that guy
distractions
still drinkable
chimie
archives
2/18/2004
No to Dean, no to Edwards
And once again, Dean goes down in flames, this time in Wisconsin. Is there any way his campaign advisors (if he still has any left) can just make him quit? Could they just hogtie him, throw him in the back of a pickup truck (complete with Confederate flag decals, naturally) and spirit him back to Burlington? Better yet, if we all got together and donated enough money to send him on an extended vacation of twice-daily shiatsu massage and mild tranquilizers, would he go? Pretty please?
Edwards, on the other hand, did surprisingly well in Wisconsin if the early returns are any indication. I hope this signals no more than a desire to keep Kerry honest, and not a serious swell in support for Edwards. I admit: I like the guy, and he'd probably make a pretty good VP candidate, being southern and relentlessly cheerful, but president? Uh-uh. Three reasons:
1. Too young. Sorry. On the other hand, in a VP debate Edwards makes Dick Cheney look like the corrupt, bloated corpse he is.
2. Too inexperienced. OK. Maybe I could see having a senator from nowhere, but not a president. We've tried that for almost four years now, and look where it got us.
3. Past career. I mean, come on. The guy was a very successful plaintiff-side trial lawyer! Anyone who thinks a trial lawyer is going to get elected president badly underestimates the American public's visceral and (mostly) irrational hatred and contempt for lawyers, and plaintiffs' lawyers in particular. Republicans will show up at his campaign rallies and douse him with scalding McDonald's coffee just to drive the point home. That, and if you think the defense firms and insurance companies are shelling out big money to the Bush campaign now, just imagine the deluge if Edwards won the nomination. I mean, who needs to spend cash on TV ads when you can just buy CNN? (Fox News, of course, has already signed on to Bush 2004 for free).
Edwards, on the other hand, did surprisingly well in Wisconsin if the early returns are any indication. I hope this signals no more than a desire to keep Kerry honest, and not a serious swell in support for Edwards. I admit: I like the guy, and he'd probably make a pretty good VP candidate, being southern and relentlessly cheerful, but president? Uh-uh. Three reasons:
1. Too young. Sorry. On the other hand, in a VP debate Edwards makes Dick Cheney look like the corrupt, bloated corpse he is.
2. Too inexperienced. OK. Maybe I could see having a senator from nowhere, but not a president. We've tried that for almost four years now, and look where it got us.
3. Past career. I mean, come on. The guy was a very successful plaintiff-side trial lawyer! Anyone who thinks a trial lawyer is going to get elected president badly underestimates the American public's visceral and (mostly) irrational hatred and contempt for lawyers, and plaintiffs' lawyers in particular. Republicans will show up at his campaign rallies and douse him with scalding McDonald's coffee just to drive the point home. That, and if you think the defense firms and insurance companies are shelling out big money to the Bush campaign now, just imagine the deluge if Edwards won the nomination. I mean, who needs to spend cash on TV ads when you can just buy CNN? (Fox News, of course, has already signed on to Bush 2004 for free).
#
by Chris @ 8:48 PM
2/15/2004
Someone needs to get fired
For presidential candidates bent on political suicide, there are always options. If you're Howard Dean, you can bellow like Al Pacino after a fifth of Wild Turkey. If you're Joe Lieberman, you travel the country scolding voters for their depraved taste in pop culture. If you're Dennis Kucinich, you can just be your hippy-dippy self.
Then there are screw-ups that initially don't look like screw-ups at all, but turn out to be disastrous. I suspect that the Bush campaign's opening salvo against John Kerry fits here. Let me explain.
With his Democratic rivals starved for cash (and delegates), Kerry has focused his fire on the President, hammering Bush for his addiction to special interest campaign cash. With the President's poll numbers slipping, the Bush re-election team decided to fight back, releasing an internet ad called Unprincipled, Part 1. The ad tars the Democratic front-runner as a lapdog of lobbyists, high-powered lawyers, and other influential favor-seekers.
