^{Going Negative on the Election}

I never believed that the Swift Boat Veterans for Malicious Bullshit campaign would backfire on Bush. These charges didn't pass the laugh test under scrutiny, but the mud did its work. The shine came off the greatest asset from Kerry's biography, his Vietnam service and his anti-war work. Among people who aren't political junkies - which is to say most people and all of the remaining undecideds - Kerry's Vietnam service and heroism have now become something murky, something merely alleged.

These days, whenever anyone refers to the Willie Horton ads put out by surrogates of Bush's father against Dukakis, it's with a shake of the head. The Willie Horton ads are usually used as distasteful examples of negative mud-slinging or racist fear-mongering. What some forget is that the damn things worked. Dukakis' lead faded. Bush the Greater washed his hands of the ads but Dukakis could never escape Horton. CNN's Aaron Brown brought Horton into the debates, hypothetically raping and killing Kitty Dukakis.

Republicans know that throwing mud gets you a little bit dirty, but not as dirty as your target. I'm convinced most Americans are unhappy, if not disgusted, with the Swift Boat Veterans. It's also clear that Bush grew up in a house with siblings. He understands that the second offender gets in more trouble than the first. By going negative and telling whooping lies about Kerry's Vietnam record, Bush insulates himself from attacks both negative and truthful about his Vietnam-era record. If Democrats were to launch a Swift Boat type attack on Bush's AWOL period, the media would tsk-tsk and ask "How could Kerry sink so low?" and "Aren't American's tired of this?"

(As I write this, the National Guard memo story is breaking. It's playing exactly as I predict. A bit of "Is this really relevant?" mixed with a ton of "OMIGOD! There's a slight possibility one of these memos is faked! Shouldn't that sink Kerry?" Republicans are just better at this crap. Possibly the lack of soul gives some advantage. It took two weeks before anyone prominent pointed out that the Swift Boat stuff was GOP-connected bullshit. It took one day for Republicans to push the disobeying an order angle out of the news. With font analysis!And inaccurate font analysis at that.)

All of this positions W. for a comfortable stretch. Amazing how a smear gets more attention than a steady three year increase in poverty levels. Amazing how a group of paid operatives spreading lies get more attention than groups of diplomats or scientists giving unsolicited condemnations of W. Now on the main site, I predicted the GOP convention would be a disaster.

I was wrong on this one. In my thinking, Bush could never ask "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" The problem with W standing on his record, of course, is that his record sucks. I anticipated their tactic of standing near things - the flag, the military, the 9/11 dead - and hoping it makes them look good, but I expected the public to at least be repulsed. I figured the convention would heighten the Bush folks' tendency to go for the Big Lie. I was right. I expected the convention would summon the consequences of telling Big Lies. So far it hasn't.

The problem is Bush doesn't argue within reality. He completely ignores it and puts the country in a situation where reality is on the ballot. The pathetic apologists were correct, in a pathetic way, when they used to say that the President wasn't a liar because he truly believed all the things he said. Bush's words have no relation to the truth, they relate to an imaginary world, but it's an imaginary world Americans want to be true. (The unbelievably sharp The Daily Show summed it up well with their campaign video George W. Bush: Because He Says So.) And as stupid as he sounds to the objective listener, he does connect more than we'd like to admit. Wouldn't you like to live in a country with a surging economy, truthful leaders, defeated bad guys and grateful foreigners? Where even C students can have a promising future of elected office and recreational drug use? Wouldn't you be happier if those 1,000 soldiers died for a peaceful, democratic, terrorist-free Iraq?

Listen to Bush say, "We're not going to nationalize health care under George W, and my opponent is. That is the difference. My opponent will. We won't." Back on reality, Kerry has no plan or intention of nationalizing health care. The media then runs over to the Kerry camp, making them deny they would do something they never said they would. Suddenly the story becomes "Is Kerry lying about his secret plan to nationalize health care?" instead of W's inability to perceive or accept reality.

Reality is W's enemy, but the Big Fat Lies tie everything together comfortably. Cheney's threat - "Vote for Kerry and terrorists will kill you!" - is simply a blunt reiteration of the often-spun spin that Kerry would not defend American. A terrorist attack on Bush's watch is proof that he is right about everything while a terrorist attack on Kerry's watch would just prove that he's a pussy. Terrorism. It explains why we're at war. It explains why we had to go to war in Iraq and why things aren't going well in Iraq. It also explains why the economy sucks and why you can't be as free or as private as you once were.

W's WAR-WAR-TERROR strategy beats Nixon's southern strategy of '72, which relied on two things, Vietnam and racism, instead of just one, fear. Nixon also made the public see a decorated war veteran - George McGovern flew 35 combat missions in WWII - as the wimpy candidate. America in wartime has never voted for the candidate perceived as antiwar. The only thing Kerry has going for him is the truth. Was Bush a cokehead? Probably. A deserter? Certainly. A whiny, dim, rich kid never held accountable for his mistakes? He still is. (Hopefully not for long.) Most importantly, he is a failure of a president. It's an unpleasant reality, but Kerry needs to say it loud and wake enough people up.