Would a Kerry nomination be an electoral disaster?

First one simple fact, Kerry is most certainly liberal and associated with the mainstream liberal-wing of the Democratic party (read the Ted Kennedy wing of the party). I can imagine the commercials now from Rove.

How would Kerry, if the nominee, appeal to enough voters to take the one or two southern states that we would have to carry to assure victory? How will he dispell the media spin of being the next McGovern or Dukkakis?

How is he going to appeal to the strongly disaffected base of the party who was sick of the Democratic leadership's approach to dealing with Bush? I'm sorry, but until he hit the campaign trail Kerry WAS part of the problem.

It may be ABB, but we need to ask some serious questions about the 'E' word: electability. In the the real world, unfortunately it does matter. What happens if Kerry loses his stump stride again? He only got his groove back the last 14 days or so. How will his health hold out given the stress and grueling schedule (remember the surgery for cancer)? This was part of the untold reason that Sen. Graham dropped out.

Just like with Dean, or any of the other candidates we need to ask these questions now.

I have always liked Kerry, but convince me that he can win...


*Note, this is not baiting a Kerry bash fest... I meant these questions quite seriously.
**Disclaimer, I am currently (and still) a Dean supporter through the primary.

Dean OTOH would be a disaster!

I can't keep up. :shrug:

I am basing my assertion on voting record.

...and hired somebody Teddy Kennedy recommended to him. At that point he stopped sniping at Dean and started talking about issues.

It was also at that point that folks started to listen to what he had to say, rather than simply sneering at his looks, his background and his wife's money.

He could win this thing, but only if he puts either Clark or Edwards on the ticket. Can you imagine the chimp standing up to two decorated war heroes, one of whom has general's stars? It would be truly wonderful to watch. Edwards, of course, would give southerners a reason to vote for a Yankee instead of going third party or holding their noses to vote for Bush's good ole boy act.

Weak. No leadership in the clutch.

His positions on gun control and the death penalty will kill him in the swing states. Rove will make him out to be the quintessential, northeastern elitist liberal. He could very well end up winning only the same states Gore won.

on the ticket with him?

but VP's only go so far.

What is considered a bloodbath? I say 1972, 1980, 1984 and 1988.

Liberals are usually portrayed as wimps. Kerry took enough bullets and spilled enough blood on the ground in Vietnam to dispel that.

Bronze Star. Silver Star. Three Purple Hearts.

They don't just give that stuff away.

but all of our candidates will have a tough fight ahead. I do think the New England liberal thing will hurt him somewhat -- sadly, with the state of mind of the U.S. electorate it's pretty hard to find a way around that.

However, he has a shot but he has to win every potential non-southern tossup state including the midwest and southwest. Frankly, I'd feel more comfortable with Clark but Kerry would have my enthusiastic support.

we would STILL need to take one or two southern states...

Any would do: Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina or Louisiana...

other major state offices, and threw the pugs out. He would have to come to La. and campaign

& John Breaux said Clark or Lieberman can carry Louisiana.

I agree, where the F was he since 2000? How come today is the first I've heard of him criticizing the "special interest politics"?

I'm still pissed at him for the "get over it" ( election 2000 ) comment.

He hasn't done much since except convince a few journalists in lunches in NYC that he's put in his time and deserves the nomination.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

is a bit tougher and more substantial than Dukakis. How he will play in the South is yet to be seen. I don't see how Dean would fare any better than Kerry though.

I do worry about those 5 Southern Senate seats. We lose those, we lose fillibuster. I can see Kerry doing a bit better with the military than Dean.


MzPip
:dem:

in the Florida governor's race against JEBtm.

JEBtm didn't even have a National Guard background to fall on...

i sure hope it's not an electoral disaster if kerry or anyone else is the nominee. i want the chimp out of here.

A Kerry nomination will only get us to about a 52% / 48% win in my book, which is enough for the electoral college to fuck us again or for BBV to come up and look like a legitimate result.

