Finally, ... Senator Kerry is a good closer.
I thought that paragraph was a bit thick, too. But I assumed that, given that he's a professional and I hate elections and don't follow them, he just knew something I didn't about Kerry's past performance, etc. It wouldn't be hard to know more than I do about Kerry.
Other than that, I understand your points but find them either arguable or minor. I don't think it's enough to prove an preference for Kerry beyond him wanting his call to come true.
This one, though, I think you may have missed.
(He says that the President is at the mercy of things that he cannot control as compared to John Kerry? Hmm, we will we see. My hunch is that a sitting President is in much more control of events (photo ops, etc...) than a challenger, remember Reagan in 1984?)
They say that in an election with an incumbent, the election is about the incumbent. Bush has a lot of really big things going on between now and November that he can't control, like for example the prison thing. So, while I take your point about him controlling the agenda and the appearances, I think Zogby is right about the big things that Bush can't control. If the election is about the incumbent and the incumbent has a lot of iffy irons in the fire, then I think it looks better for the challenger.
In any event, it was framed as a prediction, not as an endorsement. A happy prediction isn't an endorsement. If it were an endorsement he would have elaborated on why Kerry would make the better president, not on why he was well positioned to win the election. |
