More post-election analysis

[DanMcQ]

I rarely agree with things Eileen McNamara writes, many of which have a pre-sharpened knife out for the Catholic Church, but today's column is pretty much on target about why the election turned out the way it did, IMO:

Inoffensive, ineffective

www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/11/07/inoffensive_ineffective/

"Before Kerry strategist Bob Shrum convinces the next crop of Democratic losers to shun gays, shoot geese, and embrace Jesus, he ought to consider the possibility that voters did not reject John Kerry because he is a Massachusetts liberal. They rejected him because they could not figure out who he is or what his party stands for."

...another take on the subject by Joan Venocchi...

Was gay marriage Kerry's undoing?

www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/11/04/was_gay_marriage_kerrys_undoing/

...and finally, one Op-Ed writer's view of where the Democratic party should go from here...

Dems musn't know the score

news.bostonherald.com/opinion/view.bg?articleid=52776


Discussion?

[kchoya]

Yeah, what Shrum's record now? 0 for 10?

[david]

go easy on Bob Shrum................he's only 0 for 8.....not 0 for 10. (get shrum out of the party NOW)

[DFW HOYA]

Thursday's Georgetown Voice, in another "blue" review of the elections, points out that the map is not so much red or blue at the local level, but purple.

www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm

Voice article:
www.georgetownvoice.com/news/2004/11/11/Editorial/Our-Lavender.Nation-801234.shtml