Powerboss
03-09-2004, 04:24 AM
Politically Speaking
By Juan Williams
Democrats' Calm Conceals Questions About Kerry
"The difficult truth is that Kerry is less a full-hearted choice for most Democrats than a fail-safe accommodation."
Web Extra March 4, 2004 -- In a little over six weeks, the Democratic Party has picked a candidate to continue the battle of the 2000 presidential election for the next eight months.
Not only are party leaders delighted with this swift resolution, but polls find rank-and-file Democrats are also satisfied with the choice of Sen. John Kerry. In fact, the party is so unified that Democrats tell pollsters they would have been happy if Sen. John Edwards, who finished a distant second to Kerry, had won the nomination.
But beneath the calm surface there is some powerful churning in Democratic waters. The difficult truth is that Kerry is less a full-hearted choice for most Democrats than a fail-safe accommodation. He does not appeal to Democrats who questioned President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. He voted for the war resolution.
He is not the choice for most of organized labor. The big industrial unions wanted nothing to do with Kerry at the start of the primary season. They have strongly opposed him for years, mostly because of his support of unfettered free trade. The unions representing teachers, government workers and service employees turned away from him, too. He voted for the Patriot Act, although he now says that it has been overdone. He has little or no record with black or Hispanic voters. He voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, which halted the federal government from recognizing gay marriage. But he now says he is opposed to same-sex marriage.
So for most Democrats, the coming election all boils down to a sophisticated anger at President Bush. I say "sophisticated" because Democrats are exercising restraint in not going with the candidate who most clearly represents their discontent with Bush. If they had, that candidate -- Howard Dean -- would have been more than a passing infatuation. And Democrats are showing more discernment in not going with the candidate who speaks directly to issues of greatest concern to them -- John Edwards.
The entire article here:
http://www.npr.org/features/columns/column.php?wfId=1746232&columnId=1929301
By Juan Williams
Democrats' Calm Conceals Questions About Kerry
"The difficult truth is that Kerry is less a full-hearted choice for most Democrats than a fail-safe accommodation."
Web Extra March 4, 2004 -- In a little over six weeks, the Democratic Party has picked a candidate to continue the battle of the 2000 presidential election for the next eight months.
Not only are party leaders delighted with this swift resolution, but polls find rank-and-file Democrats are also satisfied with the choice of Sen. John Kerry. In fact, the party is so unified that Democrats tell pollsters they would have been happy if Sen. John Edwards, who finished a distant second to Kerry, had won the nomination.
But beneath the calm surface there is some powerful churning in Democratic waters. The difficult truth is that Kerry is less a full-hearted choice for most Democrats than a fail-safe accommodation. He does not appeal to Democrats who questioned President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. He voted for the war resolution.
He is not the choice for most of organized labor. The big industrial unions wanted nothing to do with Kerry at the start of the primary season. They have strongly opposed him for years, mostly because of his support of unfettered free trade. The unions representing teachers, government workers and service employees turned away from him, too. He voted for the Patriot Act, although he now says that it has been overdone. He has little or no record with black or Hispanic voters. He voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, which halted the federal government from recognizing gay marriage. But he now says he is opposed to same-sex marriage.
So for most Democrats, the coming election all boils down to a sophisticated anger at President Bush. I say "sophisticated" because Democrats are exercising restraint in not going with the candidate who most clearly represents their discontent with Bush. If they had, that candidate -- Howard Dean -- would have been more than a passing infatuation. And Democrats are showing more discernment in not going with the candidate who speaks directly to issues of greatest concern to them -- John Edwards.
The entire article here:
http://www.npr.org/features/columns/column.php?wfId=1746232&columnId=1929301