January 25, 2004
My Iowa Night Ramble

[I posted this originally on The Little Brown Reader. It was technically related to this news article about the results of the Iowa caucus, but it turned into a more general assessment of the Democratic race.]

I'll say this about John Kerry-- he seems to be the smoothest and warmest in close quarters. He's the only one who doesn't seem to be brimming with nervous energy, like Gephardt, Clark, Dean, and (to a lesser extent) Edwards seem to be. Maybe that explains Kerry and Edwards' strong finishes in close-quarters Iowa.

Also, Dean seemed pretty wild in his post-results "speech"-- at least the segment I saw. I have not seen the whole thing.

Kerry's speech was pretty good for the occasion. He made a lot of smart phrasings and comments. As an outsider observer who won't be voting Democrat, I'm mildly impressed by Kerry for the time being. Anyone who can unsettle the Dean Machine has to be given at least a little credit.

New Hampshire is going to be a major showdown between Kerry and Dean. Both from neighboring New England states, and Kerry on the rise with Dean hitting some bumps (his false claim that Jimmy Carter invited him to Georgia this past Sunday not being the least). Very interesting.

In the end, this is George Bush's election to lose. Most of the main Democrats would suffice to beat him if things go bad in Bushland. The possible exceptions would be Dean, who is volatile, and John Edwards, who is young and inexperienced. (And possibly Lieberman, but he won't be a factor for long. He'll be lucky (and wasting his time) if he's still in the race when his state's primary comes up in March. He lost this race the day Al Gore endorsed Dean-- if not earlier.)

Either Bush (and the facts and reality on the ground, here and in Iraq and Afghanistan) is going to undo himself, or he's not. The best Democrat to beat him would be simply a credible alternative. That leaves Kerry and Clark, strictly speaking. Even if Edwards' youth can be cleared as a hurdle (and I think it can), his inexperience will be a potential achilles heel. And Dean will be a bumpy ride. He'd make a great independent or third-party candidate, but the two-party race doesn't have as much mercy on someone who's volatile. See: John McCain, except ratchet up the heat by a factor of ten.

If Bush blows it (or continues to blow it), then either Kerry or Clark will be able to beat him. With Dean there's a maybe factor, because he's developing an image, and if the image doesn't work for mainstream America, then he'll get whupped. (See: Ralph Nader) Of course, if he makes it that far he will reshape his image as needed (See: Bill Clinton), but he might then lose the base that's into him doing the extreme screaming thing. He's a wild card, to put it simply. And the Bush campaign is going to use anything they're given that might help them win. So far, Dean has given them the most to work with. Clark the second most (all his quotes praising Bush and Cheney are definitely going to be used if it's Clark v Bush). Edwards third. I don't think that to date John Kerry has given them anything to work with in terms of tearing him down.

Kerry now has a Republican guy whose life he saved in Vietnam appearing with him and supporting his campaign. That's pretty powerful. His wife is also a strong campaigner, it seems. And he's on his game, verbally-- very confident and likeable, despite his sort of weird face. (If Jon Stewart can call it "cadaver-like", I feel safe saying "weird".)

Make no mistake-- I expect that I would disagree with and oppose most everything that a John Kerry adminstration would do if he was elected-- and I won't be voting for him, any other Democrat, or Bush. I'm just calling the race as I see it. I'll be voting Libertarian, assuming one of the four current main contenders becomes the nominee. (There's a vague possibility that a Libertarian who supported the war in Iraq could be nominated, which is the only reason I hedge. None of the four main contenders support the war, as far as I know.)

I thought Clark looked to be the strongest solid competitor against Bush, but I'm inclined to think that maybe it's Kerry. I'm surprised to find myself thinking that. If he wins New Hampshire next week, then I'd think about pencilling him in as the possible Democratic Party nominee. And-- and again, it feels weird to say this-- I think that might work OK. John Kerry can appeal relentlessly on his heroism in actual battle, and relate that to the war and decisions regarding war, and essentially shame Bush for his cavalier misuse of the men and women of the military. Other than that, he'll play a centrist, sane, experienced guy who cares, but who can be tough.

All this is contingent on no major skeletons coming out of closets. I can't guess if there are any of those to come. And it's contingent on no powerful third-party or independent candidate showing up. And on Dean sticking with his promise to support the Dem. nominee even if it's not him (rather than breaking away and running as an independent, as some have theorized).

Posted by Lance Brown at January 25, 2004 11:58 PM
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?