Home > 2004 election cycle > Well, it was a good run

Well, it was a good run

Kerry’s going to lose. It’s hard to question that now; Ohio* is simply not trending towards Kerry. Without Ohio, Kerry can at best tie, which is a loss. It looks like we did poor in the Senate too; Daschle looks to be on the losing side.

Montana looks to be not so bad, though. We knew CI-96 was going to pass, so no surprise. The medical marijuana and tobacco initiatives both passed, which is good. I-147 failed, which is good. Schweitzer looks to be Montana’s first Democratic governor in a decade.

So, why? What happened? I’m inclined to believe that the economy was a wash. Kerry and Bush could both have won with it. Iraq and terrorism probably made the biggest difference. Kerry’s position on Iraq, while mostly consistent, was hard to lay out. He simply didn’t have a position that clearly showed a difference. I think a strong Iraq position could have pulled people that way, even if they were less sure. Kerry had nothing to pull people with. Next we have social issues, which probably gave Bush his apparent boost from turnout. Gay marriage was overwhelmingly opposed. Kerry didn’t support it, but you can definitely put that position on the Democrats and “smear” Kerry by association. That’s my explanation. I put the onus on our candidate and current social issues, which is a brighter outlook for the Democrats than other people may think. Social issues trend liberal, there’s really no stopping that. The problems with Kerry himself are not problems that apply to the Democratic party as a whole. We find better candidates (easier said than done, I suppose) and we eliminate things like Kerry’s very narrow position on Iraq.

The Senate is different. I don’t know enough to really say why that happened.

*Provisional ballots could make a difference. However, I really doubt it.

Categories: 2004 election cycle
  1. November 3, 2004 at 5:48 am

    I’m incredibly disappointed in America. How does such an unpopular president get reelected? How does a house minority leader get defeated without a scandal or anything. It’s soulcrushing.

  2. November 3, 2004 at 1:15 pm

    My condolences and sympathies. Can’t think of much to say other than I feel terrible for both Americans and the rest of us.

  3. November 3, 2004 at 4:49 pm

    “The problems with Kerry are problems that can be fixed with a different candidate.”

    That’s a tautology, and hence, doesn’t apply to the electoral result. The underlying question is whether we need to fix theycandidate, or fix what Americans accept as valuable in the face of what we claim to value. ‘Just sayin’ …

  4. November 3, 2004 at 5:21 pm

    I just meant to say that some of the problems with Kerry are not general problems with the Democratic party. There were plenty of people with clear positions on Iraq. It is combined with the fact that we lost on social issues, which is absolutely something that we need to convince the rest of the country on. That’s going to happen one way or another, but we can make it happen faster.

  5. November 3, 2004 at 5:52 pm

    “It is combined with the fact that we lost on social issues, which is absolutely something that we need to convince the rest of the country on. That¬ís going to happen one way or another, but we can make it happen faster.”

    Alas, this is our point of disagreement. I don’t think that the country wants to be convinced. They have their Bible, and they have George Bush. Social issues are not the lynchpin of the electorate; religious and moral issues seem to be. I, for onr, am not at all convinced that those participating in modern elections can be swayed away from those holy writs. They believe them selves to be right. And right they will remain. I’m not totally disagreeing with what you’ve written, Jeff. I’m just saying that it might not matter with a group of voters who care more about God’s will than about any logical reasonable argumant that you or I can posit.

  6. November 3, 2004 at 5:54 pm

    And, for the record, my comment preview is under the sidebar, so spelling and grammatical errors aren’t open to scrutiny.

  7. Fate
    November 3, 2004 at 7:16 pm

    I don’t want to leave my room for 4 years…. I really wonder in the future if we will find out the election was rigged by Diebold in Florida and Ohio.

  8. November 3, 2004 at 7:29 pm

    Wulfgar –

    I don’t think they want to be convinced either, but I think as the youth of today get older it’ll get better. That’s what I’m hoping, at least.

    Comments look fine to me in both Firefox and IE. Did you try refreshing?

  9. November 3, 2004 at 10:23 pm

    Yes, Jeff, I did. But when I type out comments that go long (as mine tend to do) they go undernieth the sidebar to the right. ?

  10. November 3, 2004 at 10:30 pm

    Really? What resolution are you on? I tried 800×600 and it was fine. I can’t go lower than that. It’s set by columns so it should resize depending on resolution.

  11. November 3, 2004 at 10:51 pm

    I run 1162 x 864, both at home and at work. IE 6.

  12. November 4, 2004 at 9:09 am

    Hmmm…very strange. I’ll look at the template some more.

  13. November 4, 2004 at 11:30 am

    It’s something on his end, Jeff. I get no strange behavior at that resolution. The text entry field is designed to stay a set distance from the link bar. Even crappy IE displays it properly.

  14. November 4, 2004 at 11:46 am

    I kinda figured that. I’m gonna see if shrinking the box makes it better for him, or if it just automatically goes under no matter what.

  1. November 3, 2004 at 7:46 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: