Saturday, October 30, 2004
It is interesting that the dying people all want you to vote against Bush or for Bush. Nobody seems to want you to vote for Kerry or against Kerry. With almost half the electorate willing to vote for anybody but Bush, it is astonishing that the Democratic candidate inspires virtually no intrinsic support. If he is elected, the people who voted for him will have achieved 100% of their objective. How will Kerry govern thereafter?
Give me a break. You get so much on your high hobby horse about the MSM, and yet you don't criticize the Bush campaign for exploiting 9/11 with that awfully transparent ad about the girl in Ohio whom Bush comforted by giving a hug. Did you see that one in your media market? It's the political equivalent of Ipecac, even for this centrist with libertarian leanings on some issues.
Anonymous, you gotta lighten up. I wasn't really picking on the MSM in this post, although I don't deny that I have done so in the past. I was making the different point that the election, one way or another, is all about Bush. As Brendan points out, there is nothing intrinsically strange about that, but it seems to me that that aspect is more pronounced this time than usually.
As for the "Ashley's story" ad, I did see it for the first time today. I wasn't troubled by it, but I'm not troubled by politicizing 9/11, either. I have no objection to Kerry claiming that we are less safe because of the Iraq war, although I disagree with that claim, and I have no problem with assessing Bush's presidency at least in part on his leadership after September 11. I also believe that Bush is a much warmer human being than Kerry, and while I don't give that attribute tremendous weight, I give it some weight. I think that one of Bush's advantages is that he is not emotionally detached -- in this respect he is far more like Clinton and Reagan than Kerry, Carter or Nixon (all of whom were, in my opinion at least, emotionally detached).