You know, I don't want him to run -- I think there are better options in the field -- but could we not beat up on the man too much? He should have done better in 2004, but failing to properly handle being viciously slandered isn't the sort of failing I want to hold against someone.
Yes, this probably could have been just added to another thread about the 2008 primaries but I really have grown to hate Kerry since 2004 and think we need an entire thread devoted to saying how much he sucks and are glad he's gone.
My problem with Kerry is less how he handled 2004 than that he's acted like a little bitch in the Senate since the election. I'd have much more respect for the man if he'd taken the Al Gore route.
he's acted like a little bitch in the Senate since the election.
I haven't been paying attention to this. What'd he do?
He should have done better in 2004, but failing to properly handle being viciously slandered isn't the sort of failing I want to hold against someone.
I do. Incentives matter, and I want Dems who go to the mattresses early and often.
Come on, Kerry sucked from the get go, and we all knew it. I remember talking to someone on Super Tuesday when Kerry wrapped up the nomination and we both agreed he'd be a total disaster, and sure enough...
I didn't know it. I think that might be because I get my news from print sources.
I didn't know it, because most of what was wrong with him was that intangible loathsomeness urban Northeasterners suffer from, and for obvious biographical reasons I'm a little insensitive to it.
12: "urban Northeasterners" s/b "four-term senators"
What'd he do?
Just general posturing that's made my eyes roll back so far into my head that I've almost passed out. Can't put my finger on it but he's only grown more unlikeable.
I don't hate the man, and I've sort of liked his Senatorial little bitgch routine. I just think his running would be bad for the party.
I thought he was going to be a disaster after the primaries--then I thought the convention was good, the debates were good, but everything between was godawful.
I'm very glad he's not running but I think he actually might have been a pretty good president.
I'm tempted to agree with LB (yowza!), but the one thing I saw awhile ago that really helped open my eyes as to why Kerry didn't win was watching the Pelosi documentary of the '04 campaign. One of his worst moments:
Pelosi: How come you've made it this far, instead of one of the other candidates?
Kerry: I have no idea.
I'm very glad he's not running but I think he actually might have been a pretty good president.
Agreed.
And thirded. He certainly could have improved his campaigning skills -- I just hate to hold that against him. (And I'm kind of fond of senatorial posturing. Biden, for example, is in many ways a useless windbag, but when he's on the right side of things he windbags awfully well.)
To be honest, as I've watched Iraq unravel and Bush break into sub-30% approval ratings, I've been kinda grateful that Kerry didn't win in '04.
21: Damn Leninists are everywhere
I think Kerry's off-putting qualities are pretty context dependent. I remember watching some footage of him in a town hall-style meeting during the primaries and was shocked at how unaffected and forceful he seemed. The contrast with how he typically comes off in interviews and similar situations was extreme.
What this means is that someone might be very good at retail politics while still failing to be telegenic. Unfortuantely the latter quality becomes more decisive the higher the office one is campaigning for. Thus we needn't be surprised that Kerry got as far as he did only to seem devoid of charisma at the end.
What this means is that someone might be very good at retail politics while still failing to be telegenic.
This is absolutely true -- there's charisma, and there's TV charisma. These days you need both.
The story that sums up Kerry for me was the one that came out shortly after he lost, about how Bill Clinton had called him and told him he should actively support state constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage to distance himself from stuff in Mass. Kerry refused, said he would never do it--but at the same time, the head of the Mass. State Senate was supporting a gay marriage amendment and it was pretty clear that one of his central motivations in doing so was to protect Kerry. (It ended up not making the ballot, because it failed the next year--now they're doing some stupid petition drive instead).
Too decent to wholeheartedly do the wrong thing for political reasons; too scared to do the right thing. That was Kerry's campaign, from the Iraq vote onwards.
Bill Clinton had called him and told him he should actively support state constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage
We know that's authentic? It doesn't sound like Bill.
Bill was an early supporter of equality among ppls, on women's issues and race issues. I know he compromised on the gays in the military issue (i don't know the history of that, though), but I still wouldn't expect Bill to sell out the gays.
Fuck. I forgot about the DOMA. I knew about that, at once point.
Bill is also famous for throwing people (e.g., Guenier) and interests under the bus when it seems like the the political expedient thing to do; that's the thesis of the usual critique of the DLC and its Third Way politics. You might recall a raft of accusations from the right (and some from the left) that Clinton's policies were poll-driven.
Bill sold everyone out at one point or another. He just did it so smoothly that we barely noticed.
27: sure it sounds like Bill. Here's one article, which is the one I remember reading. (To Clinton's credit, it does also report that he told Kerry to talk less about Vietnam and engage on Iraq.)
Clinton is a calculating bastard, but he is good at it, and has other prodigious political skills besides, and did use them to get into power, and left the country better off over all.
But it doesn't even work for Gore and Kerry--or for the Democratic party as whole for that matter-- and watching them try was depressing.
I remember hoping during the 2000 campaign that we'd nominate someone like Kerry next time instead....I had fully counted on volunteering for his campaign. I was certain that he was going to vote against the Iraq war. He of all people had to know...and he'd shown plenty of political courage in the past as well as the various medals.
But there's something about a Presidential campaign that invites caution, and that makes politicians think it's just suicide to appeal to the better angels' of our nature.
I never liked Clinton much, but he just had this fantastic schmooze. I'd be watching him on TV, and only after he was off would I remember that I didn't like him much.
