- WASHINGTON -- If the human
race as a whole, rather than 50 states plus the District of Colombia, could
cast a ballot this coming November, John Kerry would surely win the presidency
by a landslide.
-
- Unfortunately for President Bush-haters around the world,
only the 200 million United States citizens of voting age will have that
right - and the outcome is anything but sure.
-
- Yesterday, Mr Kerry, the Massachusetts senator, sealed
the Democratic nomination after a round of primary and caucus victories,
clearing the way for a decisive presidential battle. The poll in November
will be a battle between two candidates who are very similar, yet very
different. Both John Forbes Kerry and George Walker Bush are of an age,
the former 60 the latter 57. Both are scions of north-eastern money and
privilege, who went to private schools. Both attended Yale, both were members
of the university's Skull and Bones club, to which dark and mysterious
powers are attributed.
-
- But, as everyone knows, one went to Vietnam and the other
didn't. One became a Republican and a B-list Texas oilman before abandoning
drink, finding God, and following his father to the White House. The other
turned against the war in which he was a decorated hero, before entering
Democratic politics, spending the past two decades as senator for Massachusetts.
-
- "Come November, voters will have a very clear choice"
proclaims Mr Bush - he couldn't be more right. The choice extends even
beyond two starkly different visions of the US role in the world, two different
approaches to taxes, health care and the array of cultural issues that
define American politics - gay marriage, guns, abortion and the rest.
-
- In terms of character, too, the contrast could not be
greater. Mr Bush, in his campaign persona at least, is an affable regular
guy with a sense of humour, who mangles the language even more than most
of us. Mr Kerry, on the other hand, projects elitism. Tall and gaunt, he
might have stepped down from Mount Rushmore, long on gravitas but very
short on laughs.
-
- Those differences matter. The issues and trends in the
American presidential mix can be impossibly complicated. Quite understandably,
voters decide on the basis of character. A rule of thumb in modern US elections,
is that the perceived nicer guy tends to win (Richard Nixon being the exception).
In that respect, score it for Mr Bush.
-
- >From character flows a person's entire approach to
governing. Mr Bush, famously, doesn't do nuance. For this utterly uncurious
President, the world is black and white. In the Bush world view, it is
a case of "either with us or against us."
-
- Mr Kerry on the other hand does nuance, if anything to
excess. All too often a Kerry speech is a symphony in greys. The habit
reflects his knowledge of the issues, and the ensuing realisation that
most things in life are more complicated.
-
- "Thoughtful" is the adjective that often best
defines Mr Kerry. But for audiences on the campaign trail, thoughtful is
usually anything but exhilarating. For the Bush campaign the senator's
"on the one hand, on the other" approach only proves his tendency
to waffle - that he is a man congenitally unable to make up his mind, who
cannot be entrusted with the job of commander-in-chief. Which leads, inevitably,
to Iraq. For the first time in decades, the election will be shaped at
least as much by foreign policy as by domestic issues such as jobs, education
or health care. Hovering over it all will be the overlapping shadows of
two wars, one 35 years ago in Vietnam, the other whose bloody aftermath
make headlines today.
-
- This year, the conflicts are inextricably entangled.
If the US transfers power successfully to an interim Iraqi government and
the violence subsides, then the debate about Mr Kerry's valour in Vietnam
and Mr Bush's spell in the Texas National Guard will become irrelevant.
-
- But if American soldiers continue to die and White House
talk about installing democracy in the Middle East is exposed as cynical
nonsense, then the disparity between Bush the launcher of wars and Bush
the man who declined to serve in a war will be a constant subtext. The
assumption is that 2004, like 2000, will be another desperately close affair.
Others believe however it will not be so tight. Incumbents, their school
of thought argues, usually win or lose by landslides.
-
- © 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd
-
- http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=497650
-
-
- Comment
From Jim Mortellaro
3-4-4
-
- Fortunately for America, there is no choice for president
of the Nation. I use the word "fortunately," because in this
election, as opposed to the last one, not only do we have to worry about
chads and little holes, but it also means we do not have to vote.
-
- The system of Democrats voting for Democrats and etc.,
is ludicrous. People should be voting for the right person. But ... darn
it ... there is no right person. In the past two or three elections we
had the good fortune of being able to vote for the best of the worst.
-
- Not this time around. Kerry has more ups and downs than
Aunt Jamima's waffles. First he is not pro this or that, and then he is.
First he is against that and this, then he is not. In 1971, Kerry, on an
interview on CBS radio, told us that he as well as most of his comrades
in arms, killed innocent Vietnamese. He even described the weapon he used.
A 50 caliber machine gun. Well, uh, that would make him a murderer and
not presidential material.
-
- Bush on the other hand, is for war and has demonstrated
that he is for war in ways of greater magnitude than his fighting father.
-
- Say ... maybe the greenest candidate could make a great
president? Good old Ralph. He would ... uh ... Nah. He'd probally ban all
automobiles and force us to turn in our weapons.
-
- You know? I think if no one voted, we'd be a hell of
a lot better off than if we did vote. I wonder what the Constitution has
to say about no one voting? Hmmm. Maybe the past president's wifey has
to serve.
-
- On second thought, maybe we'd better cast a ballot. Say,
are write-in votes allowed? I vote for my wife, Rosemarie. Boy she'd make
a great president. After all, she married me, didn't she?
-
- Or, maybe ... uh ... wait, I'm thinkin'. Uh ... er ...
ummm ... we could ... or maybe we can ... or if not, we can vote ... vot
... vo .. v ...
-
- Never mind.
-
- Jim Mortellaro
|
