Friday, September 03, 2004



I previously blogged a bit about John Kerry's Dukakis Moment. In retrospect, I think it's perhaps incorrect to pin down exactly when Kerry's presidential bid went south.

--Was it his tall tale, repeated several times, about a "seared, seared" memory of being in Cambodia during Christmas 1968 (a claim that's been pretty much refuted by . . . John Kerry himself.)

--Was it his profoundly offensive 1971 testimony before Congress, in which he accused the tens of thousands of Americans serving honorably in Vietnam of committing systematic war crimes?

--Was it when he expressed how he felt about how we honor our troops by throwing away his award ribbons?

--Was it when he authored his anti-Vietnam, anti-American screed, The New Soldier? (This link takes you to a .pdf copy of the book, and this one is a link to Amazon, where used copies of it are selling for $699.00.)

--Was it his constant waffling on issues ranging from welfare reform to mandatory minimum sentencing to affirmative action to the death penalty to education reform? Or how about his waffling on supporting our troops in Iraq (he voted to send them there, then voted against the funding they'd need to do their job); Yasser Arafat (who Kerry has called both a "statesman" and "an impediment to the peace process"); criticizing the Commander in Chief during wartime; abortion; and on and on and on?

--Was it his constant defensiveness about non-existent questions about his patriotism? (As James Taranto put it: "Democrats themselves raised the issue of patriotism by defensively denying that they lacked it. A cardinal rule of political communication is never to repeat an accusation in the course of denying it ('I am not a crook'). These candidates 'repeated' a charge no one had even made.")

--Was it his manifestly wooden, uninspired convention speech, which even the West Coast Liberal Media Lapdog, the LA Times, characterized as leaving undecided voters "swayed, not smitten?"

I don't know, but whatever Kerry's Dukakis Moment was, whenever he jumped the shark, today we are seeing the result:
For the first time since the Presidential race became a two person contest last spring, there is a clear leader, the latest TIME poll shows. If the 2004 election for President were held today, 52% of likely voters surveyed would vote for President George W. Bush, 41% would vote for Democratic nominee John Kerry, and 3% would vote for Ralph Nader, according to a new TIME poll conducted from Aug. 31 to Sept. 2.
Glenn Reynolds over at InstaPundit has more.

John Zogby predicted on May 9, 2004 that "John Kerry will win the election" and that "this race is John Kerry's to lose."

We'll see, John. We'll see.