Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: why John Kerry sucks as a candidate.
Outsports Discussion Board > Outsports > Politics & Religion
Pages: 1, 2
sportinlife
The more important question may not be whether or not Kerry "sucks" but whether it is perceived by a majority of voters that he "sucks".

It may happen that the policies of the current administration will become so obviously misguided to the average voter that it will matter little what Kerry does as long as he doesn't screw himself.

Positioning is critical. Right now Kerry's good.
ung
QUOTE
sportinlife:
The more important question may not be whether or not Kerry \"sucks\" but whether it is perceived by a majority of voters that he \"sucks\".
In politics, those two are one and the same.

If people think you suck, then you do suck.

No matter how noble your platform, if you can't relay your message to the people, you suck as a candidate.
RazorbackTX
sucking well
hockeyTom
Thanks Raze. I have heard the results of many polls recently. Some have it neck and neck, some with Kerry in the lead. It will continue to be somewhat volatile I think depending in news from iraq, and the economy.

[ May 17, 2004, 11:01 AM: Message edited by: puckman1 ]
timber07
Kerry should take a big lead following the Democratic Convention, and Bush should close the gap again after the Republicans have theirs. I'm already looking forward to the debates. I can already tell it's going to be "can Bush defend his record" vs. "can Kerry keep people awake".
hockeyTom
Oh please, Kerry can keep people awake, if they listen!
timber07
QUOTE
puckman1:
Oh please, Kerry can keep people awake,  if they listen!
Unfortunately for Kerry, in this country your message may only be as good as your presentation.

The Nixon - Kennedy debates. Most people who had heard it on radio thought Nixon had won, while those who saw it on television thought just the opposite.

Ronald Reagan, "the Great Communicator", even if you disagree with his policies you can't deny he looked good on camera.

Most recently in 2000. I really felt like Al Gore tried too hard to emphasize his experience. He should have trounced the less - than - experienced Bush, but instead he came across looking like a ranting loon.

Bush has learned how to communicate during his years in the White House. It was never more evident than it was in New York City after 911. Kerry needs to become more charismatic. He needs to excite his base. Even in this forum we have a "Kerry sucks as a candidate" thread.

I think he'll have his chance to come of age at the Convention. That will set the stage for the debates.
fantomas
QUOTE
timber07:
He needs to excite his base.  Even in this forum we have a \"Kerry sucks as a candidate\" thread.  

I think he'll have his chance to come of age at the Convention.  That will set the stage for the debates.
The thread wasn't started by anyone in Kerry's "base," but by a fed-up Repuglican: ung.

Reagan didn't "look good," he acted very well. That was his greatest gift--that, and having excellent speechwriters. He also ran against an unpopular president (Carter) and a man whose charisma was equal to Melba toast (Mondale). I never found Reagan all that charming, just a great actor (as president) and extremely dangerous. And I lived through his two terms and am not just getting my impressions from this endless hagiography and hero-worship created by Repuglicans of today. Personally, among the last few Repuglican prezzes, I'd take W'd dizzy father over Reagan any day. Or daffy Gerald Ford. Or Dwight Eisenhower, who was out of office before I was born. Nixon was pure evil.
Undercenter
fantomas wrote:
Reagan didn't "look good," he acted very well. That was his greatest gift--that, and having excellent speechwriters. He also ran against an unpopular president (Carter) and a man whose charisma was equal to Melba toast (Mondale).

Reagan did "look good" and acted very well. His debate appearance against Carter is the best "challenger to an incumbent" performance to date, and was extremely effective. I'm no apologist for the Repuslicans, just admitting the truth. Reagan did have great writers, and had been giving the same essential pitch for decades, but more importantly he seemed to believe what he was saying, that he had core values and convictions. American's really pick up on that. Many may vote for Moronboy just because they think he has convictions and values, and against Kerry because he appears not too.

All of our Presidents are really actors to some extent, and salesmen for their agendas. Reagan has to be acknowledged as one of the very best at achieving his goals - whether we liked those goals or not.

fantomas wrote:
Personally, among the last few Repuglican prezzes, I'd take W'd dizzy father over Reagan any day. Or daffy Gerald Ford. Or Dwight Eisenhower, who was out of office before I was born. Nixon was pure evil.

You might have taken DaddyW or Ford over Reagan, but both of those guys were failures as Presidents. History does not and will not view Reagan's presidency as a failure.

