The Command Post
2004 US Presidential Election
January 28, 2004
| Tracking the Reactions

Courtesy of Glenn Reynolds, a look at the reaction to Kerry’s New Hampshire win from blog pundits [for more reactions, see the comments on Reynolds’ post]:

The Jeff Jarvis summary: “Kerry is winning. Dean’s ‘temperament’ is hurting him. Dean and Edwards are running in the others’ tails. Lieberman is off-camera. Clark keeps the oxygen tent, running head-to-head with Edwards.”

Matthew Yglesias: “It’s interesting how much in the dubious ‘momentum’ sweepstakes hangs on whether John Edwards finishes third or fourth even though we know for sure that neither he nor Clark will win any delegates either way.”

Will Saletan: “[M]aybe Democrats should ask what they’re getting in Kerry. After watching him for a year and seeing him work New Hampshire, here’s my warning: You’re getting a guy who has plenty of selling points but can’t make the sale himself.”

Jacob T. Levy: “But the odd truth about the New Hampshire primary is that it doesn’t pick Presidents anymore. It doesn’t even pick nominees. What it does is put a good scare into the eventual nominee.”

David Adesnik: “My guess is that the subtleties of the Edwards-Clark finish won’t matter much, since both are depending on a strong showing in the South.”

Chip Griffin: “The Kerry team really has beautifully orchestrated this. The Curtain Cam shot on CNN all this time, waiting for Kerry, is priceless.”

Hugh Hewitt: “Dr. Dean is welcome to be my co-host any or all days from now until the 2nd.” I’d take that offer!

Kos: “Dean has enough money to limp on, but by all indications, he’s through. . . . Watch the establishment rally around Kerry to end this thing as quickly as possible. “

Jack O’Toole: “It’s been almost half a century since the Democratic party has elected a president without a Southern accent. Is that just an electoral fluke? Or does it tell us something important about what it takes for Democrats to win national elections?”

Dave Cullen: “A sizeable plurality would love to have Howard Dean as their president, but they’re convinced that they’re alone, so they have to vote for someone else that they think will appeal to other people.”

Wonkette: “This is our punishment for publishing exit polls. Kerry by double digits! And still Dean’s grimacing that spooky rictus. How much would Dean have to lose by for him to call it a loss?”

Donna Brazile: “I think Edwards is the sleeper. . . . More and more, people are looking at him now as the alternative to Kerry.”

Atrios: “I think people who are writing Dean’s obituary yet again are dead wrong. . . . How long before Clinton won his first primary in 1992? Who was the presumed nominee at this point? A certain Senator from Mass. if I remember correctly.”

Roger Simon: “It’s still bad news for those of us who wanted to see Edwards get a shot, but at least Kerry won’t have to pretend he’s Dean.”

John Ellis: “Back to Sunday’s script! Where did they leave that? Probably at the hotel!”

Armed Liberal: “I’m impressed that Dean could mount such a strong comeback … but then he gets up and makes his speech.”

Andrew Sullivan: “Dean gave arguments. Kerry spoke in packaged Shrumisms. Dean has a vision. Kerry has ambition. If I were a Democrat, I’d vote for Dean over Kerry in a heartbeat.”

Donald Sensing: “Among ‘military households’ (not further defined), Kerry got 35 percent, Dean 26, Clark 15 and Edwards 13 percent. So Kerry the lieutenant pulls more than twice the vote of Clark the general. General, you’ve just been further demoted.”

Oliver Willis: “Huge win for Kerry. Dean’s only around still because he has money, but he may push things down to the wire. Edwards may suddenly be vulnerable in South Carolina. Dead: Clark (had NH to himself and has squat to show for it), Lieberman, Kucinich, Sharpton (all three DOA).”

Kevin Drum: “Presumably Lieberman will now drop out, and for Clark and Edwards the next two weeks in the South and Midwest are make or break.”

Josh Marshall: “Dean said that New Hampshire had ‘allowed our camp to regain its momentum’ and that ‘we did what we needed to do tonight.’ And I think that’s right. But just barely. I think they’re in desperate shape. And I think they know it.”


Glenn makes a few more comments on the subject and has more useful links as well.



Posted by Michele at January 28, 2004 06:53 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Much ado about nothing. Kerry wins two states worth 11 electoral votes and everyone crowns him unbeatable. Has he won a Southern State yet? Hecj, 60% of the voters in N.H. didn’t pick him and last I look N.H. is a “red” state. If the turnout for the primary is any indicator, N.H. remains a red state. Remember we elect our President based on the Electoral College not the popoular vote. Kerry hasn’t shown he can compete for the Presidency nor does he have this nomination won. In fact despite his two wins, he’s behind in the delegate count.

Posted by: Stan Golaboff at January 28, 2004 03:39 PM

The “Rudy” syndrome that has infected this race has become unbearable to watch. What is Dennis Kucinich still doing in this race at barely 1% The man looks like a mortician and is about as entertaining as a 12 hour tax seminar. Obviously the man is positioning himself as the next Nader, and will probably cost the Democratic nominee precious votes if this election turns out to be like 2000. Joe “Loserman” your days of campaigning ended back in 2000. Get out! Clark-sit and wait for the Defense Secretary position should November go our way. Sharpton-at least brings color to the debates-no pun intended. And Kerry-do the Democrats remember what happen to the last boring nominee to go against Bush? Don’t blame the supreme court-nader pulled 5% of the national vote. Somebody needs to get Clinton of his memoirs to seriously endorse a canidate who can actually contrast this president if not in policy at least in electibility-Edwards v. Bush could be a repeat of ‘92.

Posted by: Michael Newling at February 2, 2004 02:42 PM

The “Rudy” syndrome that has infected this race has become unbearable to watch. What is Dennis Kucinich still doing in this race at barely 1% The man looks like a mortician and is about as entertaining as a 12 hour tax seminar. Obviously the man is positioning himself as the next Nader, and will probably cost the Democratic nominee precious votes if this election turns out to be like 2000. Joe “Loserman” your days of campaigning ended back in 2000. Get out! Clark-sit and wait for the Defense Secretary position should November go our way. Sharpton-at least brings color to the debates-no pun intended. And Kerry-do the Democrats remember what happen to the last boring nominee to go against Bush? Don’t blame the supreme court-nader pulled 5% of the national vote. Somebody needs to get Clinton of his memoirs to seriously endorse a canidate who can actually contrast this president if not in policy at least in electibility-Edwards v. Bush could be a repeat of ‘92.

Posted by: Michael Newling at February 2, 2004 02:42 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)