What could John Kerry have done differently overall?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 05:22:20 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  What could John Kerry have done differently overall?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What could John Kerry have done differently overall?  (Read 1698 times)
EJ24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,110
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 26, 2019, 05:16:55 PM »

Was there anything that stood out to you in 2004 that cost him the election that he could have changed?
Logged
Pericles
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,066


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2019, 02:18:42 AM »

He shouldn't have given the GOP the "I was for it before I was against it", that helped define him as a flip-flopper. He failed to respond well to the Swiftboat attacks (and was a bit similar to Dukakis in this area), which hurt his ability to use his Vietnam experience as an asset, and arguably over-relied on his Vietnam experience in the first place. This could be a symptom of him lacking a clear message and vision. Kerry was may have been hurt by voting for the Iraq War, as he was left campaigning on 'managing the war' and was therefore an uninspiring candidate with a similarly uninspiring message, though him being stridently anti-war would have been risky and could also have backfired. A lot of Kerry's support was just ABB(Anyone But Bush) voters, and he was probably too cautious. I don't think him picking Gephardt would necessarily have done much, John Edwards looks worse in hindsight because of his scandal four years later, though Gephardt could have helped marginally by flipping Iowa to Kerry (which wouldn't have been enough for Kerry to win of course unless Kerry got another state).
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,459
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2019, 09:50:34 PM »

Not helping the Bush campaign paint him as a flip-flopper would've gone a long way.
Logged
RRusso1982
Rookie
**
Posts: 207
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2020, 01:40:30 PM »

In reality, it is very difficult to defeat an incumbent, especially during wartime.  By the fall of 2004, Bush's approval numbers were not great, but they were not horrible, like they became in his second term.  His approval ratings during the fall of 2004 were just below 50%, around 48% or 49%, and his disapproval numbers were around 46% or 47%.  Basically he was treading water.  The Iraq war wasn't that popular at that time but it had not yet become as unpopular as it later became. The economy was not great but it was recovering from the early 2000s recession.  Basically the election was a tie.  In baseball a tie goes to the runner.  In elections, a tie typically goes to the incumbent, unless the opponent is a really great candidate and runs a great campaign.  That was definitely not the case with John Kerry.  Not enough to justify throwing out the incumbent.  So the dynamics favored Bush narrowly.  Even so, Kerry still came one large state (Ohio) from winning.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2020, 02:09:03 PM »

I don't think Kerry could have done much better.  It's kind of amazing he came within 3% in the PV and was one state away from winning in that kind of pro-incumbent environment. 
Logged
RRusso1982
Rookie
**
Posts: 207
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2020, 11:45:46 AM »

Kerry and the Democrats made a critical error.  By the fall of 2004, it was clear that the intelligence that was used as a justification for the Iraq war was bad.  The Democrats could have used that error and a better candidate to beat Bush.  The mistake they made was going too far in their criticism of Bush.  They accused him of knowing there were no WMD's in Iraq and deliberately falsifying the intelligence.  Kerry seemed to dial it back and say, "He misled us into war," and allow other Democrats to take it further and say, "Bush lied, people died." The problem with this argument, and Bush knew this, was that the intelligence that was used to justify the war in Iraq was exactly the same as the intelligence they were getting during the Clinton years.  So Kerry was put in a position of undermining a war he originally supported when the intelligence that was used as justification for that war was consistent with the intelligence that they were getting long before Bush was President.
Logged
Bootes Void
iamaganster123
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,682
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 12, 2020, 03:27:27 PM »

keep things simple, Kerry was constantly mocked in the media(SNL) for giving long unwinded confusing answers and a little bit for Gore. But its easy to say in retrospect
Logged
Chips
Those Chips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,245
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2021, 10:45:20 PM »

He could've made a couple more visits to Ohio for one thing.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.