Why Did Kerry Fold? Article in the New York Observer 11/19/04

[Carolab]

Here is the speech John Kerry should have delivered at 10 o’clock on the morning after Election Day. The speech that might have prevented, or at least transformed, the fever of "stolen election" paranoia that is sweeping through cyberspace now. Or, if not prevented it, given people some reason to hope that their candidate cared about their votes, even if he lost—cared enough to make sure, as he’d pledged, to get them counted. The speech that might have spared us the post-election dialogue on the phony "values" issue.

Here’s the "alternate history" Kerry speech. It’s 10 a.m., when only two networks had called Ohio for Bush and none were venturing to say he’d exceeded the 270 votes necessary for re-election:

"My friends, last night John Edwards promised all of you who worked so hard on this campaign that we would fight to make sure every vote counts and every vote is counted. We’re going to keep the promise.

"At the moment, it appears that we are behind in the count to President Bush, but the count has not been completed—particularly in Ohio, which is likely to decide the election—and there will be no resolution or concession until those votes are counted. I will pledge my continued support to the commander in chief, but voting questions must be resolved.

"We all remember what happened in Florida four years ago and how uncertainty about that vote count shadowed the legitimacy of the Presidency for many. We have pledged this time that—for the sake of whoever wins—the people must have confidence that the count has been fair.

Link: http://www.nyobserver.com/pages/frontpage8.asp

[sherilocks]

1. The article is right on point

Recommended reading for all. Thanks for posting.

[nodictators]

12. The article is crap

Where is the info re SS Blackwell's efforts to suppress Dems vote counts, especially in majority black precincts? How about the bizzare events in Gahanna and Youngstown that produced a bogus 4000+ vote count for Bush in the first case and a negative 25 million vote count in the second?

The Gahanna incident, discovered by a DUer, shows that Ohio was wide open to fraud and vote manipulation. Neither Franklin County election officials nor Blackwell and his minions discovered the false vote for Bush that exceeded the number of registered voters in the precinct in Gahanna by a factor of four. How many other fake vote counts are in Bush's total.

Kerry should have stood tall and insisted on a thorough recount.

[sherilocks]

20. You missed the point of the article

It wasn't about specific voter fraud, it was about John Kerry's concession speech. Here's a quote from the article:

<snip>
I want to separate what I’m talking about here (mainly Mr. Kerry’s cave-in on Ohio) from fringe Internet conspiracy theories. What I am saying is that Mr. Kerry’s craven failure that morning to call for a scrupulous count in Ohio—which decided the election regardless of Bush’s popular-vote margin—was a stupid, paranoia-generating move.

<snip>

Mr. Kerry’s failure to aggressively pursue the counting and recounting at the outset—that morning, when the evidence was fresh on the ground—has made it virtually impossible to know the vote with the exactitude we deserve. Especially if the Democratic Party is going to change its principles on the basis of 68,000 votes in Ohio. If we’re going to accede to discarding the constitutional separation of church and state, I’d like to know the exact count that mandates it, please.

<snip>

I agree 100% with the author. If John Kerry had delivered a speech similar to the one the author suggested, you and I, would not have to be arguing over this.

[UL_Approved]

2. Why does the article not support the exit poll discrepancy?

The discrepancy in exit polls is a monumental failure of the voting system in this country. Exit polls have been used for DECADES, and with very good sucess. If they are not representing actual poll returns, what has changed? Why are they failing now?

It is a question, however, why Kerry folded so quickly and publicly. That one has people up in arms. That is a good question that needs to be answered.

Another question, just as an aside. Why is the date that this RAN listed as 11/22/2004? Just curious.

[anamandujano]

18. "Why is the date that this RAN listed as 11/22/2004?"

This will run in the print issue of 11/22

[DELUSIONAL]

3. bad link -- use this one

http://www.observer.com/pages/frontpage8.asp


I find some of the reasoning muddled.

[The Minus World]

4. We are the fringe now?

The author goes to great lengths to repudiate Kerry for his concession; claiming that Kerry should have taken a firm stand for the Democratic party.

This is flimsy analysis: the author's article should have focused on some of the "speculative" bits of evidence being circulated around between bloggers on the "fringes" of the internet.

