John Kerry: A Bullet or a Bubble?

Remove all ads!

John Kerry is kicking some serious ass right now in the primaries. He's been all but declared the shoe-in for the nomination, despite the impressive but so far inadequate showing of John Edwards and a few death-rattle attacks by Howard Dean. As soon as Dean finally gives up, Sharpton decides he's had enough free press, Kucinich's spaceship arrives to pick him up and Edwards gracefully concedes (all of which I predict will happen in the next 3 weeks), it will be Kerry's time to duel with Dubya head on, with support from what looks like the most fired-up Democratic party we've seen in years.

There are many now who compare Kerry's meteoric rise to a stock market bubble, complete with all its inherent doom. In a stock bubble, people go crazy and buy up the stock not because they believe the stock is a wise investment, but because so many other people are buying it that it can't be a bad move. When the bubble bursts, it's because a few people realize their folly and back out, and the rest quickly follow suit. The same comparison could be made to the "Dot-Com" boom of the late 90's.

Time will tell if the same is true for Kerry. Part of me thinks this is just your standard punditry, but I'd be lying if I said I thought Kerry was invincible at this point. Attacks from the Bushies don't worry me near as much a fickle and unstable mob that appears to be forming in support of dethroning Bush at any cost. Methinks desire to get rid of one guy trumping faith in the man to do it is a bad way to elect leaders, but at this point - hey, whatever works.

I like Kerry. I think he's very qualified and will do well as President. Hell - my left nut would be a better choice than Bush at this point (but not Righty...he's too emotional). Frankly, I don't think Kerry's as vulnerable as the "bubble" theorists are saying, but who knows. Dean and Clark disappointed me, Kerry surpised and impressed me. I could be wrong and Kerry could end up sucking, but at this point I doubt it.

So - what do you think? Is Kerry "The Real Deal" as his tour bus says, or will over-hype kill him as it did Dean? Or whaterver? Weigh in.

 

I'd rather see him hit by a bullet than a bubble.

Wait .. was that the question?

 

Seriously Matt....how do you feel about him? Obviously you're voting Bush, but even I don't want Bush dead. (I know you were joking).

As a Republican, what's so bad about him?

 

I think you bring up a good point, Death Rabbit, but we shouldn't underestimate Kerry. He's no slacker - he has a military resume, political experience, more money in his personal account than Bush could possibly raise, and that presidential "look".

But let me quote from a site - KausFiles - that I've mentioned before in the Kerry contest context; it's a moderate Democrat's polyblog. A bit of yesterday's entry, which matches your concern exactly, Death Rabbit:

But then, The Economist did put Kerry on their cover recently, and wrote a favorable review of him. Or is that "favourable"?

[ February 12, 2004, 02:50: Message edited by: Grey Magistrate ]

 

Well, as an outside observer, I'm not sure that it matters much whether Kerry is the “Real Deal” or not. It seems to me that the U.S. is currently divided between two factions:
1. Those who want Bush out at any cost and will back the candidate who seems most likely to defeat him, OR those who vote Democrat as a matter of principal.
2. Those who think Bush has served his country well, and deserves a second term.

For the record, I dread the thought of Bush getting in again, but on the other hand, the interests of the citizens of foreign nations nations often clash with those of the nation doing the electing (in this case, the U.S.)

 

I pity the democrats. This is my opinion but by picking John Kerry they have doomed themselves. Massachusetts is one of the most liberal states in the country, if not the liberalest (sic). It doesn't matter what Kerry believes in, he is going to be painted as a Mass liberal and it will be his downfall.

Here in Mass we are about to commit the national sin of legalizing gay marriage. Not civil unions, but actually allowing the use of the term marriage. It will cause confusion and lawsuits throughout the country at the state and federal level as gay couples get "married" in Mass and then sue their own respective communities to be recognized.

The republicans will hammer this issue throughout the nation. It won't even matter what Kerry's position on it is (and I don't believe he has stated one yet), but he will be painted with the same crazy brush as the entire commnwealth.

If that issue doesn't kill him (which I think it will), then his coming thru the primaries unscathed will do him in.

Being from Massachusetts, I can tell you there are all sorts of unsavory stories about Kerry that are being stockpiled as ammunition.

 

I have to agree with Snook. I saw a picture recently that I'm sure will get circulated...that of a younger John Kerry, who at the time was Massachusets Attorney General to Governor Micheal Dukakis! The association with tax and spend Liberalism, along with the current state of political affairs in his home state could well serve to be a very destructive force to his candidacy.

When you take that into context with a stabilizing situation in Iraq, an improving economy, the trial of Sadam and the capture (or killing) of bin Laden (I think that it is waiting to happen), and the Kerry phenomenon will be a tempest in a teapot.

Clinton was able to win election because he seemed very "Moderate", and was able to attract a large swing vote (along with Perot draining Moderate and Libertarian votes). Kerry seems far more "Liberal", which has galvanized the party line, but I don't think it will appeal to middle class America...and they are the ones who vote.

Interesting note on Kerry's success...even though he is winning primaries there are far fewer votes being cast in almost every State indicating either voter apathy (which usually favors the incumbent) or a reduction in registered Democrats. Even the pro-pundits are not sure what to make of this.

It was further interesting to note that in the recent "Time" magazine cover story they chose a picture of John Kerry that looked very "Rooseveltish"...liberal media bias?

[edit] Sorry, I said that he was Attorney General under Dukakis...I was wrong, he was actually Lieutenant Governor...worse!

[ February 12, 2004, 16:40: Message edited by: Hacken Slash ]

 

Death Rabbit wanted to know what I really think. Honestly, I'm not as well informed on the subject as I should be. From what I've seen, however, there are a few matters that worry me.

