Reply #15: Can't have it both ways [View All]

[recovering democrat]

Kerry ran a terrible campaign = Bush was a better candidate and his campaign management did a better job of convincing the American people to support him ON THE ISSUES. (Since Kerry tried to talk about the issues and pretty much had the better program)

Kerry ran a terrible campaign = there was no fraud involved in the election, with the electronic voting machines or with the vote suppression tactics used in many areas. (Whether they succeed in overturning the election results is not the issue; the fraud is clearly evident, documented and provable in a number of cases, and the vote suppression tactics are evidenced by the behavior of the Republican opposition and litigation to stop recounts, investigations or vote -counting.

A "war time President", cruel lies and devastating negative attacks by Bush supporters, manipulation of the military actions in Iraq to reduce media coverage until after the election.... and on and on.

It is amazing Kerry's campaign did as well as it did. The CW presumes wishful thinking and all of the above are tin-foil alerts. If so, he ran a terrible campaign. I don't think so.