A one-person poll

A one-person poll

chart1.jpg: Here are my own post-debate poll results. I asked myself a battery of questions and the results:

I’ve said that I was a “likely Kerry voter” because you deserve to know my perspective as I write what I write here.

How likely? Weeks ago, I’d have put that at, oh, 85 percent: not wildly enthusiastic, perhaps, but OK with the decision.

Recently, that number has fallen to, say, 75 percent. I have become disturbed by Kerry’s efforts to turn himself into the antiwar candidate — while we are at war — and also troubled by his inability to run a compelling campaign (about which I agree with Joe Territo).

As for Bush, I never was a likely Bush voter because I disagreed with him on many fundamental issues. But during the last four years, I did support him as our President; I certainly supported the war on terrorism and I supported the war in Iraq. To my surprise, I saw circumstances under which I would vote for him (eg., if Howard Dean were the other choice). So there were times when I was 50-50 on Bush — surprisingly high for the likes of me. I became a possible Bush voter and that’s a big deal.

But I was OK with Kerry and glad he was not Dean and so I leaned his way. That’s not the strongest endorsement, I know. But it also reflected my post-9/11 political views; I believe it is time to pull together against a common demon and not to demonize each other. I seek the center. I’m militantly middle.

Tonight I rushed out of my kid’s back-to-school event and turned on the radio to hear the debate soon into it. And I got upset with Kerry from the first.

coke1.jpgKerry was pushing his Coke-commercial view of a world marching together hand-in-hand and I don’t buy it. I don’t buy that the U.N. or Old Europe will come into Iraq to save our skins — or to fight for democracy or the rights of the Iraqi people. If you say that Bush mislead us to think we’d find WMDs in Iraq then perhaps you also should say that Kerry misleads us to think we’ll ever find a French butt on the line there. I fear the consequences of giving these countries what amounts to veto power over what we must sometimes do; the result will be paralysis.

In this new era of terrorism and of our role as the sole superpower, I want to see a new vision and strong strategy for foreign policy. The Kumbaya gambit won’t cut it.

I heard Kerry criticize the war over and over without hearing a clear plan for winning it — and a clear will to win it. I also did not hear Bush give a clear plan for winning this war — but at least I still hear his will. It’s not that Kerry flipflops. It’s that I don’t hear iron will. And in a time of war — war against terrorism — we need a leader with iron will.

At the same time, will alone won’t win the war. Great planning and great execution and tireless diligence will win this war. And we don’t have that today, either. That is Bush’s failing.

Many others were able to blog the debate as it occurred. In some ways, I am glad I had to catch the debate in bits and just listen. I listened to what it did to me. And it made me more unsure about Kerry. He sounds more like Howard Dean and I didn’t want to vote for Dean. He had my likely vote; it was his to lose. He hasn’t lost it … yet.

I spun around the dial to hear all the spin and on FoxNews, the conservative commentators were saying that it was a close debate and that it may tighten the race, which is to say that they thought Kerry did OK.

Screw their spin. Raze their spin zone.

There is no single score. Each and every voter who watched this debate was looking for something different and scored it differently. I was looking for a resolute Kerry with a clear vision for a foreign policy that will protect us. I didn’t hear it.

So how likely am I now? Peg me at 65 percent and note the trendline. The next debates and the next weeks matter. The election isn’t over for me or for millions and millions of voters. We’re the real pollsters and our results are not in yet.

39 responses to “A one-person poll”

  1. Joel Avatar

    A draw. Kerry just doesn’t get the fact that 9/11 changed everything. Scary.

  2. Ibanez Avatar

    Kerry didn’t help himself today. We know who Bush is, we have seen Bush in office and know what to expect. We many not agree with him, but we do know what he will do. I was expecting Kerry to come out swinging, but in the end, he came off as confusing and didn’t seperate himself enough from Bush. Kerry hasn’t given us a reason to vote for him, his motto is, “I’m not Bush, I won’t do what he will do, I will fix what he has done wrong.” That’s not enough, you need to tell me not only what Bush has done wrong, show me how it is effecting my life and then show me how you will fix it. Saying you will fix something isn’t good enough, I want to see how.
    If this is the best debate in ages, I can tell I haven’t missed much.

  3. chuck Avatar

    Good comment, Jeff. I have been following this election since last year, but I have friends who are just beginning to pay attention. Really, I think they are blessed with a higher sanity than mine. But as you say, this is the critical time in the campaigns, and it ain’t over yet.

  4. pieman Avatar

    Like many non-Americans, and not living in the US, watching this debate, I am predisposed to side with Kerry. Bush rolled out the usual mantras. All credit to him, he is ‘unswerving’ ‘resolute’ strong’… in that respect.
    However, it was Interesting, as this was a foreign policy debate, that it was only Kerry who offered an ear to the rest of the world – that’s the ‘foreign’ bit if ‘foreign policy’ by the way. And it was only Kerry who emphasised the need, and his want, to actively engage with and listen to the opinion of the rest of the world. I didn’t get that from Bush.
    The feeling with the President is, “If you don’t agree with me, tough.” And sadly, that’s the way most non-Americans see Americans in general these days. And America really, really, really needs to listen to the world.

  5. Mork Avatar

    So, tell me this, Jeff: did you hear a clear plan for winning in Iraq from Bush?

  6. ed Avatar

    I came away with Kerry saying that his foreign policy strategy would be: REFOCUS. The details being, Finish the Job in Iraq, Account for all loose nukes, and hunt down the real terrorists. Iraq is a distraction. That’s what I needed to hear.
    In addition he was ok on Iran, good on North Korea and a million times better than Bush on Sudan.

  7. Keith Avatar

    Honest to the Point that I had a hard time finding disaggreement.
    Good Job!

  8. Austin Avatar

    And America really, really, really needs to listen to the world.
    I’ve yet to see a convincing argument that establishes that point. All I hear is “America needs to listen to the world.” Strangely, an explanation of the “why” never follows. Quite frankly, if “the rest of the world” means “France & Germany” (as the term “allies” seems to mean to John Kerry), then I’m quite happy to go on ignoring what “the world” says or thinks. I’ve heard what France and Germany have to say, I’ve seen them practice their brand of diplomacy, and I’ve certainly not seen action of any sort other than the “go along [with a dictator] to get along [with his pocketbook]” variety – if this is the advice and example we in America are supposed to follow, you’ll pardon me if I don’t leap to attend “the world’s” every wish.
    On the other hand, if “the world” includes nations who don’t necessarily agree with F & G (like, say, Russia, or Poland, or the Czech Republic, or England, or Japan, or Australia, or…etc.), then I would respond thusly: “You’ve got it turned around. At this juncture, it is not the United States that must listen to the world. It is the world that has asked us what to do. It is now that we must reply, and lead.”

  9. Brett Avatar

    Jeff,
    You’re a very honest and open soul.
    A key question to consider: how can Kerry be a unilateralist in North Korea when it didn’t work in the 90’s and will only stiffarm China’s contribution, a country with whom we have tenuous relations at best anyway?

  10. tony Avatar

    austin,
    are you saying that the debacle in iraq isn’t enough of a convincing argument that the US needs the rest of the world?
    we went in there pretty much alone and we spent most of the money, lost most of the lives, and caused just as many problems as we’ve solved.
    if we had cooperation with the world and shared resources of all kinds, the freedom that we claim to want to bring to iraq would be closer than it is now.
    and, it can be done, im sure you’ll be happy to know, without france’s help.

  11. The Lonewacko Blog Avatar

    This was a clear win for Kerry.
    The Coke comment is not correct; Kerry isn’t Nanci Pelosi. He specifically referred to the DOD memo saying if you weren’t involved in the invasion you won’t be involved in the rebuilding.
    If Kerry manages to bring up Bush’s utter unwillingness to defend our borders during one of the next debates it’s all over.

  12. pieman Avatar

    [All I hear is “America needs to listen to the world.” Strangely, an explanation of the “why” never follows.]
    Do you honestly believe any one country is so smart, so great, so faultless that they have all the right answers all of the time? Unfortunately, it’s this arrogant face of America that the ‘rest of the world’ sees and is sick of it.

  13. Bart Avatar

    I don’t buy anything that Bush says to explain why 90% of the casualties in Iraq, as Kerry pointed out many times tonight, had to come from the United States. I don’t know what Kerry could do now, since Bush did a good job with screwing us over with many countries, but we could have done so much better. And I definitely don’t trust Bush to do any better. Kerry was the strong one tonight. Bush was clearly on the defensive and I would expect a president to be able to defend his actions, especially where human lives are concerned, much better than he did.
    Also, I hear a lot about both Bush and Kerry not having plans to get out of Iraq, but does *anyone* have such a solid plan right now? Kerry has outlined key goals (getting troops from other countries, training Iraqis to defend themselves, etc.) but he can’t make any decisions until he actually is president…

  14. Tom (American Voter) Avatar

    The Democratic party has put Kerry in a difficult position. Go to pro-war and he loses the Howard Dean wing. Go to anti-war and he loses too many moderate Dems like Jeff. I’m afraid we’ll all have to wait until after the election to hear what Kerry really thinks.
    ps. Did someone leave the window open? I keep hearing this low level whine from across the pond.

  15. matty Avatar

    i was gonna vote for kerry anyway, but for what its worth, tonight was maybe the first time i could listen to him and not cringe at the thought of seeing him on tv for next 4 years. i don’t buy that he doesn’t get the need to not cut and run from iraq. he botched the “pottery barn” line, but you can believe that invading iraq was a dumb thing to do at the time, and that having done it, it is now incredibly important to do eveything we can to salvage a bad situation.
    which points to not trusting the folks who picked the wrong war, planned as if once we beat a 3rd rate army everything would come up roses, and now act as if admitting the facts on the ground is somehow equivalent to wishing our troops dead. that’s crap.
    also, could you really watch that debate and feel like bush should be the leader of the free world? i mean, kerry might now have been churchill + fdr + reagan + jesus, but it looked like no one told bush there would be a debate tonight.

  16. Kate Avatar

    As a non-American my advice is to ignore so-called “world opinion”. No such creature exists. There are only opinions, plural.
    Scratch the surface of world opinions and you’ll discover that a goodly number of those you would seek consensus with secretly hope for your humiliation.
    My own – Canada – included.

  17. a different Kate Avatar
    a different Kate

    I missed the 1st half hour ( football practice stops for nothing less than a cat5 hurricane)
    Bush lost points on style: too much stuttering, too much repitition, and facial expressions. Kerry lost points on content especially on North Korea and Iran. His style was his norm – stiff and staged but since that is what we always get from him I do not think he lost points for it.

  18. Holly Avatar

    Kerry lost the election tonight with the bit about pre-emption having to pass a global test. “Pwetty pwease Mr. Chirac, can we pwetty pwease defend ourselves? No? OK. Fanks anyway. Guess we’ll wait to get bwone up and den defend ourselves waiter. ”
    I am with the Dems on gay marriage, healthcare, education, abortion, and other issues. I am an educated, 20-something female. I should be their base, but you know what? If these terrorist scum are allowed to prevail, none of that matters. If a terrorist wipes out a major city with a biological attack or a suitcase with a nuke gets into this country, no one, myself included, will give a rat’s ass about marrying or having an abortion, and there will be nothing single-payer health insurance can do for us.
    John Kerry lost thousands of women’s votes tonight, because he cannot be trusted to protect us. Period.

  19. Mithras Avatar

    You sure are, um, idosyncratic in your judgment, Jarvis. “Iron will.” Heh. “Iron will” and George Bush, in the same sentence. Heheheheheheheh.
    I especially loved the parts where he just stopped talking and just stood there until someone whispered in the earpiece hidden in his ear and he started up again with the platitudes. Did he mention how it was hard work? And he had good, good people? Too bad he didn’t repeat how he had looked into Putin’s soul. God, that former KGB spy must eat the idiot for lunch every time they get together. Heheheheheheheh.

  20. Harry in Atlanta Avatar
    Harry in Atlanta

    Unfortunately Jeff with a war such as our War with Militant Islam (both the fundamental and secular kinds) the question is open-ended because both victory and the path to victory so far are uncertain and cloudy. But regardless our leaders at the bare minimum must have the will to prosecute the war with final victory as the goal in mind. With the will the path to victory will follow.
    As with the Second World War how we get there will have less to do with our plans as much as how we exploit opportunities at any given point. Success has more to do with being prepared for such opportunities with a planned goal than having a great plan vetted by the Harvard faculty that the enemy refuses to cooperate with. For instance our victory over the Japanese fleet at Midway Island was not planned, but we were prepared. We had to plan on the fly, and when the opportunity arose we struck and broke the back of the Japanese advance in the Pacific. But again we sure as hell didn’t plan for the Battle of Midway it just happened and we were ready.
    If the loyal opposition in the United States were of the same mind as John Kerry’s during America’s entrance into the Second World War then God only knows how that conflict would have ended. But total victory if not completely out of the picture would probably have taken many more years and lives to occur. Hitler and Tojo did not want to talk they wanted to win and the body count proves that.

  21. Harry in Atlanta Avatar
    Harry in Atlanta

    As far as the debate went I give it to Kerry on style. ‘Cause man that swinger had style. On substance he sucks. Bush was better on substance but I don’t know how that will play with people who believe everything a talking head says. It’s just to bad that style won’t stop bullets. Scary as hell too.

  22. Reid Avatar

    The “global test” phrase was a killer. The appeasement of North Korea (didn’t we already try that once?) was another boner. Shipping nuke tech to the Mullahs was downright looney. Then there was the “Treblinka Square” gaffe that, had it been Bush, would undoubtedly have been the front page headline splashed across the MSM tomorrow.
    John Kerry – the wrong man in the wrong job at the wrong time.

  23. debra Avatar

    If I ever saw a Faux Kerry voter, it is you. You aren’t going to vote for him. If you ever really thought so, then one can only conclude that you are as good at deluding yourself as George Bush is.

  24. Joel Avatar

    Giving Iran Nuclear fuel?
    Weakening China’s role in N. Korean negotiations?
    “Treblinka Square”?
    NYC Subway?
    Global test?
    Bush may stammer and pause but he actually GETS the post 9/11 world. I can’t see how you’d vote Kerry Jarvis.

  25. billg Avatar

    Kerry advocates promote the idea that ‘it was only Kerry who emphasised the need, and his want, to actively engage with and listen to the opinion of the rest of the world.’ w/r/t Foreign Policy.
    That may be true w/r/t Iraq, but what about North Korea? Bush emphasized the need for caution and a requirement to leverage China. Kerry, on the other hand, suggests a direct, go-it-alone confrontation.
    It’s a mistake to paint either candidate with the tar brush based on what they do in a single Foreign Policy situation. The world is complex and a ‘one-size-fits-all-approach’ won’t work universally.

  26. midwich Avatar

    This is why I keep coming back here despite myself – I like surprises I guess. While the conservative blogs, e.g. Powerline are giving the edge to Kerry, you seem to be doing the reverse!
    Not sure about the Psychology of this, but I’m impressed by the level of honesty amongst blogs by comparision with MSM – and Jeff is no exception it seems. Kudos!

  27. carsonfire Avatar

    JJ’s comments are the first I’ve read or heard on the debate since last night when I heard many people… Republicans included! more or less concede the debate to Kerry on stylistic grounds.
    By the time I went to bed, I finally figured out that the Republicans really did have their expectations too high. An ABC commentator complained that Bush looked angry in the cutaway shots… which was odd in itself, because ABC was running the event split screen from start to finish, no cutaways… but to me, he just looked sleepy. I saw him blink hard several times, the classic “c’mon, body, I know it’s past your bedtime, but this is important”. They kept him up late the last several nights then made him take a nap before the debate, and I know from experience that that’s the *worst* thing you can do, no more sure way of making yourself groggy and unsure of yourself.
    So this morning, JJ’s comments are refreshing, in that he’s provided an unexpected and honest critique of Kerry’s content, which I was surprised other people were simply glossing over.
    My own take on the debate was: inconsequential, unless you just dropped in from Mars. They summarized the campaign up til now. No surprises on either side, nothing brilliant on either side, except that they both hid their deficiencies better than at other times. Kerry did not act brittle and offended at any time, and Bush pronounced “vociferously” and “nuclear” fairly well.
    Apart from that, it still comes down to this: Bush’s plan for winning in Iraq is defeating the terrorists and holding democratic elections. Kerry’s plan for winning in Iraq is to… well, give up and leave as quickly as possible while calling it “winning”. Beyond that, there is only Kerry’s Deanish argument that we should never have gone in to begin with, which is a moot point run into the ground by way of flailing a dead horse for the five millionth time.
    Perhaps I just can’t be as honest as JJ is about “my” candidate, but for that reason the quick concession of the debate win to Kerry puzzled me. Note the ABC poll that showed that the majority of respondents thought Kerry won the debate, but a majority of the same respondents are still planning on voting for Bush. That means those people weren’t really swayed by Kerry, they were just disappointed that their man didn’t knock Kerry’s block off, like they were hoping.
    Forget the winner, I’ve decided who the big loser is. I hate to say it, but it was Jim Lehrer. He’s a nice man, but he simply didn’t ask a good range of questions, but instead led the two candidates back through the same arguments on the same topic three or four times. He was far too laid back, and tossed nothing but softballs to both candidates.
    Imagine if there were a few challenges in there for both candidates, along the lines of Bernard Shaw’s rape question to Dukakis. If things got shook up a bit, the debate would have been more lively, and, er, maybe Bush wouldn’t have had such a hard time staying awake through it.

  28. he Avatar

    “hidden earpiece” to all but Mithras who had his tin foil hat set on “detect electronic equipment on the Pres”.
    Thanks Mithras for your well thought out and intelligent point.

  29. John Avatar

    I support President Bush, and have since soon after 9/11 when I found that we had both arrived at the same conclusions regarding the worldwide terrorist threat.
    I think he held is own last night, but could have been more effective in countering the many cheap shots.
    Senator Kerry had a smoother delivery, in a late night infomercial kind of way. But what was he selling? He did not articulate a vision of where he wants to take the nation any more than the guy who assures me that I will be earning 20,000 a month buying property for no money down can explain how that actually will occur.
    Senator Kerry’s attack dog mode was not that of a go for the throat killer wolf, but more like one of those annoying leg humping miniature poodles in need of a smack with a rolled up newspaper.
    His convoluted logic regarding Iraq, Iran, and North Korea was something I would not be surprized to hear from a woman afflicted with PMS.
    We were wrong on Iraq for acting alone or nearly alone, and anyhow Iran and North Korea were greater threats. We are wrong on North Korea for not acting alone, but in concert with others. We are wrong on Iran for not acting in concert with the Euros and also wrong for acting alone to impose sanctions previously.
    Yes Honey I still love you, we’ll talk in a couple of days OK?

  30. Charles Wallace Avatar
    Charles Wallace

    Kerry’s speech-writers should be fired. Winning this election on the president’s sordid record ALONE should be a no-brainer.

  31. John Avatar

    Can you explain how you have had Bush at 50% even with all the ups and downs with the campaign? It just doesn’t make any sense to me. I’m a Kerry supporter but even I have had moments where I have increased my support of the president and there have been moments it has waned. To have it at 50% throughout says to me you are really just looking for reasons to vote AGAINST Kerry but for some reason you don’t want to admit it.

