Recently,
Lord Foul has been having a heyday, sowing despair amongst the ranks of Democrats, and his minions have been spending time on dKos sowing fear amongst the faithful.
Well there's an interesting article over at the latimes, which is worth reading.
Since it requires registration, I'll quote relevant parts here...
Ever since Sen. John F. Kerry effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination in March, the media have increasingly wondered out loud if he's up to the task of taking on President Bush. Some commentators have proclaimed that Kerry's campaign is sinking even before he's formally nominated. One conservative columnist called Kerry "a terrible, terrible, terrible candidate."
...
But Kerry is not the first candidate to encounter a fusillade of doubts about his fitness as a presidential candidate early in a campaign. Recent history suggests that initial impressions of weakness didn't stop some notable candidates from going on to victory in November and changing America's politics and policies.
...goes on to provide details on Nixon, Reagan, Clinton...
Kerry demonstrated his political resilience in his 1996 senatorial campaign, when he was locked in a tight race with popular Massachusetts Gov. William Weld. During their first debate, Weld challenged Kerry to explain his opposition to the death penalty. Kerry replied: "I know something about killing. I don't like killing. I don't think a state honors life by turning around and sanctioning killing." Kerry went on from there to win the election 52% to 45%.
Kerry's career and pundits' own track records apparently haven't impressed the current crop of Democratic worrywarts and political talking heads.
While nobody can predict the outcome of this year's presidential race, the critics should remember the recent past and not write off Kerry based simply on some early miscues, for at least three reasons -- Nixon, Reagan and Clinton.