John Kerry
Related: About this forumJohn Kerry in 2012 spotlight
It of course focuses a lot on the SoS position (Politico's lens), but explains how Kerry could be useful against Romney (take a deep breath before reading the sentence comparing Romney to Kerry!)
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75725.html
The Obama campaign is ready to deploy Kerry as a top surrogate on foreign policy and national security this year, a natural task for the 68-year-old Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, whom many party strategists see as a nearly perfect foil for presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney.
...
Most important to party strategists is that regardless of Kerrys ultimate motivation, hes a guy who can score points against Romney. The two Massachusetts pols have plenty in common: Romney has been compared to Kerry repeatedly this year for his vast wealth, wooden style and reputation for ideological flexibility.
The hope is Kerry can take apart Romneys Bay State record as few others can.
With Obamas defense record one of his selling points and Romneys Massachusetts governorship a ripe target Democrats believe Kerry is uniquely positioned to take the fight to Romney on issues from Baghdad to Braintree.
John Kerry is one of the presidents closest allies on foreign policy and is the leading voice on those issues in the Senate, said Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter. So hes uniquely qualified to talk about the presidents record in keeping the country safe and restoring our strength in the world and what the stakes are if we reverse course and go back to the same policies of the last administration.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75725.html#ixzz1tWQ3E9x7
karynnj
(59,942 posts)Kerry's speech on Romney's ridiculous Iran oped was very good. It also really has NOTHING to do with Mitt being a former MA governor, Kerry would be the top Democratic foreign policy voice in the Senate - even if Gingrich or Santorum were the nominee.
As you warned, the authors are quite lazy repeating the media's view of Kerry that NEVER had anything to do with who he is. They have to realize that Kerry's fundamental positions are similar to the ones that he has held all his life. They also bring up his incredible leadership on START, but then spoke of his weak record - when if he were given credit - as anyone else is, he would have a long list of things that he led on or added to.
I do like that they ended with quoting a Kerry friend saying that he is more content than he has been for years. It is nice to think that he really is happy doing what he is doing -- even if like now it is visiting Afghanistan.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)JAO. The media, GOP, some Democrats and liberals have done (somewhat) permanent damage to Senator Kerry in terms of image and perception; especially in noted praise for Obama's likability.
Just look at comments here and elsewhere that still note how Gore and Kerry are/were stiff like Romney and can't/couldn't connect. One Grio.com article brought up him "losing" the "wanna have a beer with" argument because of being "aristocratic." Holla back when someone who was at an 04 rally or on the street/place where the Senator visited, and answer what motivated them to show up for somebody that wasn't an extrovert and you know the rest.
Aside from the Ohio drama and everything else, very convinced that other strong factors (i.e. hunting, the stereotypes of NE liberals and wealth, etc.) cost him 1600. Just an observation.
Things happen for a reason, and noticed that the authors used the word "humbling" to describe his loss. Some have said the POTUS and FLOTUS are the embodiment of staying humble during or after difficult experiences in life. Experiences like that can and should humble a person, and that is what's missing in DC pols on the Hill.
That said, glad that Team Obama is seeing the Senator as a close ally on Foreign Policy, even if isn't a rah-rah issue like jobs and the fact that some might ask what about VP Biden (since he has been going after Rmoney on FP). Not many understand the role of the SFRC and see that the Senator has a right to speak out also.
As for the SOS rumors, (thought he and his spokespeople denied it?) he got game. However, after watching the O administration the last three years, it seems like working for them isn't all that it's cracked up to be (the behind the scenes dramas, etc). He seems to be happy as an independent voice as the Senior Senator from MA (though still don't think he has the same type of respect from MA like Uncle Ted had, yet). Though people have a very low view of the US Senate, in terms of lack of diversity, hopefully that will change one day.
People may get on me for saying all this, and this wasn't meant to shade Kerry, Gore or anyone, just adding some 2 cents about the article.
