Some more reactions to the Kerry speech from the left: Marc Cooper loved it because it humanized him, but he also notes the lack of substance:
On substance: While there were SOME good pushbacks at Bush on several subjects, including the war, and while I liked very much that Kerry said he deals in ?complexities,? he certainly offered no nuance, no detail and no satisfactory explanation of what he would do in Iraq. Or what?s wrong with the current course. I personally do NOT support an immediate withdrawal of troops and I wouldn?t want or expect Kerry to make that call. But he should have clearly said the war was bollixed up, that its $300 billion price tag is unacceptable, that it is creating a backlash that will haunt us for decades to come and that he was going to at least ? shift? if not change course. More on that in the days to come.
Kerry supporters Matt Welch, Mickey Kaus, Jeff Jarvis, Michael Totten, Ken Layne and Kevin Drum were also disappointed by it, or at least underwhelmed.
Kerry’s blandness, his lack of principle and conviction, and his tendency to hide behind platitudes will probably translate into low voter turnout for his side in November.
In the interest of fairness, I should point out that most Kerry-backers loved the speech, but some were paid to love it so you know how that goes.
UPDATE: Michael Totten says in the cmments that’s he an undecided at this point; I was confused by his profession of support for Edwards during the primary season.
Am I a Kerry supporter now? (Shrug.) I really don’t know.
An hour ago I got called a “Vichy Liberal” for being in the Bush camp. The middle is a funny place to be.
Thanks for the link, though!
I thought you’d written that you couldn’t bring yourself to vote for Bush, so I’d put you in the back-slider’s camp with Welch and Layne instead of the standing-firm camp with Roger L. and Reynolds. Are you more an undecided at this point?
Yeah, I’m undecided. I could go either way at this point.