Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
The issue? That Kerry screwed up and gave a gift to the Republicans? That he screwed it up even more by refusing to apologise making the debate last for seven or eight news cycles more than it had to.
Micahel J. Fox was the center of attention (which was bad for Republicans) and now John Kerry is (which is good for Republicans).
The screw up was also like a perfect storm. If someone else had made it, it wouldn't be so bad, but it came from the mouth of a guy that has a history of criticising US troops. Now the news channles get to replay all the times Kerry has made similar comments (but intentionally). It also came just before an election where the Dems had national security on their side, but this gaff put the spotlight back on the main reservation people have about the Dems: that they can't be trusted when it come to national security. Even some strong liberal on this board are saying they hope Pelosi and Rangel tone it down and don't do what they are saying they are going to do (like cut funding). Kerry's Gaff reminded people of why they have not trusted the Dems with national security in the past. Without Kerry's screw up this issue would not have been as prominent as it is now.
I am sure many Democrat strategists are wishing that the Foley thing came up now and this thing came up weeks ago. Both are irrelevent but both are political gifts. But the gifts closer to the election are the more important ones.
Is any of this not obvious? What is there to debate?
|
So it was a Good Idea then. Rove was brilliant to latch onto this 10 second clip, even understanding that Kerry didn't mean what he said, because the important thing is to confuse voters into voting for your side?
This is exactly what makes partisan politics the disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person with good ideas would ever want to wade into. Thanks for clarifying that for me.