Peace.
Mass
(27,315 posts)administration recognizes it. Why do you care about anything else?
politicasista
(14,128 posts)and wasn't taking a swipe at Senator Kerry, and only noted one article (from the Grio) and that was it.
Sorry for saying anything. Guess that opinions don't seem to be welcomed now. Peace.
Mass
(27,315 posts)The article is about the role senator Kerry will play in the campaign, and it is obviously a big role (important enough that it made the local news in Boston). For example, you could explain why you consider the opinion of grio.com on this matter important. I may be missing something, but it seems to be a website that is not related to news (www,grio.com) or am I looking at the wrong site?
Your opinion is welcome, but if you state it, you should expect that some people disagree with you.
Mass
(27,315 posts)and this must be the article you refer to
http://www.thegrio.com/politics/obama-has-already-won-likability-race-vs-republicans.php
Of course, except if there is a reference, they do not refer to Kerry as stiff, but aristocratic. (I think people spend way too much time on trivial things like that, but I have decided to ignore it. It does not matter anymore, either for Gore or Kerry).
BTW, it is a crap that seems totally american. The US media tried to pin the label of not charismatic on François Hollande. Well, it does not really matter. Hollande is 7 points ahead of Sarkozy. So, if I agree with you on something, it is that US reporter and bloggers, even those I agree with, tend to be part of a pack and to lack any critical thought, probably because most of the media is owned by big business.
One more thing: I agree that something was lacking in the Kerry campaign, but it is not his likeability (which if you look at the numbers was much higher than Romney -- the rest is a creation from the media). What was sorely missing were a few surrogates ready to go out for him as attack dogs.
Whoops, poli's bad.
Was taking what was said in the Politico article and just tying it to what was said in The Grio article, especially what was said about Romney (and yes, took a long breath before reading the Romney part). It should be taken with a grain of salt, but still.
Should not have mentioned the Grio, but it talked about the likability issue last week with Obama and Romney. You might have been looking at the right site. They have a Politics section (though the comments from some articles are infested with trolls).
It talked about each presidential race and how the likability issue was a reason that the presidents won (and stole).
In the Politico issue they used the same memes that Kerry could not .... like Romney, therefore, I decided to state what I felt about this all. America can be very fickle. Props to France and would love to study French one day.
This wasn't meant to take anything away from the Senator is doing right now. It is just too bad that that he (and Momma T) can't have an outlet like the extrovert pols (like wisteria said a few years ago--paraphrasing) to prove the memes that Bush cronies left behind wrong. He may not be defined by them, but that is what people remember. And our side will probably use them to make both prove a true point about Romney and make Obama look good, (though the Bush comparison makes O look bad).
Wasn't expecting people to agree with me, but it's just an observation.
Mass
(27,315 posts)This said, it is a corporate news website affiliated with NBC, so I do not expect more from them when it comes to repeating media meme than other corporate newsmedia.
I read the article and frankly, it is not bad as articles go. I think the point I was trying to make and that it does not really matter at this point whether reporters and some political operatives will repeat the same conventional wisdom. Frankly, I do not think it matters anymore, and I see more and more serious people move away from the stupidity of the 2004 campaign.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)On second thought, haven't visited here much since Senator Kerry became a grandpapi, but sometimes I come across articles like this one. Sometimes will ignore it, other times, maybe not.
That said, you are right, this isn't as bad as articles go.
And given the tragic mess with the former VP candidate it's not surprising to see the serious ones are moving away from the 04 campaign because it was not meant to be a Dem year. CW should not matter anymore, as mean-spirited as it is, but we shall see. Hopefully that trend (moving away from eight years ago) will continue, though it would be sweet (or sour) to find out about the Ohio shenanigans!
Peace.
karynnj
(59,942 posts)In fact, your entire post is a swipe at Kerry, who you (implicitly) compare to the wonderful Obamas. I think the Obamas are great, but I don't think Kerry has anything to prove - especially to ignorant posts on blogs or reporters who never had an independent creative thought in their lives.
