January 28, 2004
C-SPAN 2 VS. CABANA BOY:
The End of the Road: As the 1996 election waits to repeat itself, New Hampshire marked the end of the road for most of the field. (Fred Barnes, 01/28/2004, Weekly Standard)
If history prevails (and it often does), Kerry will be the Democratic nominee. Every candidate, Republican or Democrat, who has won both the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary has gone on to capture the nomination. Sure, Kerry is capable of screwing up so badly that he defies history, but it's not likely.So the stage has been set for a Kerry versus President Bush race this fall. That match-up is reminiscent of the Bob Dole versus President Clinton election in 1996. Hold your applause. It would be a conventional presidential contest between two party regulars.
Kerry is Dole without the wit. Like Dole, he's an establishment figure, an old political horse with little pizzazz. He's not identified with any particular issue or cause. His ideology is basically liberal but flexible, just as Dole's was conservative but pragmatic. Kerry is acceptable across the center-left breadth of the Democratic party, a mirror image of Dole's standing among moderate and conservative Republicans.
The most interesting question in such a case would be whether Mr. Kerry, like Bob Dole, would demonstrate his commitment to the race by giving up his Senate seat. The problem for Mr. Kerry is that his party is in the minority and the Senate split evenly enough that they badly need his vote. One assumes that MA law would allow Republican Mitt Romney to name his successor (?)--former governor Paul Cellucci seems most likely--which makes stepping down problematic. However, staying and casting more controversial votes can't possibly help him, not to mention having to be there to cast them instead of out campaigning. He'd also have to speak in the Senate chamber about every position he's taking, which leaves a large margin for error and allows Republican firebrands to follow him to the floor and pummel him. Not to be indelicate or anything, but he's well and truly screwed. Posted by Orrin Judd at January 28, 2004 11:46 AM
OJ - good point. I had the same thought after NH but I was thinking of Lieberman running for VP and reelection in CT in 2000 as the comparison.
Knowing Kerry and the Dems he stays in his seat but avoids the voting (I saw somewhere he's missed a good number of votes already this year) and the media lets him get away with it. That way, if he loses he just goes bac to his seat (a la Lieberman - I can't see him betting it all on this run)
AWW is right, Kerry will miss all votes. That's no problem for his home state, as its senior senator is capable of filling two seats at once.
Posted by: Peter at January 28, 2004 2:06 PMThis is why Kerry/Edwards ain't gonna happen-- both of them would have to give up their seats (early in the case of Edwards) or avoid votes, which in effect reduces the filibuster number to 58, and makes it a lot easier for the GOP to paint them as weenies or cowards.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at January 28, 2004 2:43 PMYou're referring to the thumbscrew of course.
Posted by: genecis at January 28, 2004 3:03 PMRaoul,
Knowing our Republican weenies and their dedication to breaking filibusters, I'm sure they still manage to screw it up.
One thing that makes it easier for Kerry to use the "invisible man" strategy during his campaign is the fact that he's hardly done anything at all of note in nover a doezne years as a member of the U.S. Senate. If he's there, nobody knows or cares; if he isn't there, nobody knows or cares. As Senate Majority Leader, Dole didn't have that luxury.
Posted by: John at January 28, 2004 6:41 PMit always surprises me how much these senate votes count. I tend to think that the personality and ideas on the stump overrule the senate voting record, or atleast if someone had blazing ideas and a personality while campaigning then their votes would make little difference.
Our current president was a cokehead, alcoholic spoiled rich boy, but we more or less loved him. I don't really think his record was truly examined in Texas.
Posted by: Neil at January 28, 2004 9:59 PMNeil, if he was "a cokehead, alcoholic spoiled rich boy," he never would have moved back to the boredorm of Midland, Texas after his dad hit it big as RNC chair and Ambassador to China in the 1970s. Dallas and Houston are far better places for the spolied, rich-boy party life GWB could have easily had at that time -- Midland's a beerm wine and mixed drinks town (OK, more expensive beer than in neighboring Odessa, which was more of a Lone Star/Natural Light and hard liquor type of place in the oil boom of hte late 70s and early 80s. But Midland definetly is not the place you move back to if you really want to party hardy).
Posted by: John at January 28, 2004 10:42 PM