  32. Nema Avatar

    I don’t think Kerry’s stance is unclear. His stance is supported by most Americans. We went to war for the wrong reasons. We went to war unprepared. We went to war on bad intelligence. We went to war without exhausting all other means and now we are at war. In the sense that we are now at war, we must support our troops to do everything possible to bring Iraq the freedom and liberty it deserves. But we have to do it with a global effort rather then a unilateral one. And we should never forget that mistake we made at the offset in order to prevent history from being repeated. Rather, our troops should know the truth, that whereas a mistake may have been made to go to war, our invasion creates an unparalled opportunity to bring freedom to the Middle East.

  33. Dog withwings Avatar

    Kerry was great in the debate, very presidential. Bush could barely answer the questions without falling back on his “talking points.”
    I don’t see how Bush is going to keep us safer. His administration did a tragic job preventing 9/11. That’s why they fought against having the 9/11 commission. They’ve already shown us they don’t have what it takes to keep the US safe.
    Now we are in Iraq making more enemies every day instead of trying to get Osama. Kerry is the man to get us out of this. A new face on this conflict will help us get back our credibility.

  34. Robert S. Avatar

    So how likely am I now? Peg me at 65 percent and note the trendline.
    Undecided? Sounds to me like you plan on voting for Bush, Jeff, and are just warming your readers up to the idea.

  35. david Avatar

    >Jeff, and are just warming your readers up to the idea.
    Like Debra and Anne most of already know Jarvis is a faux kerry voter. He’s just pretending to be a kerry supporter so he can paraded around various media outlets as a faux democrat.

  36. Kelty Avatar

    Jarvis – One word: summits. Stand alone in the voting booth and think about John Kerry relying on the calling of summits to solve the problem of terrorism. You of all people gotta know that’s just ri-donk-ulous. Anyway…I know who I’m voting for, but it’s most excellent to read your reasoning on deciding, either way. Keep up the good work (in general.)

  37. Gary Farber Avatar

    My key quote is this: ” I also did not hear Bush give a clear plan for winning this war — but at least I still hear his will. It’s not that Kerry flipflops. It’s that I don’t hear iron will. And in a time of war — war against terrorism — we need a leader with iron will.
    At the same time, will alone won’t win the war. Great planning and great execution and tireless diligence will win this war. And we don’t have that today, either. That is Bush’s failing. ”
    So why vote for Bush? Success in Fallujah? Success in iraq? Success against bin Laden?
    I don’t get it. He talks strong. Who cares? Where is bin Laden and where is success in Afghanistan and Iraq?
    Talk means nothing.

  38. Syl Avatar

    There’s an underlying assumption that runs through everything Kerry says. And that is that the Iraq war was wrong.
    Intelligence was not perfect. Can anyone really expect that intelligence will EVER be perfect? Does anyone think that Kerry would make a decision based on assessment of risk as Bush did? Kerry expects intelligence to be good enough to go to trial with and if it’s not he won’t take action.
    That’s not good enough for America because intelligence will NEVER be that good. Ever.
    My assessment of risk says we can’t risk Kerry making decisions in the oval office because he will never have enough information to satisfy him as to the necessity of taking action.

  39. John S. Avatar

    For my money, the only issue that matters in this election is Iraq, and Kerry just isn’t credible.
    Regardless of what he says, I don’t see any chance that Kerry can succeed in brining in significant outside help – either money or troops – beyond what we already have. And, the way he persists in dissing our coalition partners there’s a chance we’d lose some support with a President Kerry. I do think Kerry’s sincere in wanting to bring our troops home, and I suspect he’ll do that anyway with the eventual result being an Iranian-style theocracy in Iraq.
    So, the choice becomes electing Bush and certainly increasing the influence of the Christian fundamentalists here at home, vs. electing Kerry and probably ceding Iraq to the Islamic fundamentalists. I’d really like to vote against Bush, but we can endure four more years of him without significant damage to the country. I don’t think that’s true of Kerry.