03-10-2004, 10:12 PM
Hi Life. If the U.S. elections were held in Europe, Bush would lose. But they are held in the U.S., which is a completely different ball of wax. Americans tend to see our position in world politics quite a bit differently than how foreigners view the U.S., obviously.
As I see it, Bush will sweep the South and the Mountain West (fortunately for Kerry, the Mountain West is not worth too much politicallly other than looking huge on a map). Kerry will win the Northeast, Middle Atlantic, and the Northwest convincingly. Calfornia, Florida, and the Midwest will determine who wins. For Kerry to beat Bush, he has to convince voters in the Midwest that Bush is responsible for the slow economy, and that he can do more to create jobs. He has to win on that issue decisively, because IMHO Bush would win most of the Midwest (and thus, the election) if foreign policy were the only issue.
George Bush, Sr., had an approval rating of nearly 80% at the conclusion of Operation Desert Storm. He ended up losing the following election because Clinton was able to shift the debate to domestic affairs, and place blame on Bush for the struggling economy at that time. I suspect that Kerry would be wise to follow suit, because I actually don't see him winning if foreign policy or anti-terrorism becomes the focal issue of the election.
But when it comes to Die's point, I think he is right. People are voting for Kerry now, because they think he is the man. But they are basing that on his success in the early *Democratic primaries*. Those primaries only represent the more Liberal half of the country. A more Conservative Democrat (or at least one from a more moderate/conservative state) would have a better chance against Bush. But I think the realization is that Kerry probably would win the primaries, and it is better for his chances to be united behind him than to make him struggle his way through a negative campaign.
As I see it, Bush will sweep the South and the Mountain West (fortunately for Kerry, the Mountain West is not worth too much politicallly other than looking huge on a map). Kerry will win the Northeast, Middle Atlantic, and the Northwest convincingly. Calfornia, Florida, and the Midwest will determine who wins. For Kerry to beat Bush, he has to convince voters in the Midwest that Bush is responsible for the slow economy, and that he can do more to create jobs. He has to win on that issue decisively, because IMHO Bush would win most of the Midwest (and thus, the election) if foreign policy were the only issue.
George Bush, Sr., had an approval rating of nearly 80% at the conclusion of Operation Desert Storm. He ended up losing the following election because Clinton was able to shift the debate to domestic affairs, and place blame on Bush for the struggling economy at that time. I suspect that Kerry would be wise to follow suit, because I actually don't see him winning if foreign policy or anti-terrorism becomes the focal issue of the election.
But when it comes to Die's point, I think he is right. People are voting for Kerry now, because they think he is the man. But they are basing that on his success in the early *Democratic primaries*. Those primaries only represent the more Liberal half of the country. A more Conservative Democrat (or at least one from a more moderate/conservative state) would have a better chance against Bush. But I think the realization is that Kerry probably would win the primaries, and it is better for his chances to be united behind him than to make him struggle his way through a negative campaign.