Ok, so now that I've had night's sleep and time to get out all my gushing, here is what I think was going on last night, strategy wise. -Despite Kerry's name being brought up every few minutes, the focus is definitely on the democratic party as whole. The question on everybody's tongue was: are you better or worse than you were under Clinton? The answer was: put two democrats back in office and things will go back to normal. This logic may be a bit faulty. Kerry is nice, but he's no Clinton with foreign policy, and right now is one of the most crucial times in recent history for foreign policy leadership. -Healthcare and the economy were brought up quite a bit, but where was the education? "No Child Left Behind" was one of the most controversial acts of Bush's four years, and not bringing this up is a mistake to me. With our public schools becoming more segregated and less funded, with gang violence up and teacher retention rates down, and blacks and latinos significantly trailing behind in high school completion rates, it seems to me that education ought to be a major focus this year. -Another thing that escaped attention was the human rights violations at Abu Ghraib. Carter was the only one that even hinted at this scandal. I'm thinking that they were trying to shy away from it because it was such a downer, and the theme of the evening was to look onward and upward. Still, this subject is one that enrages repubs and dems alike, and I can't see why no one is addressing it. -One of the absolute strongest points against the republicans is that they have effectively polarized the country. Despite running on a platform of unity, I can't remember a time when the nation was so split. (granted, I"m pretty young.) Clinton emphasized this point in his speech, saying that republicans need us divided, democrats don't. Even watching the coverage of the event it was clear how worked up everyone is on either side, and the whole situation is really getting out of hand. The question is, how can the Democrats change this? Isn't this damage irreperable, won't Kerry just come under the same kind of fire Clinton did? This question has not been effectively answered yet, but I'll be on the lookout. -The main thing is, no one is trying to really sell Kerry. Everyone is just trying to say, without bringing up Bush's name, that he can't possibly F*** things up more than the current regime. Trying to oversell him as a war hero, an "ambassador of hope," and a economic genius may be hurting his credibility more than anything else. He can't encompass all the strengths of the democratic party, but he can promise to get democratic values back on the radar, and that is much more important to me, and many others in this country. Can't wait till tonight! -Tina |