At this point, he has done important things - even if discretely and quietly. Even with today, I doubt it was coincidence that Kerry was in Afghanistan this weekend. The President would not go there until the agreement was acceptable to both Obama and Karzai. Not to mention, getting OBL likely depended on the Pakistanis cooling down on the Davis issue - and Kerry spent over a week there making that happen.
Though anyone likes praise and recognition, I suspect that Kerry is genuinely motivated by the desire to do good. In his current position, he is well positioned to do that.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)Last edited Wed May 2, 2012, 03:49 PM - Edit history (1)
I was positive.
And though I am not the one dissing the Senator, the ones in GD, MSM, social media are the ones that have been comparing him to Romney and holding whatever grudge from 04. Seems like they are the target, but to each his/her own.
Understand this hasn't sat well with anyone, so will leave this thread. Peace.
beachmom
(15,239 posts)post hooks everything together regarding the GOP's displeasure with how Obama is the one who killed OBL:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/05/of_course_they_dont_like_it.php?ref=fpblg
It was Bush administration policy for seven years to de-prioritize the search for Osama bin Laden. That happened at Tora Bora to refocus the fight to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. And it continued that way through early 2009.
...
Its not only the go-ahead that President Obama gave to launch the commando raid one year ago it was the aggressive refocus on hunting down OBL that he launched on coming to office. These are uncomfortable facts but facts nonetheless.
If Don Rumsfeld would have kept his eye on the ball hunting down bin Laden ten years ago in the assault on Tora Bora, there would have been no assault to order one year ago.
"kept his eye on the ball" links to this NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/11/magazine/11TORABORA.html?pagewanted=all
Was it not John Kerry who came up with "took his eye off the ball" in the 2004 campaign? Was it not that same 2004 campaign that said America focused on the wrong place: Iraq and not Afghanistan and OBL? I like that quote from Stephanie Cutter in the Politico article.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)It is no secret that I would like to see him become SOS, but Senator Kerry seems to have his feet planted firmly on the ground and seems happy where he is now. Still, I hope he wouldn't turn down the position if it was offered to him. If the election turns out as I hope it will.
Inuca
(8,945 posts)Mass
(27,315 posts)politicasista
(14,128 posts)and apologies for ruining this thread.
Mass
(27,315 posts)Inuca
(8,945 posts)Response to Inuca (Reply #18)
wisteria This message was self-deleted by its author.
karynnj
(59,942 posts)This DU 2 thread has a lot of things debunking it - including a response that Kerry put out soon after the member of the Palin pack was on 60 minutes (where Kerry was NOT mentioned). All the transactions were done by the Heinz Family trust that he is not involved with at all - and which Teresa is not a trustee of.
In addition to the those facts, the BG looked at ALL the transactions and found that the rate of return was not unusually good.
The attacks were ridiculous - any purchase of a health care stock in 2003 or 2009 was deemed suspect. Kerry was identified as chairing the healthcare subcommittee of the Finance Committee in 2003 - and thus was key in writing the prescription drug program. In fact, the Republicans had all the chairs, Kerry was against the bill, and was spending most of his time campaigning. On a drug, they cite that the Health committee COULD have been informed when Medicare stopped covering a drug that was held by the Heinz trust. In fact, Kerry was not on the HELP committee and the Heinz trust sold at a low point.
Here is the link - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=273&topic_id=171155&mesg_id=171155 I hope that it will not be needed.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Response to Mass (Reply #17)
wisteria This message was self-deleted by its author.
beachmom
(15,239 posts)Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) laughed at Mitt Romneys claim to a lot of credit for the auto bailout.
I just he cannot be serious, Kerry told TPM in the Capitol Tuesday.
Congressional Republicans, who have criticized President Obama for the auto rescue, were also surprised by their presumptive presidential nominees claim.