American voters will make a crucial democratic decision in November.
At an important time in United States history, will the country continue on with four more years of tax cuts for the rich, environmental deregulation, inadequate health care, special interests gone wild and misplaced priorities in a war on terrorism? Or will it opt for change?
The campaign for the presidency is shaping up to be one of the most polarized in recent memory. And the mantra for thousands of moderates, progressive and liberals has become “anyone but Bush.”
And for good reason. The Bush administration has sold out the government to powerful lobbies, huge corporations and wealthy individuals. It has turned against its own citizens, particularly Arab Americans and gays. The same administration led the country to war in Iraq on faulty premises – on what pundits call “faith-based intelligence.”
Bush does not deserve re-election.
The best candidate – and the one with the best chance to replace Bush – is John Kerry, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts.
Kerry began atop the pile of Democratic candidates, before stumbling badly. Sometime in January, Kerry found traction and took off, re-emerging as the front-runner, tossing aside flavor-of-the-month candidates Howard Dean and Wesley Clark.
Kerry has won all but two state contests so far and could lock up the nomination Tuesday.
But the veteran lawmaker has more than just momentum. A decorated veteran of the Vietnam war and an expert on foreign affairs, Kerry has a credibility on national security issues equaled by few other elected officials. It’s hard to see why voters would want Bush – who may or may not have shown up for national guard duty in Alabama and who once mistook Africa for a country – to make war decisions, when they could have Kerry.
Kerry also has a strong voting record on the environment and would repeal some of Bush’s tax cuts to help fund neglected education programs. While Kerry’s opposition to gay marriage upsets many progressive voters, at least he didn’t call for a constitutional amendment restricting gays’ basic freedoms.
And lest it be forgotten how important it is to millions of Americans that Bush be shipped back to Crawford, Texas, Kerry has that one quality that is increasingly talked about in politics: electability.
He is a good debater. He would talk circles around Bush if the two ever matched up head to head.
When campaigning, Kerry is a strong finisher. He came from way back this primary season and did so in past senatorial elections too.
His status as a New Englander leads many to believe he’ll have a hard time challenging Bush – particularly in Southern states. But Kerry has won primaries in Tennessee and Virginia. Furthermore, Kerry can’t possibly do worse than Al Gore did in the the south in 2000 – and Gore almost won the presidency.
Another criticism of Kerry is that he is aloof. True, he doesn’t connect with voters in the emotional way his only remaining democratic competitor, Senator John Edwards, does. Like Kerry, Edwards also has a compelling biography, having grown up poor, the son of a mill worker. Edwards has conducted a spirited campaign, and if Kerry earns the endorsement, he would be wise to consider Edwards as a vice presidential candidate.
But if Bush and Co. would have fun painting Kerry as a Massachusetts liberal, they would have a blast highlighting Edwards’ inexperience – especially in foreign affairs. Edwards just can’t match Kerry’s credentials.
Voters know who the Republican candidate is, and they must decide who is best to do battle with him. John Kerry has proven to be the best hope for Democrats and liberals to end the Bush regime.