Posted on 01/03/2005 2:23:46 PM PST by NYTexan
Almost two months after election day, Democrat strategists continue to debate John Kerry's loss to George Bush, wondering how Mr. Kerry failed to lose by a landslide.
"It's baffling," said Democrat National Committee (DNC) Chairman Terry McAuliffe, "He had all the earmarks of a devastating, 10-million-vote, 49-state defeat. And yet he only lost by a few million in the popular vote and cut it pretty close in the Electoral College."
The debate over how Mr. Kerry managed a mediocre performance rather than a crushing embarrassment threatens to tear the fabric of Democrat party unity.
On the one side, many strategists think President Bush should have beaten Mr. Kerry "like a steel drum" due to the latter's lack of guiding principles, reasonable ideas, tolerable personality or track record of accomplishment.
On the other side, a raft of consultants continues to pore over precinct spreadsheets trying to calculate why more people don't hate George Bush.
"If we can solve this riddle," said Mr. McAuliffe, "Our 2008 candidate will be able to return us to the halcyon days of Mondale and Dukakis."
Meanwhile, he said, pundits and pols ponder the central question: "How can a man who stands for so little still get the support of about 50 million voters?"
Mr. Kerry, who is also a U.S. Senator, still attributes his "virtual victory" showing to curiosity.
"I think many Americans were curious to see my plan," he said. "My whole strategy was to tease them with it during the campaign, so they would be burning to get a glimpse of it by November. It worked. Without that plan, sculptors would be chiseling my face on the Democrat Mount Rushmore, right next to Walter and Michael."
Pinging the usual suspects!
(anyone wanting on or off the satire ping list, let me know!)
Satire my rearend...I agree with this!!
lol
Why did he even come so close!
Did you read on Drudge that Kerry said in an interview:
"We didn't lose. We just didn't win."
I know the question is asked in jest, but there is a serious answer to the question: It's because there are about 50 million voters out there who stand for so little.
I had the same question. Too d*mn close for comfort...
I mean, come on, Johnnnyboy, show up the ones (like me) who think you never had a plan.
Man, this guy is full of great lines! It sounds like, We lost before we won."
That plan was clear: Turn Iraq over to the French. I guess after Vietnam, the French owe it to us to take Iraq off our hands (or so Kerry's reason must be).
I realize this is a satirical article from "ScrappleFace", but it's still a valid question!
Was that the election or is he having flashbacks to his days in Vietnam again?
LOL.
And in the same interview he said:
"The pundits didn't like me. Was it my looks? My voice?"
#1. The pundits didn't ask him a single hard question.
#2. The Democrats are obsessed with their looks.
Maybe the people figured all that out.
Maybe the French would ban the hijab in Iraq, too ;)
The problem was Michael Moore. Not sure just how, but it seems like a good idea to blame him for something.
I actually agree with this article-
How did Kerry come as close as he did???
Is it just the media whores shilling for him?
It is because 59 million voters would stand for anything.
Honestly, it wasn't until the Mondale/Dukakis line that I noticed it was a joke.
Kerry is such an idiot.
The media gave Kerry at least a 15% edge.
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.