speakingcorpse writes:

I'm beginning to agree with Dawkins that Kerry is our best shot--especially if he chooses Edwards as VP. But the race is not over. I think Dean may pull a strong second in NH and then put in a good showing five days later. That's just a guess though. Perhaps I hope he does, because as long as the candidates stay positive, a tight race all the way through is good for the party. Unfortunately, Dean is attacking Kerry now vigorously. (See below.) This is not good for Dean and it is worse for the party. The attack is instructive, though. Because the Republicans will use it. Kerry voted against Gulf War I. And they, with the media's help, will find other stuff, too. The media will insist on virtually destroying the candidacy of the eventual nominee at least once before next September. (Thus making possible, though unlikely, the "miraculous comeback upset" story.) And they will have no trouble doing this to whomever is nominated.

Candidates Spar Over Iraq As Balloting in New Hampshire's Leadoff Primary Draws Near

The Associated Press

CONCORD, N.H. Jan. 24 — Howard Dean sharply questioned John Kerry's judgment on Iraq on Saturday as Democratic presidential rivals raced through a final, frozen weekend of campaigning before New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary.

"I would be deeply concerned about that kind of judgment in the White House," said Dean, the one-time front-runner struggling to overcome a reversal that has vaulted Kerry into first place in the New Hampshire polls.

Dean said Kerry opposed the first Persian Gulf War in Iraq in 1991, and supported the 2003 invasion, views contrary to his own. "I think my position has proven to be right twice," Dean added.

Blicero adds: True I have been holding forth on politics to rapt Flemish audiences and not following the post-Iowa death dirge as closely as I would (not) like--but from where I'm standing, I find it very hard to agree with speakingcorpse's remark about Kerry's viability. Has Kerry ever shown--ever--that he is cognizant of (not to mention prepared to fight) the Republican-media-death-complex that is all set in place to destroy the Democratic candidate and continue to assist in the ushering-in of one-party rule, permanent war, terror, and national-millenial corpsification?

The answer seems to be no. I would remind speakingcorpse of his (and many others') earlier remarks to the effect that the Democrats cannot live on Gore voters alone. Tens of millions of eligible voters did not vote in 2000, and unless the Democrats can inspire/persuade/implore a couple million of those voters to come out and vote, they are guaranteed to lose. Dean has proposed one version of an answer to this problem, with his appeal to the actual (though widely ignored and denied) Democratic majority. So, to some degree, has Clark, with his appeal to non-traditional Democrats. But has Kerry? I don't know. Maybe I missed something.

Don't get me wrong: I love hockey. But no one's skating to the White House on "steady-handedness" this year.