I also couldn't imagine that any sane person would look at what was in front of them and still vote for Bush and Co.
I think part of that was poor information (and if people *choose* to only watch Fox, I don't know what to do about that). I think part of it was just not being sure that Kerry would handle things all that much differently; a lot of people are just naturally inclined to see an election like this one not between two opponents but between the incumbent and a challenger, and they expect to see the challenger demonstrate how he would do a better job. And while I was so angry and disgusted with Bush that I felty anything had to be better, and while I felt Kerry was a good, smart, capable guy who would certainly do a good job as president and do better at representing me and my beleifs, Kerry and his campaign really did a poor job of reaching those other folks, I fear.
They did a good job of laying out Bush's mistakes, but the answers they suggested for how Kerry would do better were... flat. "Rebuild our relationships with our allies": yes, good, but are the French or Germans going to send more troops to help pacify the insurgency? Even with Pres. Kerry in the White House, I doubt it. "Train more Iraqi security forces faster" The allies might have helped with that, but it isn't clear how much help that would be, or how much faster this would lead to a solution. Same with health care, same with social security. A lot of "I have a plan" and not enough simple substance. The Democrats spent so much time showing how Bush had done a bad job that they didn't seem to have much time left to talk about specifics of what Kerry would do better.
At times during Kerry's campaign I felt that he was playing an "oh yeah, me, too!" game with the Republicans. "I'm religious, too!" "I'm an average guy, too!" "I'm not for gay marriage, either!" It seemed to me that it only muddied the choice for undecided voters.
Agreed. Even if your position and that of your opponent yield the same outcome, they have different reasons they do so. Talk about that, talk about those values ("We agree that America's business sector should be strong, but I want an economically strong America because that will mean higher salaries and better jobs for American workers, unlike my opponent, whose interest lies in seeing CEOs get richer. We should get people off welfare, but by growing the economy, not by cutting benefits to thsoe who need them." etc.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-11-17 11:53 am (UTC)I think part of that was poor information (and if people *choose* to only watch Fox, I don't know what to do about that). I think part of it was just not being sure that Kerry would handle things all that much differently; a lot of people are just naturally inclined to see an election like this one not between two opponents but between the incumbent and a challenger, and they expect to see the challenger demonstrate how he would do a better job. And while I was so angry and disgusted with Bush that I felty anything had to be better, and while I felt Kerry was a good, smart, capable guy who would certainly do a good job as president and do better at representing me and my beleifs, Kerry and his campaign really did a poor job of reaching those other folks, I fear.
They did a good job of laying out Bush's mistakes, but the answers they suggested for how Kerry would do better were... flat. "Rebuild our relationships with our allies": yes, good, but are the French or Germans going to send more troops to help pacify the insurgency? Even with Pres. Kerry in the White House, I doubt it. "Train more Iraqi security forces faster" The allies might have helped with that, but it isn't clear how much help that would be, or how much faster this would lead to a solution. Same with health care, same with social security. A lot of "I have a plan" and not enough simple substance. The Democrats spent so much time showing how Bush had done a bad job that they didn't seem to have much time left to talk about specifics of what Kerry would do better.
At times during Kerry's campaign I felt that he was playing an "oh yeah, me, too!" game with the Republicans. "I'm religious, too!" "I'm an average guy, too!" "I'm not for gay marriage, either!" It seemed to me that it only muddied the choice for undecided voters.
Agreed. Even if your position and that of your opponent yield the same outcome, they have different reasons they do so. Talk about that, talk about those values ("We agree that America's business sector should be strong, but I want an economically strong America because that will mean higher salaries and better jobs for American workers, unlike my opponent, whose interest lies in seeing CEOs get richer. We should get people off welfare, but by growing the economy, not by cutting benefits to thsoe who need them." etc.)