(Page 2 of 2)
It's an accepted narrative within Democratic circles that Kerry lost because of unfair character attacks, but while such arguments have resonance within the party's activist base, the phrase "Rove-McCain tactics" has very little meaning to most normal people.
And then, the man who testified against his fellow soldiers before the U.S. Senate during a time of war declared that "this election is a chance for America to tell the merchants of fear and division: you don't decide who loves this country; you don't decide who is a patriot; you don't decide whose service counts and whose doesn't."
Evidently, Kerry is the decider.
Beyond that, his actual critiques of McCain and President Bush were utterly incoherent. On the one hand, he argued that Bush's foreign policies are a failure and that McCain will continue the same failed policies. On the other hand, he told attendees that Obama has been vindicated because the Bush administration has emulated many of the policies Obama has called for during the campaign (diplomatic engagement with Iran and a timetable in Iraq).
The speech was well-received by the party faithful who still believe that Kerry lost because of right-wing tricksters, but it did absolutely nothing to advance the case for Obama among undecided voters.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.