Kerry: There He Goes Again

A good deal of attention has been devoted to Kerry’s characteristically off key comments on Meet The Press yesterday — his warning not to “overhype” the election or “to say that something is legitimate when a whole portion of the country can’t vote and doesn’t vote.” But those weren’t his only, well, odd observations.

For example, there was his dependence on/rejection of polls.

KERRY: I believe that 9/11 was the central deciding issue in this race. And the [Osama] tape — we were rising in the polls up until the last day when the tape appeared. We flat-lined the day the tape appeared and went down on Monday.

And, a few paragraphs later:

KERRY: Well, Tim, if you ask me about polls today, you’re going to get one of the sort of quick and easy dismissals of all politics, because I’m a poll expert. And if you’ll recall, every poll in the country eliminated me from the race in December prior to Iowa, and I turned around and won. And every poll eliminated me two or three times from even making the race close.

So I think polls today are almost irrelevant, and I just don’t pay any attention to them.

“I voted for polls … before I voted against them.” Or something.

And then there was his very odd reduction of the country to the battleground states. Consider:

… if you add up the popular vote in the battleground states, I won the popular vote in the battleground states by 2 percentage points. We just didn’t distribute it correctly in Ohio.

And how does Kerry reply to critics who are angry that his campaign wound up with a $14 million surplus? As quoted in an article in today’s Washington Post:

Some critics said it was a sign of poor planning that he finished the campaign with a surplus, but Kerry said that his battleground-state campaigns got all the money they needed.

We knew that many Democrats want to dump the electoral college in favor of a popular vote, but we always thought they’d at least be willing to count the votes in all 50 states.

Say What? (3)

  1. Agricola February 1, 2005 at 9:14 am | | Reply

    The extra money was surely for post-election litigation, should it be necessary/helpful, but he obviously can’t say that now.

  2. notherbob2 February 1, 2005 at 7:42 pm | | Reply

    Not that there is anything wrong with that.

  3. Steve Hughes February 2, 2005 at 11:57 am | | Reply

    Kerry’s remarks make perfect sense as long as you remember to look at each case individually, not as part of whole, and having nothing whatsoever to do with anything that preceded it.

    The polls showed me rising soI like polls.

    The polls showed me a loser so obviously they must be ignored.

Say What?