Kerry's biggest mistake?

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by dropCGCF

The dems' only hope lies in Edwards. He could swing some southern states. I said he should have been the main man from the beginning, Cali and NY would have elected a Dem sock monkey.

I have to disagree. Edwards gave Kerry NOTHING in the south and I have a feeling he may lose the next congressional election.

Edwards beliefs fly in the face of a lot of culturally conservative values, especially his support of partial birth abortion. That alone could kill his campaign.

The democrats need to come back to the middle because the left shift that happened in their party after the 2000 election has alientated a lot of their former base. Right now I don't see a moderate candidate that could step up, but then again a lot can change in 4 years.

Here are few things I think they would need:

1) A southerner or southern mid-westerner
2) A good military voting record
3) moderate cultural values (they don't have to be conservative)
4) A governor (senator's voting records tend to bite them in the ass)

On a side note, I'm impressed with Kerry's concession speech.

[dropCGCF]

Originally Posted by The Strangler

Edwards beliefs fly in the face of a lot of culturally conservative values, especially his support of partial birth abortion. That alone could kill his campaign.

I would say Edwards could have swayed some votes if he were the main man running. Clinton won because of charisma. So did Bush. Every year this comes out the same, the smart man wins the debates, the "commmon man" wins the elections. Americans are idiots.

Here are few things I think they would need:

1) A southerner or southern mid-westerner
2) A good military voting record
3) moderate cultural values (they don't have to be conservative)
4) A governor (senator's voting records tend to bite them in the ass)

I see nobody capable of beating Guliani in '08. Spitzer, Obama, Dean, and Clintion would all crumble. There are no good white male Dems anymore. Republicans rule Pres, the Senate, and the House for the next 8 years. Good God the Dems needed this one.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by dropCGCF

I would say Edwards could have swayed some votes if he were the main man running. Clinton won because of charisma. So did Bush. Every year this comes out the same, the smart man wins the debates, the "commmon man" wins the elections. Americans are idiots.

Except that Bush won all the debates in 2000. As for charisma, I actually think charisma had very little to do with this election as each side was just so polarized and fervent in their beliefs.

As for the "Americans are idiots" tripe, your not going to win anymore votes that way and much of that attitude that has been propogated by those like Moore and Al Franken has turned a lot of people away from the democratic party.

Its not good vs. evil. Its my opinion vs. your opinion.

[Xantar]

I believe Edwards gave up his Senate seat, so he is not in fact going to lose his next election bid because....he already lost it.

I don't think that America has in fact turned out to be surprisingly conservative. I think that on the one hand the Democrats didn't find a message other than "get Bush out" and pound it in well enough. I know what Kerry stood for, but not many did.

The other thing is Americans have apparently decided that foreign policy and homeland security are the most important issues today. More important, even, than the economy. Even if you don't believe that Bush is responsible for the weak state of the economy, the fact is that by itself is usually enough to throw a President out. The first President Bush had nothing to do with the economy being in recession either (in fact, it was booming for most of his term). But thanks to the economy and "read my lips," he got ousted.

This time, I know that many Americans voted for Bush thinking, "Well, I don't like what his education policy. His environmental policy sucks. He caters too much to those crazy fundamentalist people. But he'll keep us safe."

In most ways that are important, I actually think Kerry ran about the best campaign he could have. But he was fighting American demographics the entire way, and he just didn't win.

[ZebraRampage]

I think that another of Kerry's mistakes was that he was trying to appeal to the middle and to the far left at the same time. You can't do both, you can only support one side. I guess nobody knows where he stands on his issues, though this was mentioned before. This is what I think his biggest mistake was.

[Typhoid]

I think honestly, his biggest mistake was being openly rich.

People loathe that part of him.

Bush seems less rich...poor even, so he comes off more common.



Well, Kerry may have lost, but hes still got three purple hearts.

[Icon]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Bush seems less rich...poor even, so he comes off more common.

Well, Kerry may have lost, but hes still got three purple hearts.

Bush used to own the Texas Rangers....anyone who cant remember that is stupid, esp since he brings it up alot.

Yeah and Americans seem to sh|t on people who have done great things during war time. Look at John McCain.....

[Neo]

I have my doubts about Hillary too. She probably could not soke up enough of the female vote to make up for her liberal persona.

American in general and not just the south seems to be a lot more conservative than I realized. Female voters in the south may even believe that a female's place is in the home and that the presidency is a man's job.

Another problem with Hillary is the same problem that Kerry had - the fact that they're senators. It's been mentioned that Kerry is used to discussing the details and minutia of bills and doesn't really know how to talk to the common man. That and the enevitability of having your voting record turned against you makes it an uphill battle.

But I agree the democrats have got to reach out to conservative religious voters. A southern democratic governor would be ideal.

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Neo

I have my doubts about Hillary too. She probably could not soke up enough of the female vote to make up for her liberal persona.

American in general and not just the south seems to be a lot more conservative than I realized. Female voters in the south may even believe that a female's place is in the home and that the presidency is a man's job.

Another problem with Hillary is the same problem that Kerry had - the fact that they're senators. It's been mentioned that Kerry is used to discussing the details and minutia of bills and doesn't really know how to talk to the common man. That and the enevitability of having your voting record turned against you makes it an uphill battle.

But I agree the democrats have got to reach out to conservative religious voters. A southern democratic governor would be ideal.

That's what I've been saying. Over the last 4 years I have watched as America has become more and more conservative. The republicans far outnumber the democrats now, and I think it's going to be hard to dig us out of this whole. With the way things are going right now, in the future the president, supreme court, and congress are going to be 100% conservative.

I think you are right about a southern democratic governor. Actually, just about any southern democrat will do. I realize that to win the south the candidate is going to have to address them religiously, but I hate that. The south is so set into their tradition and religion that anyone who appears to be the least bit non religous doesnt stand a chance. There arent enough people who understand government and religion shouldnt mix.

Bush simply played off the ignorance of the southern states and won them. "I'm against the gays and abortion. Go Christianity!" That's all he needed to say, and he won. Kerry's biggest mistake was that Bush was smart enough to know how to win the southern states easily, then he could focus his real political power in the places he had to keep away from Kerry, such as Ohio and Florida. Kerry just didnt run his campaign as he should have.

And what really gets me is that Bush has no say on the subject of abortion. It's the supreme court that does that, and him being a Christain really doesnt affect anything at all. The southern states were just too ignorant to see it.

The next democratic candidate needs to lie about the religion stuff to the southern people (they wont even notice he isnt doing things religously in office), and then just keep doing what he's doing in the northern states.