Only after the Monica thing came up did I support him, since as a liberals aI'm pro-BJ. But before then, just barely.
The thing about Webb -- I have no idea if I like him because I don't know his positions. But the guy can talk!
I never liked Clinton much, but he just had this fantastic schmooze. I'd be watching him on TV, and only after he was off would I remember that I didn't like him much.
This was apparently also true of Gingrich, who I remember reading finally instructed his aides to never let him meet alone with Clinton.
Have any of you DC types heard any rumors about whether Dianne Feinstein's considering running for president in 2008? She's been getting a ton of press lately and it seems like whenever the other would-be presidential candidates in the Senate are out there bloviating she's right there alongside them. (It seems unlikely she's starting her re-election campaign early -- she's in a 4-year seat that's not up until 2010.) Her name turns up on a lot of short lists of possible Democratic candidates, but I can't find any evidence that she's actually interested in running.
I can't say I'm all that thrilled about her or Hillary as a candidate, beyond the "woo, go chicks!" aspect, because both have problematic records, but having both in the race would make things.. interesting.
Yes, I have before now felt very hostile to what LB has been very much milder about, the imputation of all sorts of regional tropes against Kerry, feeling personally attacked by them. But the distinction between retail effectiveness and TV charisma, and Katherine's story in 25, both allow me to let it go. There are probably upper-class Northeasterners who can come across on TV, and only actual experience would reveal who they were. We just can't take it personally, nor should any of us impute things to what candidates seem to be or remind us of on TV. But our instincts have got to be worth something, as the best clue we have to how others might react, to what's going on politically.
For instance, I want to like Edwards, he's done more than any other candidate to reach out to my positions and earn my trust, but I can't warm up to him.
I had the same sort of reaction listening to a little bit of Gore talking about his climate change work last night. I like what he's doing and the substance of what he was saying was fine, but there was still something about the way he talked that I didn't like very much. I need to see his movie and see if I react the same way to a larger dose.
This was apparently also true of Gingrich, who I remember reading finally instructed his aides to never let him meet alone with Clinton.
This sounds like a great sitcom running gag.
Ira Glass offered an excellent explanation on This American Life of why John Kerry should just, quietly, go away from national politics.
If 36 is true, it's by far the best thing I've learned all week.
I know. Don't you get this wonderful picture of Newt stumbling out of meetings all starry-eyed and dazed, talking about this wonderful idea Bill had had, until an aide slapped him around a little: "Get a grip on yourself, sir! He did it to you again!"
36: When I first read that, it just seemed like a funny story about Clinton's shmooze, but when I think about it it seems much more significant. Gingrich took formal steps to ensure that the very possibility of bipartisan dialogue would be foreclosed.
My own refusal to engage in bipartisan dialogue dates back to Gingrich in 1993-4, above all to his implausible and loathsome attempt to blame the horrible Susan Smith child-murder case on the Democratic Party. He said it flat-out in so many words, it wasn't a subtle smear or an innuendo. There was nothing lower for him to sink to -- he hit the absolute bottom.
I sometimes play the game myself, for example by pointing out that Susan Smith came from a Republican family, and had been sexually abused by a stepfather who was a Republican / Moral Majority leader of some importance.
So anyway, my political stuff may make me an unappealing human being at times, but this stuff has been going on for at least 12 years, and I didn't start it. And it was a winning tactic for the Republicans for most of a decade.
How does "President Gingrich" sound to you, BTW?
How does "President Gingrich" sound to you, BTW?
Unlikely.
Trouble is, I listened to that This American Life bit, and now I'm mad all over again. Ira Glass, and the people he talked to? I feel I actually want to hurt them right now.
I feel I actually want to hurt them right now.
We'll make a southerner of you yet, IDP.
I really, really hope he runs, though.
Specifically, I think, this was correct:
Kerry's problem as a candidate was that he seemed incapable of doing or saying anything to overcome or counteract any of that, any of what his opponents were saying about him. Which these days, for better or worse, is an important political skill....
So even when John Kerry pointed out, truthfully, correctly, the policy blunders and mis-steps his opponent had made, nobody in this room believed him. Even when he's in the right, he doesn't convince people.
I agree he shouldn't have been the candidate, and I don't want him to be again nor run again. But the way those people were thinking, in the presence of facts they themselves admitted, the infantile desire to "believe" him about things they knew, and ought to have known, for themselves, is just nauseating to me.
Kerry was very good in the debates. He would have made a good president.
People just were not ready to admit what a huge mistake Iraq was. That was the point of nominating a war hero. It didn't work but it wasn't a bad plan.
Osama is a fan of heightening the contradictions too; his video the weekend before the election didn't help things.
44: How does "President Gingrich" sound to you, BTW?
It sounds like time to reach for my revolver.
The only thing that would have been positive about a Kerry bid for the presidency is that it would have foreclosed the possibility of his running for re-election. I was really looking forward to having Barney Frank as my Senator.
54 is what I think. What made Kerry a bad candidate would have made him a good president.
How does "President Gingrich" sound to you, BTW?
God will not be so good as to give us nominee Gingrich to run against, alas.
What made Kerry a bad candidate would have made him a good president.
I'm not sure I follow. Could you expound upon this?
I have no idea whether or not Kerry would have made a good president.
36 - That's great! I thought only Steve Jobs had that power. If only Gingrich had though of Bud Tribble's solution.