Man... although I do like Kerry I just wish he was a little bit less "complex" with his message, and a lot faster to respond to Bush's attacks.
PostPosted:Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:10 am
<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>The American people need simple, they have short attention spans and the can only handle short, simple messages. Bush understands this. Now I'm wishing that Howard Dean had won the primaries. Boy was he crazy, but at least he was more straight-forward and consistent with his message and wouldn't take crap from anybody. Plus, if Dean would have run then we'd have an actual anti-Iraq-war candidate, instead of one who was against the war but gave Bush the authority to do it anyway... and Kerry wasn't even very clear on why he did that or why he said that he'd STILL do it. I think that had more of a negative effect on him than the SBVFT crap did. A lot of anti-war people who were with him 100% lost a lot of respect for him by saying that. He did had a good point, which was that he thought the president needing the authority to go to war with Saddam as a bargaining chip in his negotiations over weapons inspections, but he didn't make this clear at all! He kind of left it fuzzy and boy has Bush used this statement to stab him right through the heart.
Don't get me wrong though, I still support Kerry 100% in this election. I'd just like to see my guy on his toes a little more. It seems to me that Kerry's walking through this campaign like it's a Senate race in Massachusets. Bush is coming off as a far better campaigner. He's ruthless, unappolegetic and he keeps his message very, very simple and straightforward (as wrong as it may be). Bush also knows how to use the "liberal" media to his advantage far better than Kerry does. Kerry's supposed to be a "comeback kid" and he's not all that far behind in the polls, in fact he's about where Bush was a few months ago. The last poll that I read said GWB:51%, JFK:46%, RN:~1%.
Kerry needs to do these things to win:
-Make his message simpler.
-EXPLAIN HIMSELF! Most of the supposed "flip-flops" that he's made are exagerations by BushCo. that Kerry could easily explain away. It he would actually would TRY, he could show that his position on Iraq has been consistent.
-Attack Bush harder! This campaign is not really about whether people like Kerry, but how much they dislike Bush.
-Respond immediately to baseless attacks, or any attacks for that matter, by pointing out the truth and clarifying his position.
In addition to doing these things, Kerry needs to "win" the debates against Bush, and Bush just needs to keep being Bush.
That is all, thank you.</div>
Don't get me wrong though, I still support Kerry 100% in this election. I'd just like to see my guy on his toes a little more. It seems to me that Kerry's walking through this campaign like it's a Senate race in Massachusets. Bush is coming off as a far better campaigner. He's ruthless, unappolegetic and he keeps his message very, very simple and straightforward (as wrong as it may be). Bush also knows how to use the "liberal" media to his advantage far better than Kerry does. Kerry's supposed to be a "comeback kid" and he's not all that far behind in the polls, in fact he's about where Bush was a few months ago. The last poll that I read said GWB:51%, JFK:46%, RN:~1%.
Kerry needs to do these things to win:
-Make his message simpler.
-EXPLAIN HIMSELF! Most of the supposed "flip-flops" that he's made are exagerations by BushCo. that Kerry could easily explain away. It he would actually would TRY, he could show that his position on Iraq has been consistent.
-Attack Bush harder! This campaign is not really about whether people like Kerry, but how much they dislike Bush.
-Respond immediately to baseless attacks, or any attacks for that matter, by pointing out the truth and clarifying his position.
In addition to doing these things, Kerry needs to "win" the debates against Bush, and Bush just needs to keep being Bush.
That is all, thank you.</div>