Exactly how inept is the Kerry campaign? And exactly how many
times am I going to have to ask that question? The moment I think
that it can’t sink to a lower level of incompetence, the Kerry
campaign proves that there may be no bottom.
I’m tempted to suggest that postponing the nomination until
after the Democratic convention for the sake of delaying the $75
million in public funds is easily the dumbest thing John Kerry —
by the way, he actually served in Vietnam — could do, but I went
there last week, and so I am chastened. But, despite numerous
missteps, it seems that the Kerry campaign couldn’t learn a lesson
if it crashed into its national office in a swift boat.
True, many campaigns make mistakes, misjudging the mood of the
public and/or the media. Such blunders are even more likely when a
campaign has to make a decision under the gun. However, this was
not the sort of decision that had to be made under serious time
constraints. Indeed, the idea seems so bad that one has to wonder
how, exactly, such schemes get any traction in the Kerry
campaign.
Nominating conventions have become little more than free
advertising for the candidates and the parties, designed largely to
give the candidate a post-convention bounce in the polls. Kerry
would have foregone much of that if he had gone ahead with the
postponement. Because conventions are now stage-managed and devoid
of any serious politicking, the parties have a difficult time
maintaining media interest in these events. The build-up to the
nomination speech is one of their few remaining selling points. How
much interest would the networks and cable channels (not to mention
viewers) have had in covering a non-acceptance speech? Not much, if
Tom Brokaw is any indication. “My personal belief is that if he
announces he will not accept the nomination, that there’s no good
reason for NBC the network to be in Boston covering the
convention,” Brokaw said on Larry King Live the other
day.
Then there is the image problem, a no-win situation. Had Kerry
followed through, it would have reinforced his reputation as a bit
of an operator. According to John Samples of the Cato Institute,
“Kerry already has an image as a finagler, and this comes off as
heavy duty political manipulation.” Even though Kerry has now
decided to accept the nomination in Boston, the damage to his image
is done. It will only add to his fame as a waffler. I can hear the
late-night jokes now: “Kerry recently said that he first declined
the nomination before he accepted the nomination.” It seems that
the Kerry campaign didn’t consider that the delaying of the $75
million in public funds might not be worth it if it reinforced
Kerry’s negatives.
And while Kerry was making his decision, the idea generated lots
of negative press. The Rocky Mountain News has run the
headline “Dems’ Convention Could Be a Farce.” In
a story titled “Kerry’s Convention Change Angers
Boston,” the Chicago Sun-Times reports on city officials
and business owners who are upset at the idea of a non-nominating
convention. It is a safe bet that the Kerry campaign would rather
have not seen the story-line that a presidential candidate angers
his hometown folks.
Perhaps the best way to understand this dunderheaded idea is to
see it as the product Kerry’s tendency to think that he is better
than most. That Kerry believes he can run roughshod over the normal
convention process for the sake of money, and believes he can
callously disregard the feelings of the convention hosts, is
consistent with his “the rules do not apply to me” demeanor. It now
appears that Kerry’s imperious attitude has set the tone for his
campaign. If so, it’s a good bet I’ll be asking the ineptness
question many more times before November.
