September 4, 2004


* So, Paul Begala and James Carville say that Zell Miller was their mentor, a conservative Southern Democrat. Bill Clinton hired them precisely because he wanted to run to George H. W. Bush's Right, against the NorthEastern Liberal Establishment of his own party--the Third Way. But at the GOP convention, when Mr. Miller endorsed a Third Way conservative Republican against a NorthEastern Liberal they say (well, scream) that it's he who has changed?

* Meanwhile, the Democrats this year chose John Kerry, who they hoped to portray as a moderate, over Howard Dean, who was running as an unabashed liberal, to try and blunt their differences with the GOP enough that they could win a closely divided 50-50 election. The President, on the other hand, is trying to win a transformational mandate of 60-40, which would match the electoral, congressional and public opinion (on wedge issues at least) split in the country and establish a permanent Republican majority. Yet the guy aiming at 60 is the divisive candidate?

Posted by Orrin Judd at September 4, 2004 10:13 AM

Coming off the AP's phantom booing story of Friday, I'm waiting to see which news organization is the first to "mistakenly" label Miller as a Republican in an story attacking the senator's remarks at the convention and the Buchanan-like meaness/racist/sexist/homophobic nature of Bush's supporters in general.

Posted by: John at September 4, 2004 11:05 AM

All the compelling figures on the American political stage are backing Bush. Just think about it, he received rousing endorsements from John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and Arnold Schwarzenegger. For people in the muddled middle, it was like hitting a trifecta.

Who appeared for Kerry? Carter, the worst president of my lifetime. Kennedy, you gotta be kidding me. The Clintons, who spent the last year desperately seeking surrogates to knock him off. Michael Moore, a lying, personally repulsive, self-promoting, hypocritical, Jew-baiting pseudo-populist, who makes Kennedy look statesmanlike. And then the punditocracy wonders why the Democrats got no bounce out of their convention.

Posted by: Bart at September 4, 2004 11:46 AM

And Kerry doesn't even have Clinton around to hit the soapboxes on his behalf anymore, at least not as long as he's in the hospital. Depending on doctor's orders Bill might be sidelined until October, which deprives Kerry of the one major Democrat who can really speak up a storm.

Posted by: Joe at September 4, 2004 11:48 AM


Not quite on point but I am surprised that nobody picked up on this one. I thought I had heard it this way. From the Miller/Matthews interview after his speech:

MATTHEWS: All right, let me ask you. Senator, you are the expert. Many times, as a conservative Republican, you have had to come out on the floor and obey party whips and vote against big appropriations passed by the Democrats when they were in power.

Posted by: Rick T. at September 4, 2004 11:51 AM

Rick: I caught that one too. I was hoping Zell Miller would point it out when he was on the show.

Posted by: Hunter at September 4, 2004 12:57 PM

The blog Slings 'n Arrows (No connection or plug intended) asks a stunning question....

Kerry, during his midnight ramblings, said "I visited some veterans of the Iraq War in a hospital the other day, and was so impressed....." blah blah.

Huh? What hopsital? Where? When? Was this filmed? Did he and his campaign choose to do this and then utterly ignore the event... no film, no announcement, nothing? Would he have the stones to vist, knowing that a lot of soldiers might be less than enthusiastic about his campaign??

Maybe, to his credit, he did. But has anyone heard a single peep about such a visit other than Kerry's words? Note: "visited the OTHER DAY".. as in, within the past ten days.

Surely this can be verified. Simply ask his staff the hospital and date, and make a coupla calls.

If it's true, all well and good. If it's NOT..... hoo boy.

Posted by: Andrew X at September 4, 2004 3:16 PM

It will be interesting to see the first polls that are entirely from after Bush's speech. The 11% lead in the Newsweek poll is an average of a 6% lead on Thursday and 16%(!) lead on Friday. We haven't yet begun to see Kerry's emotional meltdown...

Posted by: brian at September 4, 2004 4:54 PM

My final thoughts? Kerry is utterly toast. This won't be close. It'll be nasty, but not within inches of close.

Posted by: Chris at September 4, 2004 5:01 PM

Mark Steyn:

"I remember a couple of days after Sept. 11 writing that weepy candlelight vigils were a cop-out: the issue wasn't whether you were sad about the dead people but whether you wanted to do something about it. Three years on, the two conventions drew the same distinction. If you want passivity and wallowing in victim culture, the Dems will do. If you want to win this thing, Bush is the only guy running."

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 4, 2004 5:40 PM

"And Kerry doesn't even have Clinton around to hit the soapboxes on his behalf anymore, at least not as long as he's in the hospital. Depending on doctor's orders Bill might be sidelined until October, which deprives Kerry of the one major Democrat who can really speak up a storm."

I heard that Clinton will be in the hospital 5 days post-op and a week at home or two after ward. If Kerry's numbers don't recover Bill won't either, and Hill, who hasn't spent a night under the same roof as Bill since 1/19/01, will have to nurse him beac to health.

No Way are they going to be hanging around while PF 194 goes down for the last time. They will be waving from the dock.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 4, 2004 6:10 PM