Broder's piece on Kerry and the Dem Convention was good but not great.
It seems to me that the focus on Vietnam at the Convention was the result of Dem anticipation that Kerry's Vietnam record will be a significant issue in the campaign. They fear that the SwiftVets against Kerry will raise enough questions about his four-month tour of duty such that his claim to be strong on national security--the issue in this campaign--will be made laughable. Thus, best to muddy the waters, claim heroic deeds, etc., then suggest a smear campaign on the part of the GOP when the issue becomes a reality. In my view, this is why Kerry called for a clean campaign.
The problem is that it seems thus far that the SwiftVets against Kerry are quite numerous, quite credible, and that Kerry has refused to allow his service record to be released. So long as his refusal continues, the doubts will remain.
Kerry seems like he has something to hide about Vietnam. If this lingering perception continues, his campaign will be under a cloud. He is simply not credible nor likable enough to defuse these kinds of charges in the masterful way Clinton did. I also think this is the main reason why Kerry did not enjoy a post-convention bounce.
The GOP is being incredibly astute in not yet going after Kerry for his Winter Soldiers stuff. Best to let this kind of thing alone for the moment, then jump on it after Kerry's Vietnam experience becomes much more visible as the campaign heats up. I can see an ad with a split screen. On the left, Kerry's statements concerning atrocities, etc., on the right, Kerry's "reporting for duty" statement at the convention.
My opinion and FWIW. |
