This Is A Whole Other Ballgame Folks

[12th Doctor]

If I have heard this once, I have heard it a million times since the start of the Bush surge, "John Kerry is a late surger.  He does better from behind".

Where is the proof?  Iowa?  The reason Kerry won in Iowa was because he seemed like an exceptable choice after Dean started to melt down two weeks before the caucus, and this really wasn't a "come out of the blue thing", Kerry was expected to win in 2003, he was the early favorite.  Edwards, a "nobody" almost defeated Kerry, the "favorite".

So, Kerry defeat Bill Weld in 1996.  He came back from behind and took it.  Really?  This might be true, but Kerry was not at all helped by the fact that Mass. gave Clinton his highest margin of victory that year, against an opponent who was far more conservative than the state he was running in.  Given these factors, Kerry still didn't win by much.

This general election campaign is not Iowa and it is not 1996.  Bush is not going to melt down and no one will be there to drag Kerry accross the finish line.

Those campaigns were nothing.  They were free-shot basketball.  The General election campaign for the Presidency is full-contact tackle football.  In this game, you never want to fall behind.

I think that George H. W. Bush put it best.  The secret to winning a Presidential election is "Big Mo'".  One should sieze the momentum and rid it hard.  Once you start losing the momentum, you are as good as gone.  Kerry cannot simply expect to "come from behind", he has to find a wave and ride it.  I don't see this happening.  His "new, new, new, new" campaign is killing him and he cannot afford to change advisors again.

In this game, there is no "he does better from behind".  Kerry must get moving, if he doesn't, he is done.  Plain and simple.

[12th Doctor]

didnt john kerry break his word and exceed the spending limit agreed to by him and weld?

Yes, he did.

[12th Doctor]

To be fair, Kerry came back from polling in single digits in Iowa to winning it, and Bill Weld was an extremely popular governor who at least seemed to have the edge.

While I do expect the race to tighten (most agree) and Kerry to edge out, I don't expect any miracles.

Those races were nothing compare to a Presidential race.  The dynamic is totally different and Kerry can't seem to adapt.  There will be no miracles.  Kerry has to grab onto some momentum to hope to win.  Right now, he is standing still if he isn't walking backwards.

[12th Doctor]

If I have heard this once, I have heard it a million times since the start of the Bush surge, "John Kerry is a late surger.  He does better from behind".

Where is the proof?  Iowa?  The reason Kerry won in Iowa was because he seemed like an exceptable choice after Dean started to melt down two weeks before the caucus, and this really wasn't a "come out of the blue thing", Kerry was expected to win in 2003, he was the early favorite.  Edwards, a "nobody" almost defeated Kerry, the "favorite".

So, Kerry defeat Bill Weld in 1996.  He came back from behind and took it.  Really?  This might be true, but Kerry was not at all helped by the fact that Mass. gave Clinton his highest margin of victory that year, against an opponent who was far more conservative than the state he was running in.  Given these factors, Kerry still didn't win by much.

This general election campaign is not Iowa and it is not 1996.  Bush is not going to melt down and no one will be there to drag Kerry accross the finish line.

Those campaigns were nothing.  They were free-shot basketball.  The General election campaign for the Presidency is full-contact tackle football.  In this game, you never want to fall behind.

I think that George H. W. Bush put it best.  The secret to winning a Presidential election is "Big Mo'".  One should sieze the momentum and rid it hard.  Once you start losing the momentum, you are as good as gone.  Kerry cannot simply expect to "come from behind", he has to find a wave and ride it.  I don't see this happening.  His "new, new, new, new" campaign is killing him and he cannot afford to change advisors again.

In this game, there is no "he does better from behind".  Kerry must get moving, if he doesn't, he is done.  Plain and simple.

Great thread.

Baseball is like that...you look at a player's bubblegum card stats a different way, and you glimpse a different future for the new season.

I hear what you're saying about the lineage of Kerry's underwhelming victories--and it can seem a string of lucky breaks.

But then I count 'em up, and I'm inclined to believe there's more than just trees here to see...but a forest of victories--victories of a man who, like his opponant, knows the virtues of being underestimated.

And the general election is certainly not Iowa's Democratic Primary...the nation does not verilently hate President Bush with the lazerbeam focus those folks brought to their decision.  But if Kerry loses, it's not going to be because of that distinction--the variable factored.  America doesn't hate this President...but it's not terribly attached to him right now either.