All of which is a bit like Stalin criticizing Mussolini for his human rights record. The Bush ad invites precisely the sorts of comparisons that the White House should be trying at all costs to avoid. Kerry may not unimpeachable on campaign finance, but if you put their records side by side, Bush looks like the Whore of Babylon. Go ahead, try it. The Kerry campaign can hardly believe its luck. After all, does anyone seriously think that G.W.'s Rangers and Pioneers donate hundreds of thousands to his campaign out of an altruistic concern for the future of the country? If you buy that, maybe you'd like to buy my car. Runs great! Real rubber tires! Guaranteed to pass inspection in most Third World countries!*
I should point out that as far as I know, no one is calling "Unprincipled 1" a screw-up - yet. The ad's still up on the official site as of February 15, and critics have confined their comments to variations on the word "hypocrite" without seriously asking what the ad reveals about the Republican strategy. But I think it illuminates the extreme out-to-lunchity of the string-pullers who signed off on it. They've badly misunderestimated (sic) voter anger and frustration over the economy and the Iraq war, and transparently two-faced attack ads will not divert their attention. So I predict this won't be the last boneheaded assault on the Democratic frontrunner (or nominee). The very name of the ad implies that the Bush campaign plans more such attacks. Consistent with this glass-house theme, I humbly suggest a topic for "Unprincipled 2": Kerry got three Purple Hearts in Vietnam. Bush should insinuate that Kerry undermined the war effort by allowing the VC to shoot him. Unprincipled! Ludicrous? Not so fast. If the President's re-election staff is foolish enough to condemn Kerry on campaign finance, it's hard to imagine what giggle-inducing smear they'll cook up next.
*Windshield and seatbelts not included.
Then there are screw-ups that initially don't look like screw-ups at all, but turn out to be disastrous. I suspect that the Bush campaign's opening salvo against John Kerry fits here. Let me explain.
With his Democratic rivals starved for cash (and delegates), Kerry has focused his fire on the President, hammering Bush for his addiction to special interest campaign cash. With the President's poll numbers slipping, the Bush re-election team decided to fight back, releasing an internet ad called Unprincipled, Part 1. The ad tars the Democratic front-runner as a lapdog of lobbyists, high-powered lawyers, and other influential favor-seekers.
All of which is a bit like Stalin criticizing Mussolini for his human rights record. The Bush ad invites precisely the sorts of comparisons that the White House should be trying at all costs to avoid. Kerry may not unimpeachable on campaign finance, but if you put their records side by side, Bush looks like the Whore of Babylon. Go ahead, try it. The Kerry campaign can hardly believe its luck. After all, does anyone seriously think that G.W.'s Rangers and Pioneers donate hundreds of thousands to his campaign out of an altruistic concern for the future of the country? If you buy that, maybe you'd like to buy my car. Runs great! Real rubber tires! Guaranteed to pass inspection in most Third World countries!*
I should point out that as far as I know, no one is calling "Unprincipled 1" a screw-up - yet. The ad's still up on the official site as of February 15, and critics have confined their comments to variations on the word "hypocrite" without seriously asking what the ad reveals about the Republican strategy. But I think it illuminates the extreme out-to-lunchity of the string-pullers who signed off on it. They've badly misunderestimated (sic) voter anger and frustration over the economy and the Iraq war, and transparently two-faced attack ads will not divert their attention. So I predict this won't be the last boneheaded assault on the Democratic frontrunner (or nominee). The very name of the ad implies that the Bush campaign plans more such attacks. Consistent with this glass-house theme, I humbly suggest a topic for "Unprincipled 2": Kerry got three Purple Hearts in Vietnam. Bush should insinuate that Kerry undermined the war effort by allowing the VC to shoot him. Unprincipled! Ludicrous? Not so fast. If the President's re-election staff is foolish enough to condemn Kerry on campaign finance, it's hard to imagine what giggle-inducing smear they'll cook up next.
*Windshield and seatbelts not included.
#
by Chris @ 6:44 PM