The reason that Olbermann picked up on this story is because he has integrity; the reason the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge this key story is because the media are hopelessly enmeshed with politics.

Kerry understands the media environment, and he chose to play strategically - something that the author touches upon lightly; however, he seems to dismiss it as unlikely.

Instead, the author chooses to give CPR to a dog that is simply playing dead.

Admonishing the Democratic party for its failures to bring voters into the booth in 2004 is like admonishing a gold-medalist for having his medal stolen by someone with more cunning than himself.

[JD Lau]

6. Your "admonishing the Democratic party" sentence

is the best synopsis of the situation I have read. Thanks very much for putting it in words. And the Dem party will get beaten to death by the press for not appealing to the "right people" until it may well be unrecognizable...Oh sigh.

[The Minus World]

23. Thank you!

It will be our greatest misstep if we choose to take the media's remedy of "appealing to (fill in the blank)."

The Democratic party; and liberal thought, by its very nature, is all-inclusive: it does not require a marketing strategy. We do not need to "sell" common sense to voters, nor do we need to package our message to appeal to targetted audiences.

The Republican party has done no less than attempt to stifle the truth, preventing great liberal minds from reaching a large audience. That is where the real problem lies.

[The Flaming Red Head]

8. If you're not creationist, anti-choice, pro-war, bible thumping

Ditto head then you're on the fringe and disenfranchised along with 55 million other Americans.

[sherilocks]

21. He's not focused on internet bloggers

and voter fraud. He's focused on Kerry's concession speech and how it left thousands of votes up in air. We still don't really know the outcome of the vote, especially in Ohio.

You say:

"Kerry understands the media environment, and he chose to play strategically "

That's crap. Kerry ran away from the fight, hoping, I believe, to return in 2008. He may be playing it strategically, but not for this election year, but rather in four years. I think that stinks.

[The Minus World]

22. Cut and Run?

I'm willing to try and understand your point of view, but I'm not sure I'm ready to dismiss my own as "crap" quite yet.

Yes, Kerry's concession was hasty; he left many loose ends untied, and the Democratic party to wander alone in a new climate of unchallenged potential election fraud.

I tend to believe that Kerry has maintained a relatively low profile for a reason, while you seem to believe that his retreat was based on a long-term strategy.

Neither of us can truly vouch for the validity our statements - it's all speculation - but it seems to me the best course of action for Kerry to take would have been to keep the scandal below the radar, not creating a public spectacle in the process.

Only time can tell. I certainly hope he doesn't turn out to be the self-interested coward that you have painted him as.

[sherilocks]

28. If we both can remember in the future

One of us will be able to say, "I told you so." I do not see John Kerry as a coward, but I do see him as a person who wants to be president of the United States so badly that he has lost his bearings in pursuit of the goal. My inner sensors or whatever you want to call them, were sounding alarm bells during the campaign. I disregarded these feelings until I heard his concession speech.

If I compare John Kerry to Howard Dean, (in regard to my "sensors"), I always felt that whatever Dean said, he meant. He never struck me as insincere or searching for the correct or most politcially opportunistic answers. Whether I supported Dean or not, I had the utmost respect for his forthright honesty.

[Silver Gaia]

5. Well...

I don't agree with everything this author has to say, but I do wish Kerry would toss us some sort of substantial bone to gnaw on. There's an awful lot of restlessness out here...

[NJ_Lib]

7. Well, Kerry has made his bed...

... and he will have to lay it...

If he is out there "playing dead", most of us will forgive him and understand this strategy... But if he is truly given up, and is not doing anything but getting on with his life, well then Senator Kerry, enjoy the Senate... That's about as far as you'll go...

[heyokabear]

13. It seems Kerry has asked democrats to "not stir the waters"

Hi folks, this is my first post - finally registered after much lurking over the past weeks, due to a couple conversations today with my congressman's office, then Kerry's office.

According to my congressman's office, Kerry has "asked all democrats in congress to refrain from getting involved in or stirring the waters" over possible election improprieties.

Then this office worker went on giving me the mainstream song and dance about how all elections have mistakes etc. and its just reality, someone wins, someone loses.

