"Undecided" voters
Most undecided voters are probably predisposed to vote for the Democrat, but are really trying to decide whether they want to hold their nose and vote for a Democrat they do not like. Their most likely alternative to holding their nose while marking their ballot is to just not vote.
Kerry has a history with this kind of voter. His reputation as a strong closer is really based on Massachusett's Democrats being able to persuade their fellow Democrats to vote for a guy they do not like either because Republicans are so scary or the Democrat machine will lose influence and therefore be unable to grant them some kind of political favor. Pulling this type of "close" off on a national, or more likely a battleground state, basis is probably more difficult. The Bush DWI story in 2000 had a similar effect on voters who really did not like Al Gore but were given the excuse to vote for him because of the last minute DWI story.
You can also see this happen with the media, where many people do not like Kerry, but they would rather see a bad Democrat than a Republican. This explains why they can have stories that show what an incoherent jerk Kerry is, followed by stories about "mean Republican discredited Swiftvets."
Who is responsible for the mess in Iraq
A rational answer to this question would start with the proposition that the people who are being disruptive are responsible. But, Democrats are not rational when it comes to military matters so you have the Kerry-Edwards team saying Bush and Cheney are responsible for the mess in Iraq.
Statements like those of Kerry-Edwards show a profound ignorance of warfare and history. Democrats do not seem to comprehend that war is a dynamic enterpise against a sentient opponent who can react in different ways to events. The reaction of the losing side in Iraq has been to make the transition to democratic rule as messy as possible. They are making a maximum effort in that regard at this point. However, the insurgents are only capable of acts of impotence.
They are able to instigate random bombings, but if the inability to stop random bombings was a measure of defeat, then the insurgents in Falluja would already be defeated because they are utterly incapable of stopping the US bombing of Zarqawi safe houses. At least the US bombing is attriting enemy leadership targets. Most of the insurgent bombing have been killing non combatents. That is ultimately a losing exchange of bodies for the insurgents. You win a war by destroying the enemies combat effectiveness. The insurgents are reluctant to engage US forces, because every time they have tried it the US has been the decesive winner.
Unfortunately, too many in the media in Iraq either do not comprehend these facts or are too invested in wanting the US to lose to even consider them. They, therefore, run with the theory that if the US and its allies cannot stop impotent bombings they are somehow responsible for the mess made by the insurgents. In the real world, the insurgents are just so many cockroaches who have the ability to make a mess, but do not have the ability to win. Their only hope is for someone like Kerry to be elected and then withdraw US forces before the cockroaches are exterminated.
Most undecided voters are probably predisposed to vote for the Democrat, but are really trying to decide whether they want to hold their nose and vote for a Democrat they do not like. Their most likely alternative to holding their nose while marking their ballot is to just not vote.
Kerry has a history with this kind of voter. His reputation as a strong closer is really based on Massachusett's Democrats being able to persuade their fellow Democrats to vote for a guy they do not like either because Republicans are so scary or the Democrat machine will lose influence and therefore be unable to grant them some kind of political favor. Pulling this type of "close" off on a national, or more likely a battleground state, basis is probably more difficult. The Bush DWI story in 2000 had a similar effect on voters who really did not like Al Gore but were given the excuse to vote for him because of the last minute DWI story.
You can also see this happen with the media, where many people do not like Kerry, but they would rather see a bad Democrat than a Republican. This explains why they can have stories that show what an incoherent jerk Kerry is, followed by stories about "mean Republican discredited Swiftvets."
Who is responsible for the mess in Iraq
A rational answer to this question would start with the proposition that the people who are being disruptive are responsible. But, Democrats are not rational when it comes to military matters so you have the Kerry-Edwards team saying Bush and Cheney are responsible for the mess in Iraq.
Statements like those of Kerry-Edwards show a profound ignorance of warfare and history. Democrats do not seem to comprehend that war is a dynamic enterpise against a sentient opponent who can react in different ways to events. The reaction of the losing side in Iraq has been to make the transition to democratic rule as messy as possible. They are making a maximum effort in that regard at this point. However, the insurgents are only capable of acts of impotence.
They are able to instigate random bombings, but if the inability to stop random bombings was a measure of defeat, then the insurgents in Falluja would already be defeated because they are utterly incapable of stopping the US bombing of Zarqawi safe houses. At least the US bombing is attriting enemy leadership targets. Most of the insurgent bombing have been killing non combatents. That is ultimately a losing exchange of bodies for the insurgents. You win a war by destroying the enemies combat effectiveness. The insurgents are reluctant to engage US forces, because every time they have tried it the US has been the decesive winner.
Unfortunately, too many in the media in Iraq either do not comprehend these facts or are too invested in wanting the US to lose to even consider them. They, therefore, run with the theory that if the US and its allies cannot stop impotent bombings they are somehow responsible for the mess made by the insurgents. In the real world, the insurgents are just so many cockroaches who have the ability to make a mess, but do not have the ability to win. Their only hope is for someone like Kerry to be elected and then withdraw US forces before the cockroaches are exterminated.
Comments
Post a Comment