Pollsters and strategists are puzzling over Kerry's failure to get a boost from a convention that even critics acknowledged went almost precisely as planned.

My answer: BAD PLAN!

As for the polls, I'll reserve judgment until more numbers come out.

McGehee you noticed the exact thing I chose to cut huh? But I kinda have to disagree-- it was not a bad plan as much as it was a bad message.

Even the best chef has to have good ingredients to work with. Karl Rove is a fine strategist, and no doubt about it -- but he also has the advantage of working for a pair of candidates who are sincere, likable, and competent. Whereas the other side...well, perhaps we ought not to go there.

The only poll that counts is two months away.

"Democrats were dismissive. "We're extremely pleased with where John Kerry and John Edwards are," Mary Beth Cahill, Kerry's campaign manager, said Monday."

Sounds to me like they enjoy being on the losing side of things....

The only poll that counts is two months away.

Spoken like a guy 11 points behind.

Pollsters and strategists are puzzling over Kerry's failure to get a boost from a convention that even critics acknowledged went almost precisely as planned.

It's called Al Gore disease. Kerry, and his friends in the press, feels that all he has to do to win is just get his message out. He thinks the message itself is so powerful that whoever hearis it will be instantly converted to his way of thinking. Al Gore said that a lot 4 years ago.

What Kerry and friends don't undersatnd is that we have heard the message and most of us don't like it. He's becoming as loony as Gore. I wish the Democrats would grow up.

To be fair, Gore did win the popular vote in 2000 - I attribute it more to him being better known than Bush than that those people liked his message better. Better the devil you know and all that.

*I can't believe I just defended Al Gore...sort of. I'm a little distressed.*

I like Bush and Cheney a great deal, so this comment isn't meant to take way from them ... but there is a strategy to these things. And right now Kerry is getting kicked around the political arena like Karl Rove's personal sock puppet. Last night he tore a seam and Opie Edwards doesn't have enough silky hair on his head to replace all the stuffing strewn about.

Say amen somebody and give me a Dean yell, somewhere a Striesand is weeping and Thereza is giving John hell! ; )

Re: To be fair, Gore did win the popular vote in 2000

Yeah, that does suck. I do think though that Gore's election day bounce was mostly due to the release of Bush's drunk driving record, and his non-response.

What non-response? What could he have done other than admit it?

Actually, Bush's error with that was in not trickling it out months earlier so it couldn't be used as an October Surprise.

Kind of like Kerry not signing his Form 180 and owning up to what it reveals before his convention, was a mistake.

The reasons for Bush's lead have very little to do with Bush. The Kerry campaign has screwed this one up by the numbers and on the bounce.
1- Lousy candidate. Kerry hasn't run an opposed campaign in about twenty years, and has no idea of how to do so; also, he's about as personable and Presidential as a month-old corpse (with GREAT HAIR!); also, way too many skeletons in his closet.
2- No platform. You need more to win an election than endless repetitions of, "Neener neener, Bush is a doodie-head!". This is a war year- you don't win in war years by running SOFT on defense and national security.
3- No vision on behalf of the national party. See above, but more so. While Bush was talking about the future and America's place in it, Kerry was talking about a failed war 30 years ago.
4- No love of country. If the Democrats want the rest of the nation to stop calling them unpatriotic they need to get the America-haters and divisive vermin, the Michael Moores and the Cynthia McKinneys, OUT of their party instead of giving them a national stage and public support.
5- Not ready for prime time. Max Cleland running around Bush's ranch in his wheelchair, Kerry giving a drunken rebuttal speech, Edwards as veep because he's young and pretty... try at least ACTING presidential.
The DNC could have walked dog on Bush... if they were at all in touch with the heart of America. Of course if they were, I wouldn't be as virulently opposed to them.
/longwinded rant mode OFF/

Once while debating politics with my liberal mother, she mentioned, among Bush's evil cronies, Karl Rove. I asked her if she even knew who Karl Rove was. She wasn't sure, but guessed Chief of Staff.

Basically, the guy's just the Democratic Boogie Man. They need some person closely involved with the Bush Campaign that people don't know too many details about. And it's more effective than their bleating about a vast right wing conspiracy.

Well said DaveP

Liberals may hate Karl Rove, but they'll probably love Kerry's Karl Rove:

http://kerryskarlrove.com

http://pekingduck.org/archives/Karl%20Rove.pdf

How would you like it if I started a whisper campaign about you? Take your head out of the sand and recognize that just because someone works with Bush or is Bush, does not mean that they're angels sent from Heaven. (If you're about to respond to this without reading the whole article, you're making my point for me).