Harder to blame the party, but, perhaps, more appropriate.
Kerry seems more of a symptom than the disease.
Our party has lacked a cohesive messaging and message delivery system for years. We were spoiled by Bill Clinton who knew how to talk to voters.
While Newt Gingrich was developing key words and phrases for Republicans way back in the 1990s, we were relying on one-off messages from Clinton as our rallying points. (And, no, Al From, it was Clinton and not you.)
Clinton gone, message gone.
(more)
In the meantime, the Republicans developed an incredibly effective strategic marketing machine and a disciplined approach to delivering their message from every source (elected officials, party representatives, pundits, radio zealots, etc.):
- Frank Luntz tests issues then tests words and phrases revolving around those issues in polls and focus groups, winnowing lists down to the sure winners.
- Rove, Mehlman and Ed Gillespie made sure those tested issues, words and phrases were repeated ad nauseum by every Republican speaking in speeches, on television or radio and writing in print or online forums.
And the public bought it.
Meanwhile, Kerry was changing campaign consultants as often as some of us change socks (boy, do my feet stink!), shifting his message, literally, from week to week.
And the voters chose the steady hand. Even though that steady hand had fucked up nearly evrything it touched. This election was about consistency and steadiness. Kerry offered neither (in terms of campaign rhetoric and marketing).
The Democratic Party needs to build a marketing machine to rival (and surpass) the Republicans. And we need agreement among all the players that in times of election, we will be disciplined about staying on message. If McCain's election-year ass-kissing of Bush proved one thing, it's that Republicans are relentless about message discipline when it matters most.
Kerry was symptomatic of our problems. But he wasn't the cause of them.
