Wednesday, April 14, 2004

Mark, to answer your comment below without having to post 3 comments of my own:
Easy for you to say, because you are clear in your views. Whatever Bush has done that I have not agreed with, he has always seemed genuine to me. But last night, that obvious non answer of the question as to why he would be sitting with Cheney at the commission vs. them doing sessions alone made me feel, well, a bit disappointed. And I'm a supporter! How's it going to make other people feel? Realistically, the choice is not as stark to most people as it is to you or I, and those are the people that he needs to win over to win the election. Yes, 90% of the populace has probably already decided how they will vote, 45% hate Bush (the anyone but Bush bumper sticker crowd) and will vote for his opponent, 45% either like Bush, trust Bush, or believe that his foreign policy overrides any other issue that they don't agree on, and will vote for him. It's winning that 10% that we're concerned with. Bumbling his words has never bothered me, and I don't think that it matters. Being able to answer a question without sounding "pat" is another thing altogether. The Iraq oil revenues? He had NO clue as to what they were, just that they were "good" (last time he was briefed anyway). I mean we know he can't be on top of everything, but in these situations he has to seem like he's on top of everything, and that question should have been obvious, and easily prepared for. See, it's hard for people to know exactly where Kerry stands, so how is it clear cut? If they don't like Bush even a little, and they are leaning to Kerry, he can make everyone feel that he agrees with them no matter what their opinion. These are usually self deluding people, but hey, the reality is they exist, and they vote. So while to us it seems a very stark choice, to the uninformed, NBC nightly news watching, non political junkies it isn't so clear.

No comments: