Thursday, February 19, 2004

REFLECTING ON THE PRIMARIES

These last four weeks have convinced me that the primary season is an inefficient way of finding a nominee. Kerry has won practically everything because he nabbed a surprise win in Iowa. The main reason he wins primaries is that he is "electable" according to the exit polls. Maybe he is a better candidate than Howard Dean, but only because he doesn't have the honesty of Howard Dean.

The key to Kerry's candidacy is convincing voters that he isn't a liberal. The beauty of Dean is that he defended who he was. A Dean nomination would have staved off any potential Ralph Nader run, which might negate any impact Kerry could win from moderates. In other words, the more Kerry moves to the middle, the more likely that Nader gets into the race.

I'm convinced that Dean isn't as liberal as Kerry. Dean played up the liberal message as a way to raise money and get grass roots Democrats on his bandwagon. Kerry always had an eye on the general election voting for things like the war in Iraq so that he couldn't be marginalized when the United States won the war. Dean has always been a defender of the second amendment, which is really a bold stand inside his party, especially from a northeastern liberal perspective. I always thought his anti-war talk was a natural way to separate himself from other candidates like Gephardt, Kerry and Lieberman that voted for the war. The war was unpopular among died in the wool Democrats and Dean found a natural constituency.

Joe Lieberman was the only candidate in the race that was as moderate as portrayed. If anything, Joe was probably more moderate than he played. Clark is probably not a flaming liberal either, but he has no record on which to judge it.

Edwards, Dean and Kerry are three peas in a pod. Now that the candidates are down to two, the only real policy difference between Kerry and Edwards is trade, which Kerry is quickly trying to change position on that. The Democrats are making a big mistake if they nominate the waffling smug Kerry over the more consistent affable Edwards. If Kerry wins he can thank the momentum he got from Iowa. Voters in other states jumped on the Kerry bandwagon to deny the shaky Dean, but in the meantime ignored Edwards. Had Edwards won in Iowa, he'd probably be winning all of the primaries instead, and the Democrats would have a better general election candidate.

You could argue that Kerry is whom voters think can best defeat Bush, but I think momentum and not message helped Kerry. Edwards connects with people much better. The pundits keep saying that when voters meet both men in person they like Edwards the best. If the Kerry vote was just a way to deny the unelectable Dean, then Edwards may have a real chance to rack up some wins in a one on one race.

No comments:

Post a Comment