Did John Kerry really blow it in 2004?
RRusso1982:
A lot of people say that John Kerry should have won in 2004 but he blew it. I beg to differ. It is very difficult to defeat an incumbent, particulary during wartime. At the time of the 2004 election, Bush's approvals were not great, but not terrible. He was at about 48% or 49% approval and about 46% or 47% disapproval. Basically treading water. Typically what an incumbent president gets in the popular vote is his approval rating plus maybe a point or 2. The Iraq war was not very popular, but it had not yet become the quagmire it would later become. The economy was recovering from the early 2000s recession, and was not great, but not horrible. Basically the election was a tie. In baseball, a tie goes to the runner. In politics, a tie typically goes to the incumbent unless the challenger is a really great candidate. If you look at John Kerry, definately not enough there to justify throwing out the incumbent. The fact that he came one big state away from winning (Ohio) reflects well on him. I don't buy the "It was John Kerry's race to lose and he lost" rhetoric. I think that what should have happened on paper given the fundementals happened. A narrow Bush win. Any opinions?
OSR stands with Israel:
Ohio 2004 was also like Florida 2016 where Kerry got the votes he needed in the Democratic Parts of the state(NE OH) where he even outperformed Clinton 96 in raw% but ended up losing as he got swamped in the rest of the state
President Johnson:
Quote from: Old School Republican on January 24, 2022, 11:08:33 AM
Ohio 2004 was also like Florida 2016 where Kerry got the votes he needed in the Democratic Parts of the state(NE OH) where he even outperformed Clinton 96 in raw% but ended up losing as he got swamped in the rest of the state
However, it would have been so ironic if Kerry won Ohio by a razor thin margin and subsequently the presidency, while losing the popular vote. Four years after the opposite happened.
OSR stands with Israel:
Quote from: President Johnson on January 24, 2022, 02:48:46 PM
Quote from: Old School Republican on January 24, 2022, 11:08:33 AM
Ohio 2004 was also like Florida 2016 where Kerry got the votes he needed in the Democratic Parts of the state(NE OH) where he even outperformed Clinton 96 in raw% but ended up losing as he got swamped in the rest of the state
However, it would have been so ironic if Kerry won Ohio by a razor thin margin and subsequently the presidency, while losing the popular vote. Four years after the opposite happened.
Ironically Obama’s strategy for Oho was similar to Biden’s strategy for Florida which was to basically avoid further collapse in the areas trending against the democrats (SE Ohio for Obama and Central FL exurbs for Biden) and make gains and flip many traditionally Republican strongholds(SW Ohio and Columbus burbs for Obama and NE FL and SW FL for Biden).
Sir Mohamed:
You're raising a fair point here. I think the general notion around that narrative "Kerry blew a winnable race" is that polls entering actually showed W vulnerable to a degree not expected in the months following 9/11 or even after the 2002 midterms. For sure this was more a sign of polarization.
Additionally, Kerry was (rightfully, imho) criticized for coming off as a technocrat who quite couldn't convince the public with national security credentials. The Bush campaign was very effective in defining him early as weak on the issue, similar to how Obama later defined Romney as out of touch elitist. Once this label sticks early in the campaign, it gets hard to escape. W for sure could have been beaten with the ideal candidate, though none such existed in pratice. He didn't blew the race like HRC has in 2016, that's for sure. Could he have won? Maybe. But all things considered, his performance wasn't that bad.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page