Yes, I think Kerry can beat Bush, but not by enough that it's going to matter in this next election.

He won't be a disaster, but he won't win due to vote rigging or the ludicrous EC system.

I think nominating Dean would be an electoral disaster. Nominating Kerry would be an improvement, but he'd still lose the popular vote by 4-8 percentage points, and the electoral college by a slightly larger margin.

Of course, in my opinion, any loss to Bush would be a disaster. That's why I'm backing Edwards (and, to a lesser extent, Clark).

Just look at the entrance poll data from Iowa. Kerry is a hit in every demographic.

Kerry is a liberal who can woo Republicans to crossover in spite of his progressive policies -- by inspiring them:

In Iowa, Kerry gains believers, including some Republicans

<snip>

The night before, Kerry was tripping over people on the floor of a packed Veterans of Foreign Wars post, and even Republicans were raising their hands and announcing conversions on the spot.

"I'll be very honest with you," said Shirley Cohen of Hollis, New Hampshire. "I was a Republican. I changed to become independent two months ago. I was very strongly leading toward another candidate. But you've very thoroughly convinced me tonight."

Other candidates may be talking about religion, but at almost every stop here in Iowa now, Kerry is making believers of large numbers of Democrats and others who say they are unimpressed by Howard Dean, unsure of John Edwards's experience and uninspired by Dick Gephardt.

After hearing Kerry on Monday night in Muscatine, Iowa, Ray and Sharon Kapteina, who caucused for George W. Bush in 2000, said they were re-registering as independents to caucus for Kerry. "He makes me feel like he's a leader," said Kapteina, 56, a contract analyst.

http://www.iht.com/articles/124980.html

election they have to have a broad coalition that includes African Americans, Traditional Democrats, Progressives, other Minorities, and INDEPENDENTS.

I all-capped Independents because they (and sometimes traditional Dems) represent the swing vote. Lose any piece and you cannot win.

Iowa results:
Among voters that describe themselves as 'liberal', Kerry received 33% of the vote, Dean received 24% of the vote.
Among voters that describe themselves as 'Democrats', Kerry received 36% of the vote, Dean received 20% of the vote.
Among voters that describe themselves as 'Strong Democrats', Kerry received 35% of the vote, Dean received 22% of the vote.
Among voters that describe themselves as 'Independents', Kerry received 34% of the vote, Dean received 21% of the vote.
Among voters that describe themselves as 'union households', Kerry received 29% of the vote, Dean received 19% of the vote.
Among voters that describe themselves as 'college graduates', Kerry received 33% of the vote, Dean received 24% of the vote.
Among voters that describe themselves as 'internet users', Kerry received 33% of the vote, Dean received 24% of the vote.
Among voters who 'somewhat disapprove' of the war in Iraq, Kerry received 34% of the vote, Dean received 14% of the vote.
Among voters who 'strongly disapprove' of the war in Iraq, Kerry received 34% of the vote, Dean received 29% of the vote.
Among first-time caucus goers, Kerry received 35% of the vote, Dean received 19% of the vote.
Among voters aged 17-29, Kerry received 35% of the vote, Dean received 25% of the vote.
Among voters aged 65+ (the group that votes the most), Kerry received 43% of the vote, Dean received 15% of the vote.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/IA/index.html

You do know that Harry was the first stooge for the military industrial complex, don't you?
Miller said the speech was fine, that's all. But I'm sure that you already know that.

and there's nothing wrong with that

a pie in the sky.

I highly doubt we'll ever win any of the southern states this year.(even with Edwards or Clark).

Concentrate the resources to North and Midwest....energize base.

But, I'd rather vote for beliefs instead of pandering to the demography that ignores our views.

We've been pandering, where did that get us?

No where.

Start adding where the Dem would have to win to avoid this... Other places that are nearly as difficult for a Dem as the south...

States like Ohio, Indiana, Arizona, Colorado, etc.

It's gonna be a hard sell.