First, he has waffled on his support for the war in Iraq. First voting for it, then opposing it, now supporting it again. Sounds like he is judging his stance on the matter by public opinion.

Secondly, he was a Friend of Fonda during the Vietnam War. That just gives me the "heebie-jeebies" all over!

Thirdly, his grandfather was FRENCH . That can't be good!

 

Huh? What kind of reason is that? Did you sprain your wrist watching, "Barbarella" one too many times?

 

I think one can sprain the brain from watching "Barbarella", but not the wrist!

 

@ Snook

Kerry's position on gay marriage is that he opposes gay marriage, but is in favor of civil unions. So he's kind of on the fence with that. The civil union thing is like saying I sort of definitely think gays should probably maybe be allowed to get married. Or something like that.

@ All

There are certianly some pitfalls that Kerry may have to overcome in the upcoming months, although I do not think many of them will be against Kerry himself. I think regardless of who won the nomination, there are issues that any canidate would have to deal with. Things like the economy, the war in Iraq, Saddam impending trial, if bin Laden gets captured, etc. Whether it was Kerry, Dean, Clark, Edwards, Liebermann, Shapton, Kucinich, whoever, it wouldn't matter. These are going to be issue regardless of who the nomination is. From that standpoint, I think that Kerry is just as good if not better than the others to answer these issues. No one is claiming that issues will not come up, but I think what DR is asking is not IF they will come up, but what do you think Kerry is going to do WHEN they come up, and based on that, is Kerry the man for the job?

Or maybe I'm just an idiot...

 

oops, scary news on drudgereport for the Kerry campaign. I kinda hope this isn't substantiated...

 

Kerry is not a flip-flop, as many like to suggest.

Yes, he supported it based on the case made by the White House. What he opposed was the way it was done. Trampling international alliances in order to fight an unpopular, unnecessary war is a bad strategy any way you slice it. Kerry being glad that Saddam is out of power (which he's always said was a necessity) does not equate to a change of heart. Remember, the war was never about Saddam being an evil tyrant, as the administration is saying now. It was always about the exaggerated immenant threat of WMD.

He's also been accused of flip-flopping on "No Child Left Behind." Yes, he did vote for it. Because as written it was a good idea. The reason he's criticizing it now is because Bush has drastically underfunded it and neglected it until now, the election year. Bush touts it as a big success. But he apparantly is oblivious to the school districts around the country who are actually suffering as a result of it. Bush has a track record of proposing these "big ideas" and not being honest about the costs. Medicare, anyone?

 

Yep, I was wondering whether this would surface soon. It could be a bit ugly.

 

And I'm sure it's a total coincidence this is coming out in the midst of Bush's little AWOL controversy, and has nothing to do whatsoever with alliances between Drudge and the GOP.

What are the odds?

 

none of the other news sources have picked up on it; if there's any substance to it, I'm sure they'd want to check pretty carefully to make sure their sources are in order. If there's any truth behind the rumors, it's good they're coming out now and not in october...

 

No, he wasn't. They were at the same rally, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and they both happened to speak at it. Fonda was on CNN today saying, "I don't even think we shook hands." Kerry later made plain his disapproval when Fonda went to North Vietnam.

So is the Statue of Liberty.

People are making such a big deal of gay marriage, but honestly, I don't believe this is going to be a swing issue. The Republican base is going to vote for Bush in any event, but apart from them, I can't see anyone's mind being made up by the candidates' stances on gay marriage...even if they disagree with it. I think it might even end up blowing up in the Republican party's faces. This is one of those social issues where they tend to overplay their hand.

Kerry has an ironclad defense against the 'wimp' label, and I can't imagine Rove & Co. trying to exploit that. As soon as it's mentioned, the war records have to come out. And it looks like the VA might actually endorse Kerry. Which it ought to, given that Bush asks us to support the troops one day then cuts their combat pay, separation allowance, and salaries the next. Veterans' health benefits have been cut as well.

Even Limbaugh is lambasting the President for the recent budget proposal. Honestly, that budget might work out in bizarro America, but not in the real one...and it doesn't factor in the extra costs for Iraq and Afghanistan which will be requested post-election in a supplemental spending bill. This President has not vetoed one single spending bill in four years and has saddled the next two generations (at least) with backbreaking debt...To say nothing of the fact that those things he ought to be funding go unfunded. DR mentioned No Child Left Behind, but there's also that African Aids money which made a great soundbyte but which has since gone the way of the dodo.

Kerry will be vulnerable on the "liberal" label, but I don't think that will resonate like it used to...particularly when the association between "liberal" and "wimpish" has to be applied to a man with three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star.

Key factors for Kerry: The choice of running mate, and his performance in the inevitable debate.

My two cents.

Edit: Also, watch out for Michael Moore's film on the Bush-bin Laden connection, due out in September. I doubt too many people will bother to go and see it, but I think it'll get quite a lot of play in the media.

 

Before you get too excited about his military career, there is a lot of fiction involved. It has always been claimed that his Silver Star was for killing people that were already dead, and his three purple hearts were for wounds that he himself admitted caused him to miss two days of military time. Then after the third purple heart he pulled a lawyer, by citing a naval code that says three injuries and you can be pulled out of combat. He left his command as fast as he could get paperwork typed.

I'm just warning all the democrats. He has run for office numerous times here. The Republican party has all sorts of ammunition on him, that will matter to the rest of the country, even if it didn't matter here.

 

If there is any truth to the reports of recent infidelity, he may be on the ropes. I was hoping that he would make things interesting, but not like this.