Centerfield

I mostly agree, but I think Kerry is reviving. He will certainly do well enough in New Hampshire to roll on further.

Kerry has one of the biggest tin ears i have ever seen in a politician. He has almost no appeal outside NE, but he's stubborn enough to keep laboring on anyway. He'll be the last one to know.
He lost my vote the second I heard him say without qualification hat if he were elected, US troops would be reduced to minimal levels within 6 months of his taking office. I wasn't angry because I thought he'd do it, I was angry because it felt to me like he was saying it because he thought he had to...that's not a leader.

I actually saw my first John Kerry bumper sticker two days ago. I live in Massachusetts, so you'd think I would have seen one sooner.

I see lots of Dean bumper stickers. He's clearly the choice of the Cambridge literati.

I sense that the race itself is out of whack -- like the whole political environment of the moment, I suppose.

Was thinking about this a bit while watching some of the recent specials about JFK. Back in that era, some of our leading Democrats were very strong on national defense and actually pretty good at stealing the issue from Republicans. JFK arguably ran to the right of Nixon (himself a strong anti-communist) on foreign policy in the 1960 campaign. Truman had also been a strong anti-communist.

JFK's record in office is fascinating. He made two major mistakes -- the Bay of Pigs and the Vienna conference, where he gave Khrushchev the impression he was weak. Those mistakes strengthened Khruschev's already pronounced aggressive tendencies, and set us on an incredibly dangerous path in the early 1960's. Kennedy understood that the chance of open war was high.

How he handled this incredibly difficult problem, for which he was partly responsible, is fascinating. He projected strength, but without always choosing the most aggresive response to Soviet provocation. He inaugurated the biggest peacetime military expansion in U.S. history. When they build the Berlin Wall, he was advised by many to respond militarily. But he understood this was essentially an expression of weakness on their part, and he did nothing.

During the Cuban missile crisis, almost everyone was saying this was the obvious opportunity to invade, but he understood the likely consequences of that action. He managed to respond strongly -- insisting that they remove the missiles and blockading the island. He delivered a grave address to the nation in which he openly contemplated a Soviet nuclear attack and detailed our response.

JFK managed to be strong without succumbing to the downward spiral into war. It looks to me like a balanced, centrist foreign policy -- which turned out to be critical at that moment.

That's what I wonder about these candidates. Is anyone doing something like what Kennedy did in 1960 -- projecting a tougher stance on foreign policy than his Republican opponent? This is the first presidential election after 9/11, and voters will most likely be looking for a strong stance regarding our terrorist enemies.

What would that kind of stance look like? Well, it doesn't have to mean support for our original decision to go to war in Iraq. It does involve a strong stance on winning the war now, since Iraq could become an al Qaida base. More importantly, it involves loudly and constantly proclaiming the steps we will take to defeat al Qaida.

These candidates should be talking endlessly and loudly about al Qaida -- listing the strong steps they will take. They should sound like people ready and willing to kick al Qaida's ass. And they should follow-up by governing like JFK -- aggressive, when necessary ... willing to build the forces needed to protect ourselves ... but thoughtful and deliberate in the way we apply force.

Sorry for the long comment. Got a bit carried away there.

WS: Don't apologize! Very interesting thoughts.

RH: Your comment confirms my impression that Kerry isn't playing well at all outside NE.

Don't count Lieberman out.

I would vote for Harold Ford in a heartbeat.

William: Such a platform may get a lot of centrist votes but it is hard to see the democratic wing of the democratic party rushing to give the nomination to anyone taking a hard stance regading staying in Iraq.

Ron: I am also impressed with Harold Ford. As a resident of N. Mississippi near Memphis, we do get to see more of him than many others in the country. But he is still young and lacks experience. I can easily see him in 2008 or 2012 though.

How about a Ford versus Rice maybe more interesting that Hillary versus Condie.