(tack on IMOs wherever appropriate :wink:)
Mary Cheney definitely had an impact... the footage of his response they showed on Headline News was particularly telling. His body language was as if someone had told him "an unconfirmed story has you jogging in your underwear this morning"... Equal parts amusement, indifference and arrogance and all behind that overused, phony smile and before his too obviously canned response 'they're just getting desperate'. Scratch arrogance and use overconfidence..., which was a terrible thing to show to folks who, some of which at least, are only willing to accept him out of their abhorrence of the other guy. Others were likely turned off by his utter lack of concern for the Cheney's feelings a second time. Bill Maher predictably made several off color jokes about it, which only served to keep it festering and I'm sure other comedians did as well. Plus, I'm sure this isn't the only place it was discussed at length. :wink:
Meanwhile Bush, dopey and agonizingly repetitive as he is, just keeps pounding home the flip-flop-fiesta theme that, like it or not, really does reflect Kerry's record.
Voted against Gulf War 1 is in such contrast to his current aggressive
talk, and it was delivered perfectly, adding an exclamation point to the "87 billion..." fiasco and myriad of other examples of.
Another thing I noticed that may have been a critical tactical error on Kerry's part, is in his insistence that Bush doesn't admit he was wrong about Iraq being a threat... He never does either. Instead of that long double-speak explanation (that no one but the choir buys) about his vote, he should have just said, "What can I say? I was wrong too. When an intelligent man makes a mistake, the best thing he can do next is to first admit it... (pause for affect) and then take steps to correct it" (last part while pounding the podium and finish with by silently nodding his head in the affirmative. Picture Clinton doing "John Kerry said send me".) Bush would have doubled over.
Part of Kerry's problem is he's been so quick with his excuses, and his plethora of contradictions have required so many, that he has practically no wiggle room left without contradicting previous statements. Then consider the gazillion dollar war chest Bush uses to highlight these follies. Conversely, Bush has tons of wiggle room because he doesn't often bother making excuses
and his tune is maddeningly repetitive. Apparently, he recognizes his limitations and generally stays within them.
What's it come down to? Which man does the general public believe? George Bush believes what he says, even when he's wrong, and it doesn't take an intellect greater than his own to figure out what he'll do with another 4 years. Pretty cut and dry.
John Kerry, proved infinitely more human and likeable without the gazillion dollar spin filter
but ultimately we still have no clue what he'd do in the next 4 years. The only discernable pattern you can see in his history is in direct contrast to his campaign rhetoric. I suspect this, on top of the phony smile, Massachusetts accent, unlikable wife and the usual mountain of slander is why he's losing ground as judgment day approaches. Wrong guy
Personally, I still think the General was the way to go. I think Bob Dole was right about Senatorial experience. It provides such an abundance of history that it can be shaped any which way you wish with selective gathering. With the size of today's campaign war chests; inexperience or at least limited experience, may have become a prerequisite for the job of President.