Okay, maybe not. But at the very least, everyone's favorite pissed-off Cajun cueball is saying that Edwards has a better shot at the number two slot than anyone else at 6 to 5. Hillary Clinton is the last one mentioned on the list at 15 to 1, though I'm sure there are less-likely choices (Lyndon LaRouche comes to mind).
I keep hearing people talk about Hillary as VP. It's so nuts on so many counts, I'm not even going to try refuting it anymore. Okay... just the once. A) She's too polarizing and there are too many folks in the center who don't like her; and B) She's made a commitment to serve out her term in New York--one state no one on the Democratic ticket can afford to miff.
Edwards... I don't know. It's possible. But I just keep going back to 2000 when Al Gore announced that Joe Lieberman was going to be his running mate. Now, I was familiar with the Senator back then, but even my reaction was--if I remember correctly--something along the lines of, "Joe Whoberman?"
In other words, I would not be surprised to be very surprised by Kerry's ultimate pick.
posted by Scott |
3/05/2004 |
| Tuesday, March 02, 2004
Time To Fall In Line
I'm not a huge fan of John Kerry's, but seeing as how he pretty much swept the primaries today and secured the Democratic nomination, I'm going to start learning how to become one. Kerry won every Super Tuesday state except for Vermont, which (and this was actually a surprise) went to that state's no-longer-in-the-running former Governor Howard Dean.
It's also come to my attention that many of you are less than thrilled with Kerry as the nominee. My wife, even less a fan of losing than I am, is pretty bummed that first Clark and then Edwards have fallen to Kerry, who she sees as "too much of a politician."
So with this in mind, I present you with The Idiot's Guide to Supporting John Kerry.
In my mailbox this afternoon was the new issue of The Nation, headlined, "What's Right With Kerry." Good timing. In the accompanying article, David Corn points out some things that we may not have known about Kerry that may just change our minds.
For those on the left who doubt Kerry's credentials, Corn pulls out Kerry's vote against the Defense of Marriage Act. It was such a political hot potato that even Paul Wellstone voted for it (a vote he would later come to regret). But Kerry, who is now portrayed by some as a mealy-mouthed waffler, stood up, took a huge political risk, and said no. He said that the legislation was "meant to divide Americans" and called the issue "fundamentally ugly" and "fundamentally political."
There's even something in Corn's piece for those in the center who see Kerry as one more Washington-party-line guy. In the eighties, after digging away at the Iran/Contra scandal, Kerry turned his prosecutorial eye inward. He dove head-first into an investigation of BCCI, turning upside down all sorts of rocks and unearthing countless skeletons from Democratic closets. Both parties were furious with him. The web of the scandal touched everyone from Jimmy Carter to Henry Kissinger to Abu Nidal to the CIA.
This brings me to another point. One of my worries about Kerry is that he isn't electable.
Stop laughing. No, really. It's rude. Seriously, knock it off. Okay.
John Kerry speaks like one would expect a Yale graduate to speak. Sometimes it comes off as a bit condescending. Sometimes, it's a little too 'Yankee' even for my taste--and I'm from the Northeast. I'm really afraid of the way Team W is already starting to try to Dukakis Kerry up. But Kerry may be a stronger general election candidate than I have been giving him credit for.
Over at The New Republic a few days ago, Ryan Lizza posted a fantastic 'Campaign Journal' piece comparing the biographies of Kerry and Bush. While I highly recommend you just go over there and read it all for yourself, here's a bit from the first item:
"Kerry in 1970: In His First Campaign For Congress, Kerry Wanted To Defund CIA."
"Bush in 1972: After Smashing Into Trash Cans, Bush Wanted To Fight Future Head of CIA."
...you get the idea.
There are, I'm sure, a million other reasons for Democrats to rejoice that Kerry has been picked as the Democratic nominee. I like this 'Idiots' Guide' idea, so expect to be seeing more of it in the coming weeks and months.
posted by Scott |
3/02/2004 |
|
I'll update this one later on tonight.
posted by Scott |
3/02/2004 |
| Monday, March 01, 2004
Last-Minute Polling: Super Tuesday Edition
A number of you have pointed out that it's been quite a while since I posted anything. I certainly can't argue that, can I? Anyway, I'll get to the polling report in a minute, but I wanted to apologize for my recent absence (new job, long hours) and let you all know that DemWatch will be undergoing some changes in the coming months.
It's become increasingly obvious to me that, with the primaries winding down, a primary-centric blog is somewhat limiting. With that in mind, I'm moving DemWatch off of Blogger, onto a more permanent home, switching to Movable Type, and setting up a bunch of the type of bells and whistles that y'all have been asking me about for the better part of the last year.
Hopefully, that will make up for my recent lack of attention to DW and keep the site relevant moving into November and beyond.
Okay, now on to the meat and potatoes.
Kerry's going to clean up tomorrow. Sorry if you hadn't heard.
SurveyUSA seems to be just about the only game in town when it comes to comprehensive polling. There are scattered others, but the numbers are all pretty uniform:
California - Kerry 61%, Edwards 24%
New York - Kerry 61%, Edwards 20%
Ohio - Kerry 53%, Edwards 32%
Connecticut - Kerry 64%, Edwards 22%
Maryland - Kerry 54%, Edwards 29%
Rhode Island - Kerry 66%, Edwards 23%
Georgia - Kerry 46%, Edwards 42% (close, but close enough?)
I haven't seen any numbers for Vermont or Massachusetts, but it comes as no surprise that Kerry has commanding leads in both states. Minnesota apparently doesn't have any polling data, and while some are saying Edwards might have a shot here, I'm guessing that he really doesn't. (And if I'm wrong, I get to be pleasantly surprised tomorrow.)
Let me comment that I'm pretty depressed by what this has turned into. At a few points during this primary season, genuine outsiders seemed to have a shot at the nomination. The grassroots appeared to take a win over Washington insiders. First it was Howard Dean, then it was Wesley Clark, then it was back to Dean again, and then John Edwards shocked everyone, finishing a strong second in Iowa.
But in the end, it came down to John Kerry--a man who looked like (once a Gore candidacy was counted out) the presumptive nominee from the start. Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Kerry. I like him, I agree with him, and I will support him. But I'm still not sure he's the best candidate to go mano a mano with Team W in November. (Though it could get interesting when the mainstream media start seriously covering Rand Beers and his
support of Kerry.)
Me, I like Edwards. I think he'd make a damn fine President. But what do I know? I also used to support Dean and Clark. All of the Democrats are light-years beyond Bush in terms of intellect and ethics.
Well... maybe just one...
posted by Scott |
3/01/2004 |
|