Gore lost by less than 5% last time and they are in big economic trouble. If we win Ohio Bush is through.

paint with a broad brush and write us all off. There are large pockets of real Dems in the south and now we even have some angered repugs, many of whom have told me (since they know my feelings)that they will not vote for Bush again. With a Clark or an Edwards, we can win this demographic. I'm a transplant because of husband and I hunger for Dem who can win the south. It can be done, we just need the right candidate pair.

Dole went against Clinton during a boom.

Kerry against, ahem, Bush, during a sluggish period.

Not a comparison.

we can avoid the "liberal" label is by nominating Lieberman. I don't see a big ground-swell to do that . . .

I agree with jmaier; whoever wins has a tough roe to hoe. Incumbency + $200 million is tough to face, and if the economy continues to improve and Iraq doesn't blow up in our faces, the odds are long.

Those who assert their candidate will "blow away" the repubs are living a fantasy. Our winning scenario is to win all the states Gore took in 2000, and add one more. The most obvious possibilities are New Hampshire, Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, or Tennessee. The margin was slight in all except LA, and Democrats have done well there since, winning two statewide elections (unfortunately the extremely popular Breaux won't be on the ticket).

Even so, we won Wisconsin, Iowa, New Mexico, and Oregon very narrowly last time, so holding those states won't be easy.

Putting Bill Richardson on the ticket would give us a shot at Colorado, Florida, and Arizona.

We will only win with a united, all-out effort on all fronts. We have to energize and turn out our people and register as many new ones as we can. It's an uphill battle, but the stakes are high.

Kerry is at no more disadvantage than any of the others, as far as I can see.

I am still uncommitted and considering Kerry, Edwards, Clark, and Dean.

Can't, he's chairing the convention.

women will vote for Kerry. Remember Bush was packaged as warm and fuzzy and moderate for the last election. The women who bought that will not vote for Bush again.

Men will vote for Kerry. The men who simply didn't like Gore -- and I know quite a few traditionally Democratic men who didn't like him -- they can respect Kerry. Kerry is going to have a network of veterans talking to other veterans who have traditionally voted Republican. Kerry can get other crossover Republican voters. I'm sure even George Will is going to vote for Kerry.

I look forward to the level of the debate being raised. I want to see Kerry and Edwards and Clark, with intelligence and quick wit, and especially, CLASS, debating the issues. It will make them all better candidates.

Going into the fall, Bush will be on the defensive. The convention in New York, as more people sense victory and release from Bush control, will be a nail in the Republican coffin.

B-)

record in the sentate?

The man's got a great head of hair. So what's this about?

:)

Stop being afraid of Rove, we're going to take it to them... they have the horrible record, they are the miserable failures, we'll expose them for what they are... the little man will have to step out from behind the curtain!

If it helps, Kerry's nearly across-the board win in Iowa should settle you down. He ran strong with young, old, anti-war, prowar, union. If the polls are indicating a trend that continues until next week, we might even see better numbers in NH for Kerry.

So, come on, join us and we'll go beat up on rove, bush and their republican drones!

Cuz that's what Kerry's done so well...

I'm not afraid of Rove. That's why I'm a Dean supporter. What I'm afraid of is Kerry wussing out again. What I'M afraid of is Kerry saying things like "My IWR vote was the right thing to do for the country."

All of our front four are electable. They're the strongest field we've had in years.

Bush is unelectable. He's a miserable failure.

Just repeat it. Believe it. It's true.

Any of them will get slimed by the VRWC but that's expected.

Fight.

Bush may be an intellectual idiot, but his political-sense is pretty good.

Remember he was the architect of Willie Horton during the '88 campaign...

Let's not 'misunderestimate' the Chimp.

Kerry can stand tall against shrubby.

n/t

I am looking at the latest poll numbers from NH,
(see details on Drudgereport.com)
and Clark is fading fast. Good news is that my
three favorites are now polling amongst the top three!

I doubt very much you'll hear much depression among Clark supporters even if Drudge is right (even a broken clock is right two times a day). The bottom line is that we have the organization and the money to keep on going long past New Hampshire, even if Clark takes a drubbing there.