I shared my perspective, probably much like many in here would. But it was clear from talking to this fellow that the real problem is that Kerry, a powerful Senator, has made clear what he wants - no trouble, no asking for investigations, no standing up and speaking out for the very survival of our election process. What congressman would ignore that? (I said nevertheless, I expect my congressman to stand up for the good of the process.)

So I called Senator Kerry's office. (Did I mention I'm from MA?). I told the person there what I had been told by my congressman. He said "I can't confirm or deny that." So I proceeded to let him know just what I thought about this - "if" it was true.

I'm disappointed as a long time Kerry supporter - well before this election.

Kerry doesn't get it, it seems. It's not about him anymore.

bear

[Annette]

19. Welcome to the DU!

Thanks for the info.

[dkofos]

25. Did he give a reason for Kerry not wanting to stir the waters??

I will continue to sit patiently waiting for the final outcome.
I am having doubts about Kerry.

Way to go INDEPENDENT PARTIES. At least you appear to still give a shit about your country.

P.S. Welcome to DU

[99Pancakes]

27. This was very interesting given the personal....

involvement. I have been one of those who has held out with the idea that Kerry intends to be low key so that he can pursue a "covert" vote count/irregularity check. He was interviewed on a MA local News Ch. and he came right out and snipped at the interviewer about the votes not having been fully counted yet in Ohio and irritably stated that she was jumping the gun thinking of 2008. I found his commments reassuring.

Soooo....because of the MA News interview, I will still hold out that Kerry's "strategy" is to be "covert" so that he doesn't have to also deal with a public attack by the Republican'ts. In the sense that he (and lawyers)can get more done faster, I think it is a good strategy.

[mzmolly]

9. I think the article makes some valid points frankly. We're all quite

numb and a bit upset with Kerry's early concession. I know I was. But I have to believe he had some goal other then self preservation?

*sigh*

[andino]

10. Why have the GOP controled media looking over everything?

We learned that in 2000.

Let it go under the radar. It will work better that way.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

11. Even the author of the article thinks a turnaround is unlikely

Kerry did the right thing. And IS doing the right thing even now.

[NJ_Lib]

14. Oh so it can't help Senator Kerry so...

... just call it a day and go back to the mansion?

NO!

God help Senator Kerry if this is true and he has really given up... 2008? HA! Don't make me laugh...

Don't stir the waters, huh? No of course not, we wouldn't want to do anything that may jeoperdize his Senate seat and his 2008 chances...

He couldn't be that clueless, could he? If he thinks he can ignore this and then expect our support in 08, he IS a fool!

[Crunchy Frog]

15. Apparently, he's got over 50 million dollars

left over from this campaign, including the money earmarked for the recount, to kick off his 2008 presidential campaign.

I don't have a link for this, and don't know whether it's true or not, but if it is and he gets the nomination next time, I won't even vote for him.

[NJ_Lib]

17. All the money in the world won't help him...

... if he has truly decided to let this go...

It wasn't enough this time, and with losing many of his faithful supporters, it will be impossible for him to win...

I really hope Senator Kerry realizes the situation here... Does he think we'll learn to forgive and forget?

He promised us he would NOT do what Gore did, he promised us ALL of the votes will be counted... He also promised to fight on own behalf... If he breaks those promises, he's a done deal...

[genieroze]

16. If they keep on rigging these voting machines

we could run Jesus Christ and if he wasn't a rethugnakin he would lose.

:mad:

[dkofos]

26. I was thinking that same thing myself

[Generator]

24. I think everyone on DU should read it

But that's just my opinion. It summed up my feelings pretty much until then end when he said Kerry was condescending. Don't think so at all-I actually find Kerry very warm and real.

If this part then nothing else:

"Especially if the Democratic Party is going to change its principles on the basis of 68,000 votes in Ohio. If we’re going to accede to discarding the constitutional separation of church and state, I’d like to know the exact count that mandates it, please."

BINGO Charlie!

Mostly except for some outrage at BushCo and this forum all I read on DU anymore is blah blah blah. That's all it says to me.

It's the votes, stupid. If I don't believe the votes, I'm not discussing how we "can improve" or change our strategy. Not this cowgirl.