Thu, July 29, 2004
Anybody But Bush: Anybody Else?—11:34 PM
Admittedly, I only saw the snippets on The Daily Show, but I really like what Al Sharpton had to say at the DNC, and I like it even more since all the TV pundits are so horrified by it. (They whined for weeks in advance that the convention was too choreographed, too predictable; then the minute something unexpected happens - Sharpton going off-book? Shocker! - they get huffy.) He remains the most charismatic of the original nine candidates, and the most forcefully direct. He's as fearless as Kucinich – they're equally unelectable, so they can just speak the truth without worrying over the political consequences. Kucinich just has the misfortune of being white, so he's had to root his unelectability in being a loony. Sharpton was born unelectable, so he can be a well spoken straight shooter and cut out most of the goofiness. I like him.
And, he's the latest addition to the list of people I'd rather vote for than John Kerry. I'm a staunch Anybody But Bush voter, but it's a shame that Kerry is the absolute last of the anybodies. In order of how likely I'd vote for them for president:
Anybody else in America
Kerry
Cheney
Bush
Third from last: kind of sad. With such a large movement behind the Anybody But Bush vote, it seems a shame that the Democrats couldn't come up with someone who is more acceptable than Bush by a wide margin. Instead we have the guy who's preferable by the narrowest possible margin. The Daily Show calls Kerry "the least objectionable of the alternatives to Bush," but out of the pack of nine, I'd have much preferred Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, or Clark before him. And I'd gladly elect McCain or Biden before any of them.
And this is the convention of my guys! I shudder at the thought of how incensed I'll be by the coverage of the GOP convention next month. I think I'll have to bake my head into a cake just to block it out.
Brandon — Fri, 7/30/04 2:40am
The Daily Show was fantastic tonight, and so was Sharpton. Brian Williams should turn in his anchor badge - "Whatever it was you were riffing on there..." Embarassing and insulting.
I agree with your sentiments on Kerry. I grow less and less enthusiastic about him with each passing day (though Edwards has grown on me). But he's Not Bush, and so he'll get my vote - I just wish I was voting FOR someone, not AGAINST someone else. It's a disheartening way to vote.
I like McCain too. I don't agree with everything he stands for, but as a voter, lordy I'm a sucker for that straight-shootin', charismatic integrity thing he's got goin' on. (Proceed to fan myself like a swooning Southern belle)
"michwagn" — Fri, 7/30/04 10:45am
Don't be fooled by the media's John Kerry is the "least objectionable" candidate or the "most electable." His senate voting record is spot on from the perspective of most Democrats. I think that he has less television charisma than Sharpton, Edwards, and even Clark, but I think that he is not an empty suit...which I feared Edwards was...now I am slowly being convinced that he's really smart and a strong communicator...but my jury is still out on him.
Now, Kerry has to run for undecideds because the Democrats have finally gotten it together and said, "Let's win." The platform passed unanimously. There was hardly any dissention. That never happens with the Dems. While lots of talk about Kerry taking some pages out of the Republican playbook on defense and strength and patriotism and all that will dominate coverage for awhile, the real steal was taking the "Get on board and win" thing that Bush really perfected in 2000. He ran as a compassionate conservative, which really appealed to middle of the road voters, when more religiously ideological Republicans wanted red meat on abortion and gay issues and economically ideological Republicans wanted a bigger tax cut and less spending promises. He said, "Listen, you're voting for me already. Shhhhh." It was a good strategy. Kerry is doing the same now, trying really hard to inoculate himself against weakness charges he'll likely hear from teh Bush campaign. Gore had to hit all the big Dem notes in 2000 because of Nader and his own refusal to embrace Clinton. Kerry gave BC's soundbites last night with the economic prosperity, 100,000 cops on the street and so forth. Kerry won't worry about Nader as much because he thinks that when those folks get into the voting booth, they can compare the Gore/Nader/Bush decision to whether they are satisfied with the last four years and Kerry is betting they'll side with him.
