And the Winner Is

Why have an election if we already know the result?

Jeff Taylor | May 19, 2004

(Page 2 of 2)

"Kerry should not be as fearful as Democrats usually are of telling a simple truth: that government is sometimes the only instrument available to solve problems that markets cannot," Dionne writes.

Thanks E.J., we'll get back to you on that. Could you work up a list of the problems you have in mind, besides peace I mean? Great.

Meanwhile, Kerry is only just now testing out a more critical message on Iraq, one that seems to focus more on the values of the Bush administration than any actual policy differences that might exist between the two campaigns. That and gasoline is way too expensive, and that is Bush's fault too.

But Bush is flailing beyond the obvious Iraq troubles. The White House appears utterly flummoxed that the sight of gays marrying in Kerry's stomping ground has yet to set the peasants to marching with their pitchforks. Gay marriage was to be both the outsider-liberal millstone that Bush saddled Kerry with and the talisman that helped to activate social conservatives for the stretch run. However, as of this moment, this issue looks more like what gun control turned out to be for liberals in recent elections—important to a core of activists but not a voting issue for most voters.

So if both campaigns are blowing up already, who is going to win? That's easy. Look for the scary Yalie to win going away. Unless it's real close.