Recognizing the Obvious

« ASP vs. License | Main | Wes Clark - A Class Act »

Recognizing the Obvious

The race for the democratic nomination is over. John Kerry is going to be the nominee.

He's my third favorite after Clark and Edwards, but he's the favorite of most everyone else judging from the results so far and the poll numbers in the next three states, Tennesee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

By Feb 10th, Kerry will have won big in the southern states of Tennesee and Virginia, where Clark and Edwards are likely to make their last stands. On the 17th, he will win big in Wisconsin which is the place Dean has said he'll make his last stand.

I am not sure it will actually go that long before the Dean, Clark, and Edwards campaigns throw in the towel. It's hard to keep these campaigns funded when the contributors know who is going to win. Nobody likes to "throw good money after bad".

Is such an early victory good for the Democrats? I am not sure. Kerry is a "known quantity" so its not like we are taking a risk with someone who hasn't been battle tested. But the overwhelming media attention that the Democrats have been getting has been in parallel with a significant slip by Bush in the approval ratings. I think there are a number of reasons for Bush's problems, many of them self imposed, but the spotlight of the media on Kerry and the other attractive Democrats like Edwards and Clark, and their attacks on Bush, are also an important part of the slip in the ratings for Bush.

If the campaign ends this week or next, how are the Democrats going to stay in the spotlight? I don't know.

And the Bush smear campaign will start in force now that they know who to smear. That worries me.

All I can say is those of us who want someone who values policy over politics, truth over lies, and friends over enemies should get behind John Kerry now and don't stop working for him until the election is over in November.

Comments (9) | | TrackBack (1)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2c969e200e5503671418834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Recognizing the Obvious:

» After all, his initials are JFK from O'DonnellWeb
Over at A VC, we find this, "All I can say is those of us who want someone who values... [Read More]

Tracked on Feb 8, 2004 11:11:22 AM

Posted February 8, 2004 in Politics

Comments

Amen, Brother! I've deliberated long and hard and now I'm of the same opinion. Bush has done some good, but I can't support him in the next election for innumerable reasons, but mainly one key one: I can't trust him. I know that's an illogical statement when referring to a politician, but I have my reasons.

I won't get into it here...

Keep on keepin' on!

Posted by: scotty the body | Feb 8, 2004 11:32:16 AM

I think if we're going to settle for a career politician with no history or running a government (just sitting in washington trying unsuccessfully to pass bills), then I'd rather have the dice rolled for John Edwards. That man is a machine and has the policy/debate/background/visual qualities needed to beat Bush. Sad to say, but voters can be very superficial when it comes to visuals, and let's be honest, Kerry always looks tired, so he kind of looks like a loser. That said, I do think he's a solid candidate, but I think we might be looking at Dukaksis Part 2. Kerry just doesn't energize the voters like some of the other candidates. Bush, despite all his failings, is still a damn good politician. Look at his interview with Tim Russert, he flubbed all his answers and stuttered all the way through, and still mananged to come off lookin okay. I don't think Kerry can really hurt Bush. Edwards could though.

Posted by: Robin | Feb 9, 2004 8:29:23 AM

Well, I agree with everyone so far.

I hope Kerry continues to improve (because he has), and that the apathetic lesser-of-two evils vote will swing his way.

Maybe all these credible ex-candidates can help undermine Bush while keeping JFK above the fray.

Posted by: compelled_to_reply | Feb 10, 2004 11:49:54 PM

Clark drops out... Why is Kucinich still running? Sharpton has stated he plans to stay in until the very end (to try and control the black vote.

So we're done to three: Kerry, Edwards, Dean. As much as Kerry looks like the winner, I still wouldn't count those other two out yet, stranger things have happened.

Posted by: Robin | Feb 11, 2004 2:12:38 AM

How does "someone who values...friends over enemies" square with Kerry's alliance with "Hanoi Jane"? The anti-war movement _was_ directly aimed at impairing our prosecution of that war, at the cost of increased US casualties. Kerry may have been a hero in Vietnam, but he allied himself with a traitor (Fonda) afterwards. With his post-war record, Kerry is not likely to carry the South (VA is today a bedroom comm'y for the Federal gov't, and TN was and is a border state.)

If you folks want a ticket that can, really, beat Bush, isn't the perfect match:

Hillary + Edwards ??

Posted by: clarence | Feb 11, 2004 4:24:18 AM

wow, Hillary + Edwards would be a landslide!

Posted by: Robin | Feb 11, 2004 10:10:16 AM

What kind of pot are you people smoking and where can I get some?

Hillary is the most despised politician in America -- the day she runs for President or Veep will be a great day for the GOP, insuring a victory in all elected branches of government!

Posted by: LoneStar | Feb 11, 2004 3:54:02 PM

I don't know where you can get pot, but I do know where you should have gotten some manners (your parents).

Hillary Clinton is despised by people who will vote GOP under any circumstances. She has the ability to run to the _right_ of Bush on federal spending (Billy did have a balanced budget) and to the right on foreign policy ("right idea but bad management").

Do you want to win?????

Posted by: clarence | Feb 11, 2004 4:19:38 PM

This is a curious site: it seems like a venture capitalist would be a master of taking uncertainty into account and hedge a little more on who the Dem candidate would be. Yet, months before the final bell, this site announces a winner. Today, however, Edwards looks like he's not just "still in" but perhaps is genuinely viable as the potential Democratic candidate.

It confirmed that the pick of Kerry was 'early' (it seemed to me).

I enjoy the site a lot -- it just doesn't fit what I "expected" from a VC; it doesn't fit my stereotype, which says something about my stereotype. So, I'm learning. For example,

1 - Preferring Clark seemed inconsistent with what I thought a VC would do (based solely on my perceptions, of course: Clark, to me, was all over the map, so he would be scary to 'invest in' because I would have no clear idea of what he would actually do -- none of his positions seemed stable or even well thought out -- more reactions than positions; plus, he was in primarily as a stalking horse for Hillary so it wasn't even clear the degree to which he was an independent decision maker -- another uncertainty in investing in him). So, were I a VC, Clark seemed too unpredictable -- I would have guessed he wouldn't make the funding cut.

2 - Picking a winner (Kerry) as early as this post seemed inconsistent, too. Why not pick two and say it's one of them?

BUT, here's where I may be off in my thinking: maybe the prediction is still RIGHT and having gotten in on the ground floor, you are much better able to go with this option when it becomes reality; whereas I, waiting until the race is all but over, pick the winner along with the masses, but do it so late it does me no good.

In any case, I find the site very instructive. Thanks for taking the time to keep it up.

Posted by: Carson Bennett | Feb 18, 2004 4:43:58 PM

A VC

Musings of a VC in NYC