Dean isn't going away anytime soon either and Edwards will be playing on his own turf. The irony will be that if Kerry wins New Hampshire he'll be left with little money and little organisation on the ground in the South.

The possiblity of four candidates fighting it out on the floor of the convention could well become a reality.

Now there are six.

Oh, yeah, and Lieberman.

instead of a rubber stamp of the presumptive nominee.

but Kerry will only take the Northeast and West Coast and maybe a few industrial states. New York, California, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Michigan might add up to a decent number, but it will still be a landslide.

for Bush.

I want to see that idiot in the WH run and hide! :kick:

we really need to concentrate on the Midwest area.

If we can start polling better in midwest, then start worrying about the south.Until then, don't even care for the south.

I live in Minnesota and things have been scaring me since 2000.
This is supposed to be a "hardcore" Blue state...not so anymore.

A gun grabbing, $75 dollar haircut, Yale, Skull & Bones, multi-millionaire, elitist from Boston will not resonate across America. Add to that Kerry's speech pattern, that pompous patronizing paternalistic voice that sounds remarkably similar to Principal Seymour Skinner of the Simpsons.



When not conducting fire drills, augmenting the school lunches with shredded newspaper, polishing the statue of the school mascot, or calculating detention time for Bart, Skinner can be found at his desk, reliving, through vivid flashbacks, the more horrific moments of his experience as a Green Beret in 'Nam.

Though he still lives at home with overly-protective mother, and purportedly wears a toupee, Seymour has managed to eke out a meager romantic life. On one occasion he became enmeshed in a scandalous affair with Edna Krabappel, while on another he proposed to Patty Bouvier. When Patty, turned him down, the broken-hearted Skinner remained steadfastly optimistic, declaring, "Tomorrow is another school day!"

http://www.thesimpsons.com/bios/bios_school_skinner.html

which means that Kerry won with 9.5% of all Iowa Democrats.

Are the Democrats going to carry Iowa in the Fall?

The highest turnout in Iowa was back in 1988.

so what was the total percentage for the eminently electable Dean juggernaut?

Considering how much we hate Bush, and how much other people see him as a buffoon, it is troubling that the portion of the electorate that chooses to drop out of the process continues to rise.

For some reason, there is no one capturing the imagination of the voters outside of the die-hard partisans. We are in real trouble!

For example, there was a report on TV tonight about the furor in St. Louis when a TV station decided to switch from a reality show to the Gephardt concession speech. People were furious that their TV was pre-empted for Gephardt.

beefore the actual caucus! And they were proven wrong!!
Unless you are better prognosticator than all the pundits,
I think a Kerry/Edwards ticket has the best chance of
winning in november.

I'm not trying to "take-Down" Kerry here.

But, you have to remember that Iowa has a very strong GOP support since 2000. I've been seeing it as a trend here (MN, WI,IA and the Dakotas). Don't let the Vilsack thing fool you. It's the same reason why Daschle has been re-elected several times in S. Dakota.

I'm just telling you a trend that I've been seeing...ask other Mid-westerners...they'll tell you the same.

for their haircuts, or get someone to cut their hair for free.

Guns are a big issue. My sister lives in Kentucky, and they love their guns and their dogs. They are not the stereotypical gun nut that many of you imagine, they are very much working class, pro-choice, and want pot decriminalized, and they hate Bush. But they vote GOP because of guns!

the only people I know locally that would vote for Kerry are those Democrats who would vote for Cthulu if he had a (D) behind his name...and those are few and far between.

and the most complaints I've heard is that his hair looks bad. Guess 75.00 doesn't buy you much.

And when did John Kerry come out against dogs!?!?!?! I musta missed that speech.

People love their hunting rifles in Kentucky. . .what do they think about assault rifles handguns etc? Should be unregulated????

besides that - what - exactly does the cost of his haircut have to do with anything?

What, are they shaving their backs at the same time?!?!?

