A CNN/USA Today poll of registered voters at the beginning of August showed Kerry leading Bush 50-47. When those who tell the pollsters they intend to register were included in the survey, the same poll showed the inverse result.

Even among the most liberal publications, which often report statistics to boost the campaign of the Democratic half of the twin parties of capitalism, there was not much enthusiasm for Kerry’s prospects following the Boston performance. A poll by the Washington Post and ABC News showed Kerry leading Bush by two percentage points among those likely to vote. “By historical standards, Kerry’s post-convention bounce is modest, at best,” the Post said. “The Bush team said Kerry’s failure to gain more significant ground from his national convention puts him at a serious disadvantage for the fall, while Kerry advisers said the electorate is already so polarized and partisans so energized that there was far less chance for a big bounce this year.”

Similar surveys by conservative publications said Bush is now leading Kerry by a few percentage points. A Zogby International/Wall Street Journal poll also said the incumbent took the lead in a number of hotly contested states including Arizona, Nevada, and Tennessee.

“It is unusual, to say the least, to build a challenger’s campaign on the incumbent’s main strengths,” said David Broder, a syndicated columnist, in an article that appeared in the August 4 Seattle Times. “But that is what the Kerry team has done.”

At the Boston convention, Democratic Party politicians made “homeland security” a central theme in nominating Sen. John Kerry for president (see last week’s Militant coverage). Before and after the convention, the Democratic Party has led the drive for more centralization of Washington’s intelligence agencies and has pushed federal police spying.

Kerry himself insisted he can fight a more effective “war on terrorism” than the sitting president. In his acceptance speech, he trumpeted his credentials as a “war hero” for fighting in the imperialist army during Washington’s war on Vietnam. He made it clear he intends to pursue the U.S. occupation of Iraq, promising to take charge of “a nation at war.” He added, “I will never hesitate to use force when it is required.”  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home