himself....others think they have....

GO BLUE

[depakid]

68. Maybe because the western states actually got to have say in the decision

for a change?

[benEzra]

70. Kerry promised to "fight hard" to ban the most popular civilian rifles in the USA,

and left the campaign trail on freaking Super Tuesday to go vote for that ban (S.1431, 2004 session). That didn't play well in the West or South (Kerry-Edwards lost Edwards' own home state of NC, even as the Dem gubernatorial candidate here won handily), but thankfully so far Obama has avoided that minefield.

The party mostly dropped the ban-people's-guns thing in '06 (and it showed), and Obama hasn't said much about new bans this year either.

The draft party platform suggests we could have a bit of a problem later (it retains the 1990's DLC language calling for more bans) but I am hoping that it gets dropped from the final version, and that Obama will stick to the important issues instead of resurrecting that one.

[politicasista]

71. Good question although it has brought out the

Kerry bashers/haters, some out to bash him to promote Obama, which doesn't help Obama's cause that posters are taking potshots at his surrogate, but go figure.

[DevonRex]

75. I think there's less racial prejudice here. I'm from the south, my husband

is from New York. We lived in both areas together before coming to Colorado, so we have a pretty good handle on the differences.

I can say that Colorado is hands down the least racially prejudiced state we have ever lived in, even including California.

Folks out here like politicians who came from nothing and made something of themselves. They're also tired of republican bullshit.

[Marrah_G]

76. I agree with those who say it is because he isn't from the North East

[OwnedByFerrets]

78. The repugs hadnt destroyed Amerika at that time....nt

[kwolf68]

79. So it comes down to likeable?

I so tired of these simple-minded platitudes...the guy has to be 'straight talkin' (code word for inept), likeable, Christian, a common man...bollocks.

I want a GREAT man who will lead. I don't care if he worships sunflower plants and uses f-bombs regularly...can he lead? will he (or she) go to bat for justice?

Obama may be that guy...I hope he's that guy.

But to think Kerry didn't win in 2004 (cheating aside) because he wasn't as 'likeable' as an inferior human being (Chimp) speaks volumes of our fucked up Democracy.

[YvonneCa]

87. Great post...

...kwolf68. I agree completely. Especially this part:


"I want a GREAT man who will lead. I don't care if he worships sunflower plants and uses f-bombs regularly...can he lead? will he (or she) go to bat for justice? "

Kerry WAS (and is) that guy. I hope Obama WILL BE that guy in 2008 and beyond.
:patriot: