Centerfield

Bravo. I've been a little puzzled by Kerry's strategy too.

Back several months ago, when Kerry was winning the Democratic nomination, I found it fairly easy to imagine he would run reasonably well in the general election.

Think about why all those Democrats got on the Kerry bandwagon. He was, first, running all those biographical ads that emphasize his war record. He was introducing himself in a way that was compelling.

Second, when he started having success, he was giving victory speeches on primary nights that were even-tempered, composed, and substantive. He sounded like he was rising above the fray and simply presenting his own leadership vision. You looked at that and saw a president.

What's he done in the general election? Well, he put the biographical ads on the shelf for quite a while and ran his more policy-oriented ads. Missed quite an opportunity to introduce himself to the American people in his most positive personal light.

He's running the bio ads now -- just saw one a couple days ago, and it's excellent. But he should have done it first.

Secondarily, he's sounding shrill and partisan in most of the statements he makes -- at least the ones that filter through the media.

Kerry had a fairly simple path to the presidency -- make yourself personally respectable, and sound like a serious, substantive, balanced guy. He's not taking that path.

So, as you surmise, his success depends largely on Bush's failure.

Kerry is going to give a speech on national security today. Perhaps it will all be clear soon.

I disagree with Mathew. Kerry's strategy is not stupid, nor is there any reason to assume he has no ideas and no courage.

A few months ago everyone predicted a landslide for Bush. Now Kerry is polling ahead. What's so stupid? Do you think a smarter strategy would have Kerry 20 points ahead?

The general election is still too far away for him to start offering serious ideas. For example, everyone ignored his health care proposal. Kerry did the obvious thing in spending the last three months raising money and developing his organization.

Second, a re-election race is mostly about the incumbent. Bush's chances depend largely on Iraq. Kerry can't do much to change this. He also faces difficulty in offering an alternative on Iraq without coming across as undercutting America.

Finally, I don't think anyone gets to be presidential nominee without ideas and courage. You should assume that both Bush and Kerry have both. I'm still predicting a Bush win, but no one should misunderestimate Kerry.

I think you are being a little hard on the Kerry political strategy. I'm the first to admit that I want to hear his plan and the plan he lays out will effect my vote, but I don't think it's bad politically to sit it out while Bush is going through this period.

I think in earlier controversies such the 911 commission and his comments on Rumsfeld and the Iraqi prison scandal, he was too active in condemning the Bush administration and pointing fingers, and it hurt him as a result. Sometimes saying nothing is more effective, and Kerry's missteps have been because he talked too much, not that he spoke too little.

I think he has to lay out his grand vision on the war, but waiting until the dust settles some will make his voice heard louder, and quite frankly, give him the freedom to shift his position as news events warrant.

Let's say he came out and said "The June 30th handoff is the most important thing to happen in the war" and it turns out to have little impact or alternatively "The June 30th handoff is a politcal crock of s**t" and it becomes a pivotal point in the war. What doe he gain by making a stand instead of just being non-commital?

The incumbent has some political advantages and the opponent has some political advantages. Kerry's advantage is that until he puts a stake in the ground, he can use hindsight to claim he would have done things differently. He'll have to put a stake in the ground, no doubt, but in October, few swing voters will care that he didn't lay out his vision in May.

Kerry's going for the center. I don't know why you guys are so baffled.

We have a piece up today at preemptive karma that talks about what Kerry has been trying to do.

So...

If Kerry is talking like a Republican in order to try and go toward the center, does this mean that Republicans are in the center?

Just asking...

Sounds like Kerry wants to be Nixon. Haven't we had enough of 'secret plans'?
I'm voting for Kerry (I usually vote Democrat), but hearing stuff like this makes me want to hold my breath. I fear he risks being as disliked as W.

ps... does anyone read Glenn Reynolds? I think he's Republican, but he seems astute in his ideas about Kerry