John Kerry was and is every bit as Presidential as Obama. Kerry even has the much needed experience. Obama is lucky this time out. He would have lost in a landside in 2004. And, I wouldn't get to cocky if I were you - the election isn't over yet.
Struck a nerve, eh? If you had the presence of mind to click the link, you would have recognized that I'm talking about John McCain's extraordinary flip-flopping skills, not Barack Obama.
Though, for the record, I'll make a point that's blindingly obvious to, well, probably everyone else in the world besides you: if John Kerry had run in the same primary as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, he would have finished third at best.
And regarding your "cocky" line, clearly you didn't read the other posts today, either.
With all due respect el rancero, Senator Kerry was doing extremely well in in focus groups against Clinton in 2006 when he was still considering running again. And, given the turn of events since 2004- unfortunately for the worse- these events have proven that much of what Kerry said to the nation and about Bush was the truth. Hey, Kerry was right. Not only that, but people had gotten to know him since 2004 and trusted his judgement. He not only has the look of leadership but he has a commanding presence.He HAD and HAS THE EXPERIENCE, THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE DETAILED IDEAS to gain the attention of the public. I highly doubt that with what he had learned from his run in 2004 and his improved speech style he would have come in third. In fact, he would have out campained both Clinton and Obama. This election wuld have been a piece of cake after 2004. Obama has had an easy ride in 2008. look, Obama is going to win this election, but he is no way near as qualified nor does he have the leadership qualities of Senator Kerry. He has an appeal that escapes me, but if he is able to get the job done, that is all that matters to me. I just hope he has good enough judgement to surround himself with good and loyal people. As for the link, well it didn't work for me so I had no way to know about your play on words.
Yes, Kerry did SO well in focus groups that he bailed on the race before even announcing his candidacy! I'm sure it's because he didn't want to embarrass Clinton and Obama by defeating them so handily with his mighty, commanding presence!
Don't get me wrong, I like Kerry, but he was a weak candidate because a) his campaign lacked the discipline to stay on message, b) he couldn't close the likability gap with Bush, and c) like Clinton and Edwards, Kerry couldn't convince people his foreign policy would be fundamentally different from Bush because he voted for war in Iraq, which made his future opposition to it look like "flip flopping." His failure to defeat what Democrats all viewed (true or false) as a very vulnerable incumbent made him radioactive in the 2008 primary. That's why he quit early on his '08 hopes, an aide noting that he "came to the realization a lot of people want something new."
When he dropped out, by the way, he was drawing a whopping 5% in polls of Democratic voters.
4 comments:
John Kerry was and is every bit as Presidential as Obama. Kerry even has the much needed experience. Obama is lucky this time out. He would have lost in a landside in 2004. And, I wouldn't get to cocky if I were you - the election isn't over yet.
Struck a nerve, eh? If you had the presence of mind to click the link, you would have recognized that I'm talking about John McCain's extraordinary flip-flopping skills, not Barack Obama.
Though, for the record, I'll make a point that's blindingly obvious to, well, probably everyone else in the world besides you: if John Kerry had run in the same primary as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, he would have finished third at best.
And regarding your "cocky" line, clearly you didn't read the other posts today, either.
With all due respect el rancero, Senator Kerry was doing extremely well in in focus groups against Clinton in 2006 when he was still considering running again. And, given the turn of events since 2004- unfortunately for the worse- these events have proven that much of what Kerry said to the nation and about Bush was the truth. Hey, Kerry was right. Not only that, but people had gotten to know him since 2004 and trusted his judgement. He not only has the look of leadership but he has a commanding presence.He HAD and HAS THE EXPERIENCE, THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE DETAILED IDEAS to gain the attention of the public. I highly doubt that with what he had learned from his run in 2004 and his improved speech style he would have come in third. In fact, he would have out campained both Clinton and Obama. This election wuld have been a piece of cake after 2004. Obama has had an easy ride in 2008. look, Obama is going to win this election, but he is no way near as qualified nor does he have the leadership qualities of Senator Kerry. He has an appeal that escapes me, but if he is able to get the job done, that is all that matters to me. I just hope he has good enough judgement to surround himself with good and loyal people.
As for the link, well it didn't work for me so I had no way to know about your play on words.
Yes, Kerry did SO well in focus groups that he bailed on the race before even announcing his candidacy! I'm sure it's because he didn't want to embarrass Clinton and Obama by defeating them so handily with his mighty, commanding presence!
Don't get me wrong, I like Kerry, but he was a weak candidate because a) his campaign lacked the discipline to stay on message, b) he couldn't close the likability gap with Bush, and c) like Clinton and Edwards, Kerry couldn't convince people his foreign policy would be fundamentally different from Bush because he voted for war in Iraq, which made his future opposition to it look like "flip flopping." His failure to defeat what Democrats all viewed (true or false) as a very vulnerable incumbent made him radioactive in the 2008 primary. That's why he quit early on his '08 hopes, an aide noting that he "came to the realization a lot of people want something new."
When he dropped out, by the way, he was drawing a whopping 5% in polls of Democratic voters.
Post a Comment