Kos posted a front page story earlier this afternoon in which he wrote
Good thing I don't have to remain neutral. A BIG HEARTY NO to Kerry in '08. Been there, done that, time to move on.
I couldn't agree more. But, don't get me wrong. I like and respect John Kerry but he may be engaged in a futile attempt to prove F. Scott Fitzgerald wrong by suggesting that there are second acts in American lives. Moreover, is anyone clamoring for Kerry to run again?
More below the fold.
Here's the hand Kerry was dealt in 2004
John Kerry's 2004 Advantages
- The Democratic Party was unified as never before -- with no credible 3rd party challengers to siphon off votes in battleground states.
- There was unprecedented opposition to Bush among other countries -- virtually all of them. And America's global standing had rarely, if ever, been lower in the post-World War II era.
- Almost all of Kerry's primary opponents worked their tail off for him during the General Election.
- There was widespread cheering in the Democratic Party (and much of the media) when Kerry selected John Edwards as his running mate.
- Kerry had one of the most impressive resumes and compelling personal stories of any challenger in recent memory.
- As a Democratic challenger, Kerry (and groups sympathetic to the Democratic Party) achieved financial parity with and even outspent Bush and the Republican Party.
- On one of Bush's signature issues (war, not terrorism) Kerry had plenty of opportunities to distinguish himself from Bush.
- On a host of domestic issues (budget/trade deficits, environment, social welfare, education, etc, etc) , Kerry had wide leads in public opinion polls.
- There were plenty of disgruntled moderate Republicans who were unhappy with Bush about balooning federal deficits, out-of-control federal spending, loss of individual liberties, and the like that Kerry could have appealed to. And finally...
- Kerry was running against one of the most mediocre, linguistically challenged, and despised presidents of all times.
How in the world did Kerry allow Bush and his minions to paint him as a flip-flopping, windsurfing, snowboarding, unpatriotic American? If Kerry could not take utilize these advantages to his (and the Democratic Party's) benefit, what does it say about his qualifications as an effective candidate and campaigner? In 2000, I bet Al Gore would have loved to have been in the enviable position that Kerry found himself in 2004.
It is often said by sports analysts that 70%-80% of professional football games are lost, not won. While not as prohibitive a favorite, wasn't this (Kerry's loss) to some degree reminiscent of Johnny Unitas and the Baltimore Colts' 16-7 loss to Joe Namath and the New York Jets in the 1969 Super Bowl?
When will a Democratic challenger ever have these advantages again? Probably never.
Remember to take the poll and, if your heart so desires, do recommend this diary as I'd like to expand this discussion. Thanks.