There are external winds that can very easily continue to build at Kerry's back--and we can deny him credit for creating them (doing our best to shout over them as they blow him into the White House.)  Coverage of Iraq is trending pessimistic--more than merely "liberal media bias" in my assesment, and the fog of war is going to set in prior to there being a credible climate for holding elections in January.  The odds of happy headlines for Bush prior to November 2 aren't worth mentioning.

The country is going to be in a foul enough mood to take advantage of the Entire time between now and election day to pick the lesser of two evils.  It's going to be in a foul enough mood to give Kerry a chance to redeem himself--because there is MUCH room for improvement over what we have in the mind of the average voter, and Kerry still has SOME room left to perform 'the idiot' before convincing America he isn't worth the risks.

I hear what you are saying, but the election is no longer some far off event.  If it were, I would see what you are saying, but Kerry doesn't have much room to act in just 5 weeks and there is little time for things to line up against Bush.  Sorry Kerry, not this time, not this year.

[12th Doctor]

I hear what you are saying, but the election is no longer some far off event.  If it were, I would see what you are saying, but Kerry doesn't have much room to act in just 5 weeks and there is little time for things to line up against Bush.  Sorry Kerry, not this time, not this year.

Iraq is heading back to where it was in March or so, when that contractor's truck was struck in Fallujah. Things calmed down a bit and are escalting very fast. That will probably dominate the month of October.

And thus, Kerry's apparent lack on leadership ability will also dominate the headlines.  Usually, switching advisors 4 times is not seen as a mark of strong leadership.

[12th Doctor]

You may be right in that he (Kerry) won't turn things around in time to pull off a win.  But I'm projecting he will turn things around with a surge that will be more than Gore's last minute election-night gas.  And even if he doesn't, it isn't because the opportunity to do so isn't there.  (I agree you're right that there has to be some "gel" time at the end of this year's contest--but we're not to that zone yet.)

The swing voters are very fickle, and the last election proved that every bit of the game clock can count.  It's more inclined to do so this year than ever.

Gore's "gas" was based largely on brilliant turnout opperations by the DNC.  That will not happen this time.  I have spoken with a guy who has worked on several Democratic campaigns and he has said flat out that organization on a state-district-city-ward level is just awful this year.  He has predicted Kerry will lose in a landslide.  This is a fact, this isn't opinion.

[12th Doctor]

You may be right in that he (Kerry) won't turn things around in time to pull off a win.  But I'm projecting he will turn things around with a surge that will be more than Gore's last minute election-night gas.  And even if he doesn't, it isn't because the opportunity to do so isn't there.  (I agree you're right that there has to be some "gel" time at the end of this year's contest--but we're not to that zone yet.)

The swing voters are very fickle, and the last election proved that every bit of the game clock can count.  It's more inclined to do so this year than ever.

Gore's "gas" was based largely on brilliant turnout opperations by the DNC.  That will not happen this time.  I have spoken with a guy who has worked on several Democratic campaigns and he has said flat out that organization on a state-district-city-ward level is just awful this year.  He has predicted Kerry will lose in a landslide.  This is a fact, this isn't opinion.

You're using anecdotal evidence. That doesn't prove anything.

Not to mention that there are still 6 weeks to go. Did everyone know 6 weeks before the election last time that the Democratic GOTV effort would be very good on election day?

The gentleman I talked to does have connections and he has seen the opperation on the state and local levels.  He says that it is pathetic.  He should know, he is working for the campaign and had worked for many others.  

To answer your second point (and I have said this before) in 2000, Al Gore established his campaign HQ here in Erie in May.  Kerry just put his up last week.  By contrast, Bush had no campaign HQ in 2000, but had his in place at the begining of April this year.

Moreover, my friend Paul, having expireince in these matters and being connected, has talked to people in the campaign and even had a private conversation with Chris Heinz.  Paul said of the meeting, "He answered the questions about organization on the state level pretty vaugely, often times saying that things would 'fall into place'.  That is no way to run a campaign".

I asked him about what he saw of the accutal organization (door to door efforts, GOTV, etc.) and he said, "They don't have any.  There is no organization.  No leadership.  They are just sorta winging it.  It isn't professional.  They are just expecting Democrat oppertatives to go out and know what to do, without giving them any help to speak of."

I added, "So they are running it like a student demonstration"?

He said, "Yes, that is exactly it".