Kerry should have won: A Republican view.

[robini123]

The President said that there were WMD’s in Iraq… this turned out to be untrue. Now I do not want to debate on whether the President lied or made a mistake, as this is now a moot point, but conceder this: Based on the fact that there are no WMD’s in Iraq, Kerry should have been able to capture a majority of the Independent and undecided vote, thus easily giving him the victory. This did not happen… why not?

I think it starts with the Democrat’s primary election. Clearly Kerry was not the most popular/capable Liberal to go against Bush… I could think of a few more capable Democrats that would have had a much better chance against Bush, but Kerry won the DNC nomination. This was the first nail in the coffin.

Now you have a nominee that is one of the most liberal Senators up on the hill. He tries to present himself as a moderate Liberal but fails miserably. He fails to make clear his Plan for America, or explain how he will pay for it… at least not in a believable way.

He launches a negative campaign, all the while claiming to want a clean campaign that focuses on the issues. If he had actually done so he would have won. On so many occasions he appears hypocritical by attacking the President on something he is doing himself.

Kerry needed to reach out to all Americans like he did during his concession speech, if he had done so, I guarantee you he would have won the election. How a Democrat faced such a humiliating defeat after the Iraq WMD fiasco is a lesion on how to NOT run an election.

But I am a republican and say “thank God” Bush won.

[Joker]

Originally Posted by robini123

The President said that there were WMD’s in Iraq… this turned out to be untrue. Now I do not want to debate on whether the President lied or made a mistake, as this is now a moot point, but conceder this: Based on the fact that there are no WMD’s in Iraq, Kerry should have been able to capture a majority of the Independent and undecided vote, thus easily giving him the victory. This did not happen… why not?

Because of all the people who claimed, with an equal 'absense of evidence', that the WMDs were now in Syria?

[Bluehawk]

IMHO...

If Kerry had not given that "Winter Soldier" testimony before a Congressional committee, he would probably have had a better chance at victory in his race for the Presidency. He might not have won, but the margin would have been a lot closer.

There are approximately 20,000,000 vets living in America today... and that is a HUGE voting block, even if only a tiny percentage of us vote.

The Dem party chose the wrong candidate... from the moment Kerry announced his candidacy, an onslaught of vets immediately began reminding people of that testimony he gave, and they kept up that refrain right up until the last minute on November 2nd. Even a whiff of treason spells doom.

As usual, the political party in charge closed their ears and eyes, and just arrogantly blundered on ahead. They did not even get the picture when General Wesley Clarke got ignored... hundreds of officers who had served with Clarke absolutely despise the man.

Stupid move...

[robini123]

Originally Posted by Joker

Because of all the people who claimed, with an equal 'absense of evidence', that the WMDs were now in Syria?

I assume you are implying that I said that??? I have stated it as a possibility... nothing more. Still it is a moot point.

[Carnage_59]

Originally Posted by Joker

Because of all the people who claimed, with an equal 'absense of evidence', that the WMDs were now in Syria?

Whoa, Joker. There is a lot of evidence that WMDs were moved to Syria.

1. The IAEA noted a lot of equipment was moved to al Aqaa just before the invasion in March 2003.

2. The fact that Tariq Aziz, the former Vice President of Iraq, confirmed that Russian Special Forces moved almost 200 metric tons of equipment into Syria.

As for #1, the only two media outlets that touched this were the BBC World Service and Deutsche Welle (Voice of Germany).

[Carnage_59]

Originally Posted by Bluehawk

IMHO...

If Kerry had not given that "Winter Soldier" testimony before a Congressional committee, he would probably have had a better chance at victory in his race for the Presidency. He might not have won, but the margin would have been a lot closer.

The Dem party chose the wrong candidate... from the moment Kerry announced his candidacy, an onslaught of vets immediately began reminding people of that testimony he gave, and they kept up that refrain right up until the last minute on November 2nd. Even a whiff of treason spells doom.

They did not even get the picture when General Wesley Clarke got ignored... hundreds of officers who had served with Clarke absolutely despise the man.

Stupid move...

Bluehawk, you and I disagree a lot, but here we agree. Even Jimmy "Mad Dog" Carville, Slick Willie's attack pet, commented that the Democratic Party is very out of touch with a lot of people.

Zell Miller was dead on in his book about the Democratic Party.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by Carnage_59

Bluehawk, you and I disagree a lot, but here we agree. Even Jimmy "Mad Dog" Carville, Slick Willie's attack pet, commented that the Democratic Party is very out of touch with a lot of people.

Zell Miller was dead on in his book about the Democratic Party.

We probably agree on a lot more than is sometimes apparent... my hunch is that MOST political partys eventually get out of touch, become complacent or arrogant or downright stupid, but the Dems have a real bad case at this moment in history.

Another thing... I still maintain that they have yet to reckon with the irreparable damage that Bill Clinton's misconduct created... which is one thing even Carville refuses to admit.