…is that he stinks on TV, writes The New York Observer’s Joe Hagan:
Watching Mr. Kerry on TV, [former McCain strategist John Weaver] said, “I don’t know if it’s a stream of consciousness or stream of unconsciousness.”
“It’s a lot of words and no clarity, a lot of presence and no warmth,” said Chris Matthews, the host of MSNBC’s Hardball. … “And I think he’s got to deal with that.” …
In recent appearances, Mr. Kerry’s digressions and obfuscations about whether he threw a war medal or a ribbon on the White House lawn in 1971—or whether the young Mr. Kerry should have used the word “war crimes” to describe actions in Vietnam—have obscured the candidate. At every turn, he has managed to turn the TV screen into smoked glass: He’s right in front of you, but you can’t … quite … make … him … out. With his morose patrician mien and robotic delivery—parodied with precision by Jon Stewart on the Monday, April 24, Daily Show, surely not a good thing for the candidate—Mr. Kerry’s TV performances are sounding a gut-level alarm about his ability to inspire confidence in the electorate. “He needs to speak the truth and speak from the heart and not try to calibrate his views or his actions,” said Mr. Weaver. “The public catches on to these things, and they can see through whether there’s a calibration going on or not. He needs to stop that.”
He didn’t need to speak the name of former Vice President Al Gore. But a media strategist for another Democratic Presidential candidate said that Mr. Kerry had to lose the “legislative speak” and begin talking “like a normal person communicates, speaking in simple, more declarative sentences that have a clearer meaning for people.” Compared to President George W. Bush, he added, Mr. Kerry appeared more intelligent, “but there are many instances in which George Bush communicates more clearly.”
Read the whole thing. Near the end, 60 Minutes executive producer Don Hewitt is quoted as saying, “The Democratic friends I have keep saying, ‘Wait, wait, he’ll get better.’” [As if Don Hewitt has any non-Democratic friends. -ed.] He adds, “Well, I’m waiting, and I don’t know if he will or not.” I’m waiting, too, and wondering.
|
Categories: Election 2004
|
April 29th, 2004 at 10:44:47 pm
Wow, what a great article! I didn’t know Germans were capable of such nuance! My favorite part:
He who acts, makes mistakes. Case in point Bush and Blair: For example in their reasoning and communication regarding their Afghanistan and Iraq policy, in the concept and the management of expectations the key question is how fast the region can be pacified and democratized. But despite all of the mistakes regarding the details (or often just in public relations) their policy and politics are at their core right. It is a policy of clear and tough resistance against the enemies of the free world.
Impressive for an Old Europe commentator!
April 30th, 2004 at 3:40:57 pm
Relatively decent speech from John Kerry today. I’m slightly reassured that he wouldn’t make the mistake of pulling out of Iraq early.
I have two problems though. For one, his goal is “stability” in Iraq, not democracy. Well, Iraq was pretty stable otherwise under Saddam, and many of the Middle East countries are stable now, but then that’s precisely the problem, isn’t it–stable but repressive regimes that help foment international terrorism?
For my second objection, his suggestions for steps the president needs to take are empty. The central conceit of the speech is that Bush must commit more troops to secure Iraq, bring in more international troops by going to the United Nations, and then hand over power to the Iraqis under Brahimi’s plan. The problem is, that’s basically the plan we are implementing right now anyway, the central difference being that it appears the Bush Administration is reluctant to go back to the UN just yet. And why shouldn’t they be? The widening UNSCAM issue, the probable veto by cranky France, the overwhelming inferiority of our European allies’ military, and the apparent reluctance of the UN to re-enter Iraq unless conditions are more closer to perfect–all of these are major impediments to success. And all this on the same day Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin called for abandoning the UN ship and creating a new international body instead!
So while it appears this is a major step forward for Kerry, it’s also obvious that he doesn’t really have anything new or groundbreaking that would be any different or better than what we’re already doing, and it’s kind of lame to see him essentially repeat Bush’s plan, call it his own, and then exhort Bush to implement said plan per Kerry’s directive.
April 30th, 2004 at 3:49:25 pm
Well, it may not do much for you, but Kerry basically echoing Bush on Iraq is fine with me, since I supported the war and have a relatively conservative stance on the substance of the Iraq situation. Far better to echo Bush than to pull a Kucinich, which might just force me to plug my nose vote for Bush, with whom I have profound differences on many other issues. If Kerry and Bush are basically the same on Iraq, then great, I can put Iraq out of my mind and vote for Kerry based on all the other issues (plus the whole WMD “accountability” thing we’ve discussed previously).
April 30th, 2004 at 4:00:32 pm
If you want to buy stock in Kerry right now on Iraq, then fine, I think that’s acceptable given Kerry’s speech today. But there are still alarms there. As I mentioned previously, his goal is “stability”, meaning under Kerry we may cut and run before democracy has set in, and that’s really no better than abandoning Iraq to anarchy now. In fact, it’s probably worse, because at least by leaving now, we could save American lives. The other ramification that I see is, Kerry will not be progressive in seeking to end or undermine other regimes that foster terrorism. Kerry will absolutely not have the guts to press Iran, and it’s quite possible he may offer too much carrot and not enough stick to regimes like North Korea, which is also a mistake we cannot repeat. With Bush, I may not know what plans he has for the rest of the Axis of Evil, but I can at least be sure he won’t sit idly by as the danger grows and simply hope for the best while offering the voters empty, reassuring platitudes.
April 30th, 2004 at 9:41:02 pm
John Kerry isn’t the only person with the middle initial “F” who is putting stability ahead of democracy. Just listen to that liberal mouthpiece George F. Will:
The results of elections, including theocratic elements, may be markedly unlovely. That may break the big hearts of those in the U.S. government who hope for a luminously liberal democracy to shame the entire Middle East into emulation, thereby justifying the war originally justified primarily by the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But pursuit of that ideal can impede achievement of something tolerable — a stable, perhaps illiberal, even authoritarian Iraq which cooperates in the war against terrorism. Call this an exit strategy.
I’m not saying Will’s right. Just thought it was interesting.
May 1st, 2004 at 1:57:03 pm
I’m well aware of where Will is coming from, and in fact we’ve discussed Will on the blog before (or at least your dad and I have). I totally disagree with Will, but his position is a naturally conservative (paleo-con) position to take, seeing as how it resurrects traditional American Cold War foreign policy, and follows the traditional conservative analysis that certain civilizations and cultures (and some say even races and ethnicities) do not necessarily show a proclivity or even an ability to adapt to democratic conventions For me, this is unremarkable coming from Will, but it is very remarkable coming from Kerry, seeing as how he’s supposed to be the caring, liberal Democrat in favor of human rights, as opposed to those evil, Reagan-Nixon Republicans who don’t care how many of our brown brothers die as a result of fascist dictators in Nicaragua, Chile, etc. In fact, given how much Kerry attacked our foreign policy strategy during the Cold War–how we were arming dictators, Iran-Contra, and all that stuff–and how much he called for strategies of appeasement for dealing with the Soviets, his newfound position is frankly bizarre.
May 1st, 2004 at 2:03:22 pm
Man, these latest ads are devastating!
May 2nd, 2004 at 8:55:30 pm
It’s a shame we don’t see more of these types of interviews. Kerry actually appears to do pretty well here.