I would agree about Eisenhower and Nixon. Nixon is the great Shakespearian presidential tragedy - someday someone will write him as such. I've heard one can see Nixon rise from the grave every Halloween, but I don't believe it...
KeyWest Guy
Kerry & Bush tied at 47% in Florida. Florida poll

That's amazing considering the amount of negative ads that have been run against Kerry down here over the last two months. Ask anybody who lives in Florida, and they can probably recite the Bush commercials verbatim, since they've been run so often. And Katharine Harris isn't tallying the poll results this time, so Shrub's really in trouble.
hockeyTom
Key, that is optimistic news. I have noticed up here in Wash. State, have hardly seen any (negative-attack) Shrub ads of late, almost only (positive) Kerry ads. How refreshing. At first all we got we the negative Shrub ads.
KeyWest Guy
Now Shrub is having to defend some of the "red" states that weren't previously in contention. Shrub forced to defend Louisiana.

With polls showing Arkansas, Florida and even North Carolina (if Edwards is on the ticket) in play, maybe the "Solid South" isn't so solid after all.

[ May 21, 2004, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: KeyWest Guy ]
hockeyTom
Cool. biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif
KeyWest Guy
The latest CBS poll has Kerry with an 8-point lead 49%--41% over Bush. CBS Poll

The lead expands to 14 points if McCain's on the ticket. I know it doesn't mean Kerry will win, but I'd rather be up 8 points than down 8 points.
CPT_Doom
QUOTE
The latest CBS poll has Kerry with an 8-point lead 49%--41% over Bush. CBS Poll

The lead expands to 14 points if McCain's on the ticket. I know it doesn't mean Kerry will win, but I'd rather be up 8 points than down 8 points.  
You're right KeyWestGuy - we have no idea how the general election will play out - but I find it interesting, and encouraging, that Bush has spent a reported 70 million on negative Kerry ads, and it does not seem to be helping him at all. I'll be very interested to see what happens when the real fight begins this summer.
ung
QUOTE
KeyWest Guy:
The lead expands to 14 points if McCain's on the ticket.  
Keywest... (the following post will have bitchy over tones. But it's meant in good humour with tongue firmly in cheek)

well... yeah... with McCain there's a huge lead. But then you might as well see how much the lead grows if Jesus Christ were to sign up as VP candidate. 10%? maybe 15%? wink

Cuz neither one is gonna be Kerry's VP.
KeyWest Guy
QUOTE
ung:
But then you might as well see how much the lead grows if Jesus Christ were to sign up as VP candidate. 10%? maybe 15%?   wink  
Well, accordingly to Shrub, JC already plays for his team. rolleyes.gif

Don't forget that only Republicans can be religious or patriotic. frown
mdphl
Cpt. Doom - lots of talk in the press about how negative ads are backfiring. John Edwards ran a positive campaign with an upbeat message. Bush is in a quandry because he has gone so negative, so early and it is hurting him.
timber07
QUOTE
CPT_Doom:
 
QUOTE
The latest CBS poll has Kerry with an 8-point lead 49%--41% over Bush. CBS Poll

The lead expands to 14 points if McCain's on the ticket. I know it doesn't mean Kerry will win, but I'd rather be up 8 points than down 8 points.  
You're right KeyWestGuy - we have no idea how the general election will play out - but I find it interesting, and encouraging, that Bush has spent a reported 70 million on negative Kerry ads, and it does not seem to be helping him at all. I'll be very interested to see what happens when the real fight begins this summer.
I haven't said much about this lately, its really starting to bore me. Kerry is negative, Bush is negative, Bush is gaining ground, Kerry is in front now, Bush has nothing to run on, Kerry has nothing to run on.

This reminds me of the American Idol finale. Just wake me up when they are ready to announce the winner, or in this case, when Labor Day gets here.

Both sides can present compelling arguments about why the other candidate looks like a fool. Is it no wonder that every four years so many people say they vote "for the worst of the two evils"?

This race will be won or lost by both candidates between Labor Day and the election. I believe Kerry will build a huge lead after his Convention, and Bush will make it a toss up again after his.

It should be an interesting race. People usually vote their pocket books when election day comes. If the economy is humming along it usually means the incumbent wins. Kerry used to be talking about how many people were unemployed, but I haven't heard anything about that lately. The only commercial I've seen for him is the one telling us how he pulled a man out of the river. If Kerry wants to win he'll probably need to do more than that.

As for Bush, the economy seems to be falling into place at just the right time, but can it make up for the bad press coming out of Iraq?

This race is just starting...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2012 Invision Power Services, Inc.