No way in hell I'd EVER pay $75 for a haircut...

here in Western Mass.

I really think that Kerry is having his swan song with Iowa and New Hampshire and then comes the time when he calls Gephardt for lessons in crying in public. Clark will wipe Kerry up and down the Mississippi River.

The one thing not lost on me is the biggst loser in Iowa --- the one that was wiped completley out of the race --- was the biggest supporter of the War with Iraq: Dick Gephardt.

Did you say $75 haircut?

I look like Wes Clark's evil twin, Skippy.

:P

Stick to watching the Simpsons and getting your life's lessons from a cartoon and leave us adults to do the serious work of discussing the issues...

But, I see your point.

I'm more afraid of Kerry being "Gored".

I have two words that everyone better get real used to hearing:
"Massachusettes Liberal".

so...you're worried about a New England guy perceived as a liberal across the nation?

well, at least a bunch of veterans are likely to get out the vote for Kerry.

I think you gotta get past the "speech". Worried about Kerry's health? If Cheney could do it...I think Kerry can get it done.

that avatar.

and at least down here, "Massachusetts Liberal" has an ENTIRELY different connotation than, say, "Vermont Liberal" or "New England Liberal", and Massachusetts doesn't compare favorably to the others. I suppose we should look at the positive...at least Kerry's not from New Jersey... :evilgrin:

for him if he got the nomination. Kerry would do a lot better than Dean and he could nail the deserter - something a draft dodger couldn't do.

as the Red Sox.

He is doomed!

If the supporters of the other candidates work as hard for ABB as they are for their guys now, beating Bush should be doable.

Did he even mention the 500 dead soldiers in SOTU? I tuned out right away because he made me nauseous

I am sorry, but Bush's idiotic speech pattern connects with people better than Kerry would.

If you can't put it in a sound bite, you are lost!

And Dems traditionally have gotten clobbered with new england
yankee types as the nominee. We can't make that mistake this
year. It's too critical.

has made him radioactive to the Left.

and there are 2 good ones running right now.

He would have his ass handed to him.

I think Sen. Kerry would probably win most of the 'blue states' from 2000, but I don't see him adding to that total, frankly.

Not enough fire. Not fast on his feet. Too equivocal. Too much of a politician. Bush will beat him, although I'll go down with the Kerry ship if he wins the nom.

I think people are deluding themselves if they think that FOX-watching voters in the south and the west are going to vote for Kerry merely because he is a veteran. These people *LIKE* Bush, and unless Kerry can convince them otherwise, they aren't going to switch. And after the media starts laying out Kerry's liberal credentials (especially his position on guns), they won't even listen to him, let alone be convinced to vote for him. He has also been spending a lot of time defending his vote on the IWR, so uninformed people aren't going to understand the "nuances", only that he initially supported the war, and now he doesn't.

He has also been spending a lot of time defending his vote on the IWR, so uninformed people aren't going to understand the "nuances", only that he initially supported the war, and now he doesn't.

People will see video clips of Lieberman chiding Kerry for "waffling" on Iraq, and they will fall sleep listening to that Principal Seymour Skinner voice of his. Kerry may not even carry Philadelphia, a picture of him eating a Philly steak while holding it with his pinkies up (and with Swiss cheese to boot!), will lose him the vote!

I like Kerry because I don't think the "Massachusettes liberal" label will stick as well as Rove & Co. think it will.

(a) He's a war hero. Most people dont' associate those with liberals.

(b) He's HUGE, tall and reasonably good looking, with a booming voice. He doesn't look or sound like a typical liberal.

(c) Bush is an idiot. And I have the utmost faith that when Kerry stands next to Bush in three debates the American people are gonna have to be completely clueless not to vote for him.

I always thought his IWR vote was politcally motivated, and it never bothered me because...well...this is big-time politics. He's not a warmongerer and I have no doubt he would never have gone to war with Saddam if HE were president. And I don't believe he'll be starting any wars anytime soon if he does get elected.

I like John Edwards too, and I also think he can beat Bush. I wasn't sure of this until Iowa, but now I'm positive.

