 |
06.25.04
|
WITH FRIENDS LIKE RALPH NADER ...: I was a little worried when I first saw this:
But then I remembered that Nader plans to draw eqaully from Bush and Kerry, and I felt much better.
|
06.24.04
JOHN KERRY SISTER SOULJAHS EUROPE: Looks like Kerry has decided to take Peter Feaver's advice and bash our European allies over their foot-dragging on Iraq. Like Feaver, I think this is a very savvy move. It portrays Kerry as a both a tough guy and a multilateralist, which is about as good as you're going to do with his worldview. (Not that there's anything wrong with being a multilaterlist...) The only risk for Kerry, as Feaver pointed out, is that his jawboning might actually produce some results, which would shore Bush up politically. But, if Kerry is right that most foreign leaders want him to win in November, that risk is pretty small. And, in any case, it would be good for the country and the world if the jawboning did work, so I feel like us Bush-haters are pretty well hedged.
|
06.23.04
PAUL WOLFOWITZ--UNINTENTIONALLY COMING CLEAN: This line from Paul Wolfowtiz's congressional testimony yesterday struck me as pretty amusing:
Frankly, part of our problem [i.e., the reason most Americans think the situation in Iraq is so hopeless] is a lot of the press are afraid to travel very much, so they sit in Baghdad and they publish rumors.
Um, yeah. And who's fault is it that it's too dangerous to travel beyond Baghdad?
(Alright, technically it's the insurgents' fault. But who's proven completely incompetent at fighting the insurgency, and in preventing it from materializing in the first place?)
|
06.22.04
|
THE NEW WASHINGTON POST POLL--EVEN BETTER NEWS THAN YOU THINK: It's not hard to interpret the Washington Post/ABC News poll released yesterday as good news for John Kerry. The poll shows Kerry extending his lead over Bush to four points with Ralph Nader in the mix, and to eight points in a head-to-head matchup with Bush. Also, as the Post story notes in its lead, Kerry has completely erased Bush's edge when it comes to dealing with terrorism.
In fact, I think the news may be slightly better than even those numbers suggest. According to the poll, the percentage of respondents who said the war in Iraq was justified is 47, versus 52 percent who said it wasn't, the highest such number ever recorded in the Post/ABC poll. Meanwhile, the percentage of respondents who said the United States is making progress in establishing a democratic government in Iraq rose to 50 percent from 37 percent last month. Taken together, I think the implication of these two sets of responses is that Americans consider the question of whether the war was a good idea separate from the question of whether we're successful at setting up an Iraqi government. This is critical since it suggests Kerry could benefit from the persistent--even growing--feeling that the war was a mistake even as views about the management of postwar Iraq improve, which is likely to continue after the handoff of power at the end of the month.
UPDATE: Kenny Baer makes a compelling case that, despite the finding in the Post/ABC poll, Kerry is still trailing Bush when it comes to fighting terrorism. He doesn't, however, attempt to explain why the poll would show Kerry leading Bush on terrorism if that's not actually true. Thoughts welcome. ...
|
06.21.04
|
TODAY'S HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE VEEP SPECULATION: The latest issue of Newsweek reports that "Kerry sources" say the vice presidential contest has become a two-man race between Tom Vilsack and Dick Gephardt. Vilsack's only advantage, as far as I can tell, is the freshness/boldness factor. Of course, that's been a relatively important criterion for recent Democratic nominees (see Joe Lieberman in 2000 and Al Gore in 1992). And it could be for Kerry, too--particularly since he isn't viewed as the freshest or boldest guy around. But I think Gephardt's selling points (lack of political ambition, ample national experience, and the ability to carry a vote-rich swing state--Iowa in my book is neither vote-rich nor a bona fide swing state) put him over the top. That's assuming, of course, that Newsweek is right about these being the lone remaining contenders...
|
|
HOW THE CLINTON BOOK HURTS KERRY: I think the Clinton book will end up exciting hard-core Democrats and Republicans more or less equally, making it basically a wash politically. I'm not moved by the idea that the comparison with Clinton will be unfavorable to Kerry, charisma-wise. (Yes, but so what? Only Kerry is on the ballot, and the book isn't going to make Democrats any less fired up about beating Bush.) And I don't think memories of Lewinsky and impeachment per se will hurt Kerry. (It wasn't Kerry who fooled around with an intern. And, in any case, impeachment ended up helping Democrats in the 1998 midterm elections, when it looked to voters like Republicans were overreaching.)
But one slightly more subtle effect concerns me. David Kirkpatrick reports in today's Times that:
Bush campaign allies are reviving talk about the honor and dignity of the Oval Office in thinly veiled references to the Clinton years.
"I have found that the best way to get a rousing response from a crowd is to say that whatever disagreements you may have with President Bush on one issue or another, nobody can argue that he hasn't restored honor to the White house," said Gary L. Bauer, chairman of the organization American Values. "I think there is a reason that the Kerry people were not all that excited about this book coming out now."
The White House has tried on several occasions to frame the election as a referendum on a very narrowly-defined understanding of the president's "character." (How many times have you heard that Bush is sure of his convictions, willing to make tough decisions, committed to doing what's right, etc.?) The reason is obvious: Doing so deflects attention from the administration's colossal failures abroad and its borderline-corrupt policies at home, and therefore represents Bush's best hope of being reelected. If the Clinton book helps the White House in this regard, even slightly, then it could be a devastating blow to Kerry's chances of winning.
|
|
|
|
|
RSS FEED |
|
|
