Posted on 09/22/2004 11:10:08 PM PDT by kattracks
[snip]This linkage of combat in Baghdad with safety on Main Street has reduced the gender gap in the polls to historic lows as women have resonated with Bush's new emphasis.
Now that Kerry has moved too far left in a misguided effort to enthuse his political base, Bush can close in for the kill and defend our action in Iraq and our global combativeness against terrorism as fundamental to the protection of our families at home.
Part of Kerry's vulnerability on the Iraq issue is because he is really not proposing anything new to deal with the war. His four-part "plan" which centers on urging our allies and the U.N. to do more and calls for strong efforts to provide jobs to Iraqis (the John Edwards message, sent abroad) and to train Iraqi police and troops just mirrors what Bush is already doing.
That is, it is only in retrospect in criticizing past actions that Kerry really differs from Bush. He is proposing no real alternative for action in the future.
Since elections are about the future and history books about the past, Bush can fairly ask Kerry what he would do differently. When the Democrat ticks off his agenda, Bush can reply with his statistics saying (in effect), Been there, done that.
John Kerry has zigged when he should have zagged. He has chosen to fight over terror and Iraq when he should have stayed on domestic issues. He has tacked left when he should have stayed in the center on foreign issues and attacked on matters closer to home.
Kerry has defined himself as a liberal and will pay for it with his defeat.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
"Now that Kerry has moved too far left in a misguided effort to enthuse his political base, Bush can close in for the kill and defend our action in Iraq and our global combativeness against terrorism as fundamental to the protection of our families at home. "
This explains the thunder Pres. Bush, VP Cheney and Rudy G. whipped on JFK on Wednesday.
Its a clinch. I can rephrase the old House un-American Activities Committee question for good measure as follows: "Are you and have you ever been a liberal?"
Bush can do some of this, but decorum says that ONLY the Swifties can run footage of 9/11 effectively.
btt
It needs to be said again: When I see a Democratic candidate support our wartime President, and spare the vitriol for our real enemies (you know, the radical psychotic Islamists) -- then I'll worry about us losing the election.
Didn't the Dems learn anything about Clinton's co-opting the GOP's positions... triangulation and all that? Kerry's repeating the same mistakes Gore did!!!! Unbelievably stupid.
Unlike GW who just sets a course and keeps on trucking, sKerry just flip flops like a newly landed fish on Iraq and the WOT.
Exactly, and it isn't that those 30-40 percent will vote for Bush, it is simply that he is alienating his base and giving them absolutely nothing to motivate them on Nov 2nd. This is turning into the worst candidacy in memory.
I thought that was a Cole Porter song.
I think he is on this one. Kerry had to do this because his base was eroding and there was no fire to his campaign. Nothing whips up the smiles and steely determination among the liberals like opposing the Iraq war and talking about "Bush misleading us into war." Remember how effective Howard Dean was at that last fall? Kerry's plan has always been to tack to the middle on this in the general election, but with his base eroding, he has to take this loser of a position.
Clinton only stayed in power because he presided over a Peace Dividend because "we have no enemies". 9-11 put the lie to that position. However, after Gore lost, the Democrats moved to the left, put Nanci Pelosi in charge of their legislative minority and secured a forthcoming victory for George W Bush. Kerry is just the personafication of that policy position. As the party of unilateral disarmament, Kerry must be against this war, as he is against all wars. If he had a gun and was standing in front of Osama Bin Ladden, what would he do? He wouldn't shoot. He would bring him in to justice. After all, we should hear his side of the story. This is why Kerry and the Democrats will lose.
Great points!
MORE:
STUNG by criticism that his campaign lacks di rection and focus, Sen. John Kerry has chosen to base his candidacy on an all-out assault on President Bush's record in Iraq indeed, opted to move to the left decisively and attack the war head-on.
Liberals will cheer Kerry's new-found decisiveness, but it opens the way for Bush to deal him a counterstroke that can all but end this election and finish off Kerry for good.
Kerry's right flank is now gapingly vulnerable to a Bush attack. According to Scott Rasmussen's tracking polls, 30 to 40 percent of Kerry's voters disagree with his new leftward tilt on Iraq....
Kerry has moved to the left, leaving about one-third of his vote behind. Bush can now move in and peel off Kerry's moderate supporters....
The backdrop of this new emphasis on Iraq is Bush's largely successful effort to appeal to women in his battle against terror. After misdirecting his rhetoric for months, echoing a macho tough guy approach, the president found his stride at the GOP Convention and, with the able assistance of his wife, portrayed the war in Iraq and the global battle against terror as an effort to keep American families safe at home.
Thanks for that link......! Brutal! My father tells me the same thing everytime Kerry mentions bringing the troops home...
Why don't you tell the other team at halftime you are leaving by the 3rd quarter.......A**inine!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.