Tuesday, July 27 2004
TERESA'S TROUBLES: Teresa Heinz Kerry is getting it with both barrels. There's this in the Boston Herald and then this from the July issue of Boston Magazine:

And there's another trait that Heinz Kerry possesses, one that the interviews have yet to capture, but which is known to her employees, the sales clerks at stores where she shops, and her Beacon Hill neighbors (and even their children) — and which is likely to be exploited by her husband's rivals for the presidency as the campaign intensifies:

Her temper.

At private as well as public events, Heinz Kerry sometimes appears to operate at the very edge of what is considered acceptable behavior, according to many people who have seen her. At a campaign event in Boston earlier this year, Heinz Kerry riled her husband's aides by dominating the conversation.

"The problem," says one woman who attended the event, "is that she just doesn't stop talking." Kerry's attempts to get a word in proved futile. Finally, he gave up and went to the appetizer table. A few of the guests rolled their eyes; one says she could swear she saw Kerry rolling his, too.

For all the negative publicity Heinz Kerry has received, the issue of her temper has been left unexplored. She has a sharp tongue and has been known to use it, particularly when dealing with people in her or her husband's employ. Former staffers for Senator Heinz, campaign workers for Kerry, and salespeople at chic clothing shops frequented by the heiress say she doesn't hesitate to voice her displeasure. This conduct is so widely known in the retail world that a woman who works in one Newbury Street boutique says she's grateful Heinz Kerry does so much of her shopping in Washington, and not here. Heinz Kerry complains about everything from the kind of food and wine being served to the time at which people telephone her home at night. And she voices those complaints loudly and publicly, say those who claim to have been humiliated by her.

I recently talked to a friend of mine who interviewed Teresa and had nothing but good things to say about her. My friend said she was warm, funny, strong, and likeable in private. Unfortunately, Mrs. Heinz Kerry doesn't project nearly the same image publicly, if indeed that's really how she is.

Either way, another couple of outbursts like the one yesterday and her behavior could become a liability for Kerry. It won't help that the scrutiny of Teresa's temper will stand in stark contrast to Laura Bush, who rarely (if ever) has a bad word written or said about her.

People don't vote for first ladies, but candidates' wives can certainly leave either a positive or negative impression on voters (as Hillary did in 1992 with "let them stay home and bake cookies") which may help or hurt on the margins. In an election that could be razor-thin - especially in the traditional, values-oriented Midwest - John Kerry's wife could end up costing him some crucial votes. - T. Bevan 1:45 pm

CONVENTION NOTES: Let's just say the Dems are lucky the majority of the country got to see Bill Clinton and not Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. Clinton was his usual self: captivating, persuasive, funny, and empathetic. His speech was partisan and tough, but delivered without the eye-bulging, vein-popping shrillness that has characterized the Dems for the last year or more. Last night's line, "strength and wisdom are not conflicting values" could and should be the signature of John Kerry's campaign on the issue of national security.

Whether you disagree with his politics or despise him personally, you have to respect Clinton's political skills. He's simply the best at what he does. He's the Michael Jordan of politics and (to push the analogy deep into the weeds of basketball trivia) when he's in the game Republicans always end up looking like the Cleveland Cavaliers.

Unlike 2000 when the country wanted him to just go away, Clinton is going to be a valuable asset for John Kerry this time around. The question is just how much effort he's inclined to exert on Kerry's behalf given that it may possibly thwart his wife's single minded ambition to be President for an extra four or eight years.

The Dems have to hope Clinton's performance was enough to wash away the day's glitches. First, there was the Teresa Heinz-Kerry "shove it" story, complete with video that played in a loop all day long. Second, there was the Washington Post/ABC News poll released yesterday evening showing Bush jumping back ahead of Kerry by 2 points and regaining solid leads on some key internal numbers. Finally, yesterday the public was exposed to this rather unflattering picture of Mr. Kerry:

Not exactly the kind of stories you want in the news on the opening day of your big convention.

Meanwhile, this morning Andrew Sullivan gushes over Jimmy Carter's performance last night. I can only describe this as inexplicable and deluded analysis from a Thatcherite gone wobbly. Anyway you want to slice it, Jimmy Carter standing center stage talking about strong national security is an absolute caricature and a disaster for Democrats.

Wherever he is, I bet Karl Rove was doing back flips last night when Carter started lecturing America on how to deal with North Korea:

North Korea's nuclear menace -- a threat far more real and immediate than any posed by Saddam Hussein -- has been allowed to advance unheeded, with potentially ominous consequences for peace and stability in Northeast Asia. These are some of the prices of our government's radical departure from the basic American principles and values espoused by John Kerry!

Right! And Carter's got the Nobel Prize to prove it! Except for the tiny, inconvenient fact that the 1994 Framework Agreement was a total sham and the North Koreans played Carter and "dancing" Maddie Albright for stooges. That's some message, "John Kerry will return us to the days when we felt more safe and more secure because people were lying to us."

Jimmy Carter is a nice guy. A sweet man. But I would think it rather counterproductive to trot him out to undecided voters in battleground states as an example of "security and strength at home and abroad" or whatever the Democrats' theme is. Who are they going to bring out next to project strength, Warren Christopher and Janet Reno?

Another note: it looks like the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review had to shut down the comments on Colin McNickle's convention blog due to "inappropriate language" and personal attacks. Seems like some Democrats are doing as Teresa does, not as she says....

Lastly, a reader sent the following email last night:

I was watching Chris Matthews and he had a panel of political commentators. One of the commentators was Ron Reagan Jr.

Ron was commenting on Al Gore's speech which had just ended. Ron said and I quote:

"Now we know that Al Gore won the 2000 Florida election."

When he was questioned by Matthews regarding this statement, Ron proceeded to state that a consortium of News organizations held a recount and concluded that Gore won the vote count in Florida.

Chris dropped the topic.

I happened to be watching the exchange and I also couldn't believe that neither Chris Matthews nor any of the other panelists - including veteran reporter Howard Fineman - took issue with or corrected Reagan's remark, which is the exact opposite of the truth.

It's tempting to think Reagan knew the facts and tried to mislead people about the outcome of the 2000 election. I'm inclined to believe the opposite: that he's just a sloppy partisan who made a buffoon of himself and wouldn't be anywhere near a television camera to comment on politics if his last name wasn't Reagan.

Okay, one last thing. You'll want to check out our revamped poll page which we've designed to be a cheat sheet for the coming election. It contains snapshots of everything you'll need to stay on top of the numbers. We've added the "send to a friend" feature to the page so be sure to, well, send it to your friends. - T. Bevan 8:40 am Link | Email | Send to a Friend