February 10, 2004

HEADING SOUTH (via David Hill, The Bronx):

Kerry's `Southern strategy' spurs worry: Loyalists cheer rare appearance in Tennessee (Jeff Zeleny and Kirsten Scharnberg, 2/10/04, The Chicago Tribune)

"There should be a Southern strategy in a national campaign for a Democratic candidate," said Tennessee party Chairman Randy Button, who thought Kerry's decision to skip the weekend forum was "a mistake." "If you're looking at November, there are going to be some Southern battleground states. Tennessee is one of them."

After winning 10 states, and with polls indicating he is leading in Tuesday's contests in Tennessee and in Virginia, Kerry may all but cinch his fight for the party's nomination. But some Democratic strategists say he also may have passed up a chance to begin presenting himself as a candidate in whom the voters could feel an investment for the fall campaign.

Indeed, when the nominee emerges to challenge Bush, each candidate faces a country with a narrow political divide. While each of the last three Democratic presidents have come from the South, the region was far less kind to its own native son, Al Gore, in the last presidential race; some party leaders believe there may be little reason to think it will do otherwise, particularly if the nominee is a well-heeled senator from the Northeast.

"There's no question that when certain issues are played up, Republicans will point to him being a Massachusetts liberal," said Alexander Lamis, who studies Southern politics at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. "But you have to confront those issues if you are to win elsewhere."

Mathematically speaking, the Democratic Party does not need to carry Tennessee or other Southern states to win the White House. But other Democrats argue that the lingering effects of a punishing economy accompanied by high job loss could trump the traditional cultural divide over abortion rights, gay rights and civil rights.

Kerry seized upon this earlier Monday as he delivered a speech outside a firehouse in Roanoke, Va., where he invoked a name that resonated well with the crowd of several hundred supporters.

"If you like what Bill Clinton gave you in those eight years," the senator said, "you're going to love what John Kerry gives you in the first four years."


DNA samples?

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 10, 2004 8:36 AM
Comments

Being from MA I've seen Kerry in action (or inaction given his no bills in 19 years career) and can't believe a) he's going to be the nominee, and b) he actually has a chance.
As for the South the GOP needs a solid south to win. I can't see Kerry alone winning in the south but with Edwards or Richardson as VP he might do ok in the South.

Posted by: AWW at February 10, 2004 9:36 AM

Wouldn't ketchup stains be more appropriate on any blue Gap dress JFK II comes in contact with?

Posted by: John at February 10, 2004 9:43 AM

Bob Ryan was on the Tony Kornheiser show the other day just laughing at the thought of anyone taking Kerry seriously.

Posted by: oj at February 10, 2004 9:44 AM

Kerry is obviously going to play on nostalgia for the very unserious nineties, when the economy boomed and there wasn't any threat to the security of the US. That makes for a nonsensical policy, but it may be very succesful in November. I'm afraid Bush's first term has just been too radical and too eventful : people have a kind of Bush fatigue after four years of war and economical troubles.

Posted by: Peter at February 10, 2004 10:50 AM

Clinton was a completely unserious candidate. He had no chance. I will take seriously any threat to Bush's presidency, even though the candidate he faces seems delusional and obviously loaded with baggage.

Posted by: NKR at February 10, 2004 12:13 PM

"There are going to be some Southern battleground states"?

Would anyone who believes Kerry will come within 10 points of Bush in any Southern state (save Florida) please raise their hand?

And would someone tell the internet community freaking out about the Meet the Press interview that a president with these economic numbers, approval ratings, and poll numbers is going to win in a walkover?

Posted by: brian at February 10, 2004 1:56 PM

No elected incumbent, other than Herbert Hoover, lost in the 20th Century unless there was a third party candidate.

Posted by: oj at February 10, 2004 2:06 PM

My Comment to NKR (The Wife is NRK) is that the first thing Kerry needs to do is to bring Ross Perot out of retirement.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 11, 2004 2:05 PM
« HOOPLA: | Main | DON'T LOOK BACK...: »