Meanwhile, Kerry ought to get a 4-6 point bump out of the convention (above the margin of error in polls, so a reported 6-9 point bump). The independents focus group on MSNBC that did that thing with the dials (if you've seen the "100,000 Airplanes" West Wing episode, it is that stuff) and found that Kerry talking about his war experience and his making war a last resort tested really high among independents who voted for Bush last time. That's who he needs to win the election. That and women, who Kerry could always really count on in MA.
I am pretty enthusiastic about Kerry. I think he'll be a really good president. I want someone who is flexible and sees complexity in some of our more important issues. Actually, I think Bush is more flexible than he paints himself to be on some things, but I think that he is incapable of admitting a mistake or that things are not going well in a certain area when he had previously said that they will go well. Kerry has the ability to say, "Whoops." Now, of course, we can't have someone who just keeps saying "Whoops" all the time either, but when presidents grow in office, they get a second term: see Clinton and the Health Care failure and then the Welfare success.
I wish I'd seen The Daily Show. Dammit.
I like McCain in general as well, but I am really glad Kerry didn't pick him to be VP...and don't believe the hype, there's no way in hell that he asked. But he wanted us to think he almost asked.
Brandon — Fri, 7/30/04 10:55am
Try to catch the rerun of last night's (Thursday's) The Daily Show today (Friday) if you can, Mike. It was quite hilarious.
Joe Mulder — Fri, 7/30/04 12:24pm
"He ran as a compassionate conservative, which really appealed to middle of the road voters, when more religiously ideological Republicans wanted red meat on abortion and gay issues and economically ideological Republicans wanted a bigger tax cut and less spending promises. He said, "Listen, you're voting for me already. Shhhhh.""
Let's give credit where credit is due; Clinton invented, then perfected, this. Bush just learned at the feet of the master.
"michwagn" — Fri, 7/30/04 12:49pm
Oh, absolutely. Cheerfully applauded.
Bee Boy — Fri, 7/30/04 5:49pm
This is something that I significantly respect in Kerry, and I'm glad that in his speech he managed to relate the merits of this to viewers (or at least he tried). Because I think that BC04 has managed to make it his biggest liability as far as uninformed voters are concerned. (Uninformed voters are, sadly, the most important ones, because they're such a big group. Of the informed voters I know, 70% have already posted comments on this page.)
I hope Kerry can pull it off, and I admit he's not as bad as I originally thought, but it still looks to be a close race, and someone with a little more energy and charisma could've widened the gap.
Yes, but Clinton used his powers for good... ;-)
Anonymous Coward — Fri, 7/30/04 8:47pm
one thing to keep in mind...the "undecideds" are a much smaller percentage of the "voting" population this year, and both parties know this.(the great unifier has created more division than anyone thought possible) It's the untapped 50% of the potential voting population that doesn't even show up, that they are aiming to recruit. And, both camps are heavily recruiting...and organizing huge "get out the vote" drives aimed at those they think will boost their numbers. so, if anyone knows someone who isn't registered, doesn't bother to go to the polls or whatever, please encourage them to get involved. it's free, relatively painless, and really, the very least anyone can do.
"michwagn" — Sun, 8/1/04 12:08am
True, the undecideds are smaller this year, but they are still important. Right now, about 90% of Republicans are for Bush and about 80% of Dems are for Kerry. Usually, higher turnout helps Democrats because Republicans are more likely to vote as they are more likely to have a higher average income, education, racial background, and interest in politics than Democrats (these are just trends - they don't apply to everyone, but they are enduring ones). So, usually, increased turnout is good for Democrats. However, while Latinos and Hispanics are more Democrat than Republican right now, that hold is tenuous. With a spanish speaking Texan who doesn't like abortion, many of those voters are soft Dems and can be brought over to the Republican side.
Usually, as a political scientist, I see every election as part of some long trend in increasing polarization, decreasing partisanship or something else. This one, I am currently seeing as more important, it is possible that this election could have 54-60% turnout, which would be a big jump from year's past.
Of course, registered voters turnout at about 65%, and you have to be registered to vote to actually vote, so increasing registration seems to be a good tactic for both sides, though if that increases the percentage of registered voters will likely drop a little.