Another article about Kerry in 2008 - The Hill

[_dynamicdems]

Who’d win Nov. 2005 election? Maybe Kerry
By Roxana Tiron

President Bush’s poor poll numbers have some people wondering how he would have fared if the November 2004 election were held this year instead.

And it would not be surprising if Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) thought he would have a good shot at winning the White House in just such a hypothetical race.

But when asked about it in a brief interview, Kerry did not want to give a confident prediction.

“I do not do hypotheticals and speculations,” he told The Hill, pointing instead to the wisdom of recent polls.

(continued) http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/111705/news2.html

[Mass]

1. I just read that and it is so full of speculations and errors ...

1/ Who cares who would win the election in 05? "
“I do not do hypotheticals and speculations,” he told The Hill". And anyway, Kerry won in 04.

2/ Another article who tells us that Kerry did not have a position on Iraq last year and that this is political opportunism. Where were they all in September 04?

At least at the end, it talks about facts.

I guess I should be happy. I have been complaining so often that he is ignored in the media.

[jenndar]

2. Does The Hill every write anything about Seantor Kerry

that's not 2008 speculation?

[Mass]

3. No, but I guess the Hill is only about rumors on Capitol Hill.

[jenndar]

4. Kinda what I thought.

Thanks.

[_dynamicdems]

5. The article is about 2005, but what they are really wondering is about...

is 2008:

"“I do know that there were polls on television the last few days that answered that question. I think Bill O’Reilly had a poll, CNN had a poll that showed that I would have won, but it is not for me to be making any judgments about that. I am moving on to the future.”

Is that a hint? Many people believe Kerry is already running for the 2008 Democratic nomination, although he is not a declared candidate."

Strange that nobody wants to talk about 2006.

[TayTay]

6. The news media has lost their mind.

Excuse me, Senator, but would you comment on this poll we just made up about a hypothetical election.

Ahm, no. It's hypothetical. Why should I?

Aha! So you are running for President again? We knew it.

Whaaaat?

The very idea that you refuse to speculate on a hypothetical poll that hypothetically shows you might have beaten Bush if the election were held today, but doesn't show so conclusively, due to it's being highly hypothetical, shows that you are running. We can read between the lines Senator. We know everything.

I'm not commenting because it's not news and not worthy of comment. It doesn't prove I'm either running or not running. It's the political equivalent of that clip they show on The Daily Show all the time of a monkey bathing a cat in a sink. It looks odd and mildly interesting, but has no real meaning. Oh, and what exactly does this have to do with the Amendment I authored about getting some Congressional control over the CIA torture prisons in Europe.

It has nothing to do with that. We just threw that in so that we would look smart. The only thing we really care about is that hypothetical poll and what it really says about 2008. How about if we changed the poll and put in a line about you saying that everyone who votes for you in our poll gets a free gift card at Wal-Mart? Would that help?

Go away. Go far, far away. This is the most idiotic interview I've ever had. John Peter Zinger is spinning in his grave right now. Just go away.

[jenndar]

7. Did they actually interview him?

That's what bugged me - it doesn't seem like they did.

[Mass]

8. It seems they did, according to this...

But when asked about it in a brief interview, Kerry did not want to give a confident prediction.

“I do not do hypotheticals and speculations,” he told The Hill, pointing instead to the wisdom of recent polls.

[TayTay]

10. That 'story' is pure bullshit.

That's not a story, that's a bit from the psychic hotline. Dear Lord in heaven. Don't these people have a bill or something they can report on. This was stupid.

[Mass]

11. When was the last time you read a valid story in the Hill?

They are "People" for Capitol Hill, and I am probably nice.

But they seem to have asked a few questions to Kerry, and then stretched that as far as they could. (It would be the first time that I see Kerry care about polls).

[TayTay]

12. Who is their intended audience?

Who actually reads this stuff and sits there and nods their heads and goes, "Yup, they really nailed Kerry with that poll question."

Who pays the bills for 'The Hill.' I know Roll Call is a right wing deal. Is 'The Hill' one as well?

[Mass]

13. People on the Hill, I think, and other reporters.

I am not sure what is their political orientation, though my best guess is RW.

But it is more gossip than anything else.

[TayTay]

9. No. Ahm, I didn't either.

And I'm honest about admitting that I made it up. The Hill writes things that look like they interviewed him, but they probably didn't do to a prior appointment to get their hair done or something.

Sigh! The state of journalism today is disgraceful. Just disgraceful. Honestly, if you were going to ask someone about a hypothetical poll with dubious results, don't you think you would go to their office and get an actual denial from someone who wouldn't know what you were talking about? Honestly, the standards have certainly slipped.

[jenndar]

14. Haha, yeah, "brief interview" could mean anything.

Can't you just imagine, "while attempting to give us the brush-off the other day at the gym, Senator Kerry said..."?

I guess they can't admit to stuff like that?

[ginnyinWI]

15. lol

TayTay you cracked me up--that is so close to reality it's really funny! (now my stiches hurt--ouch!)