Thursday, August 19, 2004
One significant question remains, regardless of who's wrong or right here. Why did Kerry make a four and a half month stint in VietNam the center plank of his campaign platform when he's been in the political realm for so many years? One would assume that the issues he espouses would be reflected in his voting record. Wouldn't this be akin to Bush trying to divert attention from his four-year term in the White House back to his record as Texas Governor?
I don't understand the direction the Kerry campaign is taking. This has the potential to go down in history as the political equivalent of "New Coke".
The only possible explanation I can imagine is that the intent is to divert attention away from the issues at hand (i.e. war on terror, economy, gay marriage, abortion, etc.) because the Republicans seem to be more in line with the majority of Americans' positions on those things. In doing this, perhaps they hope to cash in on the "anyone but Bush" syndrome. As long as Kerry doesn't strongly align with either side of any of these issues, there's less chance that potential voters will be turned off by his stance.
At the same time, I don't think most Americans find this type of fence-straddling appealing. Kerry should define himself as someone who stands hard-and-fast against the policies of the current administration, and let the voters decide which road to take.