So it's Kerry and Edwards for me. Either one is gold. The best two candidates the party has fielded in a primary, possibly ever.

It's spinning too fast...

I thought we lost in 2002 because the Democratic party embraced an agenda that was too conservative. Now we're worried that Kerry is too liberal???

Jesus man...The propaganda around here is THICK!

To Indiana

"I thought we lost in 2002 because the Democratic party embraced an agenda that was too conservative.

Now we're worried that Kerry is too liberal???"

From Oklahoma

He will not carry the southern/sunbelt states. Before IWR, a Kerry-Edwards ticket was my idea of a winning team for 2004. Now it's Clark-Edwards.

Kerry goes over like a lead balloon here in SC, Iowa bump notwithstanding. He will be branded, solely and unfairly, as a New England, northeast liberal (drawl that out with a sneer). His JFK initials and Ted Kennedy support will be used to his great disadvantage ad nauseum in foul repug ads that are lower than snake shit. Our hero Ted is rightwing red meat (like Hillary). No matter that Kennedy has always fought for the little guy, many of the little blue collar guys here listen to Rush and do their master's bidding. We disenfranchised Dems in SC remember all too well the Bush dirty tricks/ads used against McCain in 2000 and what that portended for Al. And that was just a primary; imagine the GE. God, I need a drink.

Anyway, I did not like Kerry's attacks on Dean or his failure to vote on the recent Medicare bill despite a big show of remaining in DC to do so. Seemed like a political ploy to me: passionately say one thing but when it comes to putting your vote where your mouth is, decline because there weren't enough nay votes to seal the deal. Go figure. It was calculated and cowardly like his IWR vote.

I'm a Clark supporter and was part of the draft movement but I do not like how Kerry, Gephardt and Lieberman ganged up on Dean and gave comfort and ammunition to the opposition. I think the party owes Dean a huge debt of gratitude for waking up their sorry, pink tutu asses.
Gephardt is history and Lieberman is likely to follow soon I hope. Kerry lacks a well-oiled political campaign machine or even good instincts hence the trial and error pattern to his campaign. He also has a tin political ear like Al Gore, and flame me if you wish, but comes across to many here as Al Gore did ... someone trying to hard to be real, to connect, and thus insincere (recall the many incarnations of Al in the 2000 cycle). BTW, Dean supporters, I think Al hurt your guy and I said so here at the time.

Anyway, Kerry scares me when it comes to the GE. Repugs will have a field day. It will be a little harder with Clark or Edwards because then the GOP will have to fight for territory it currently takes for granted. Just my two cents.

All those big red states have unreasonably bad reactions to elites from Massachusetts who "appear" to look down their noses at the rest of the country.

I personlly don't think Kerry is that way, and I'm deep in red country. However, its just too easy a target for the mantra the RW has been spewing for decades.

I thought Dean could escape that because he doesn't appear to look down his nose at others, he is a "doctor" which in rural america still gives people a feeling of trust, and he's not from some "big liberal city...Boston"...he's from a rural state, with some of those yankees who don't take "a shine to fancy things".....its weird I know...I live with these attitudes in my locale.

Anyway, add Kerry's gun regulation record to the above and it is a recipe for a rout, an absolute disaster.

I'm a Dean person. I'm also ABB.

I think Kerry would be fine, but I think he'll get massacred in the GE

The Little Turd from Crawford won't know what hit 'im!

If you haven't figured it out yet. The Media and the White House have figured out that the easiest win for Bush would be if he could face Kerry or Edwards. They are scared sh....tless of Dean and Clark. They will do all in their power to use the Telly to brainwash the American people to vote for one of these candidates. Then they know they can win or at least if the steal the election it won't be so obvious.

I think the media uncalled for criticism of and attempted humiliation of Dean will result ultimately in a backlash when people realize they made way too much of this and showed their sneaky hand. It will help Dean in the end.

God Bless America and God Help Her if Bush Wins in 2004 !